PREDICTING SYNTAX FROM SEMANTICS 525One of the main features noted for psych-action remember in English
was its selection of a ίο-complement, which is predicted by the "intention"
component compatible with its semantic representation (cf. fn. 2). Unlike
English remember, which has a variable in its LS for the some
thing.be.in.mind, itelare- does not have such a component in its representa
tion but has only know in its LS. Because of the lack of "intention" compo
nent, it does not take a core cosubordinate complement. Rather, the know
in its semantic structure predicts only a core subordinate -rle "that" comple
ment, just as with irlpangke. However, being an activity verb, it may occur
in a purpose construction, taking a purposive junct as a core cosubordinate
adjunct. It is a core juncture, because there is an obligatorily shared core
argument, the actor of the matrix predicate, and it is an adjunct, because
the matrix predicate does not select for a purposive complement, unlike the
verbs in (l)-(3), and it cannot be replaced by a dative-case-marked pronom
inal. As noted previously, the purpose construction (marked by -tyeke)
semantically entails that one action is done with the intention of bringing
about a second event. (See Jolly, this volume, and Wilkins 1990 for explicit
decompositions of the purposive relation.) With itelare-, therefore, a pur
posive adjunct would give rise to the interpretation "someone is thinking
about something they know intending to bring about another event". While
this is not identical to the psych-action sense of remember in English, it
would be the closest equivalent to it. Note the difference between kaltye
with a purposive complement in (9a) and itelare- with a purposive adjunct
in (9b).
(9) a. Re kaltye nhenhe-werne-kemparre petye-tyeke ne-ke.
3SGS know here-ALL-first come-PURP be-pc
"He knew to come this way first."
b. Re itelare-ke nhenhe-werne-kemparre petye-tyeke.
3SGS know-pc here-ALL-first come-puRP
"He remembered (*knew) to come this way first."
The distinction between the (a) and (b) sentences above is akin to the dis
tinction in English between stative "know to do something" and achieve
ment "remember to do something". The crucial difference between psych-
action remember in English and psych-action itelare- in MpA is that in Eng
lish the psych-action meaning is part of the meaning of remember indepen
dent of whether it takes an infinitival complement or not, whereas in MpA
this meaning is not part of the semantics of itelare- and arises solely as a