132 Małgorzata Krzek
(3) a. Se comen las manzanas.
se eat.3pl the apples
‘[People] eat apples.’
(Spanish, Mendikoetxea 2008: 291)
b. Se come las manzanas.
se eats.3sg the apples
‘[One] eats apples.’
(Spanish, Mendikoetxea 2008: 304)
One of the most interesting features that these SI/SE sentences illustrate, which is unat-
tested in Polish, are the two different agreement patterns. Namely, in (2a) and (3a) the
verbs agree with their objects; with spaghetti and las manzanas ‘the apples’ respectively.
In (2b) and (3b), on the other hand, there is no such agreement, and the verbs show a
3 sg inflection. According to Cinque (1988) and Mendikoetxea (2008), the agreement
patterns in (2a) and (3a) suggest that in these sentences SI and SE particles act as pas-
sivisers. For D’Alessandro (2008: 37), different agreement patterns stem from aspectual
differences. Sentences with V–O agreement are accomplishments whereas those with-
out V–O agreement are activities (in the sense of Vendler 1967).
In Polish only the latter type, that is, the one without V–O agreement, is possible,
and it can appear with both activities, as in (4), and accomplishments, as illustrated
by (5):
(4) Biegało się dużo.
run.past 3 sg.n się a_lot
‘[One] used to run/ran a lot.’
(5) Namalowało się wiele obrazków.
paint.past 3 sg.n się many pictures.gen
‘[One] painted many pictures.’
The fact that aspectual differences do not change agreement patterns in the Polish
SIĘ construction, namely that both accomplishments and activities are possible with-
out V–O agreement, seems to suggest that the SIĘ particle does not interact with the
remaining structure in the same way as the SI particle does in Italian.2.2 The –NO/–TO construction
The –NO/–TO construction is an uninflected verb form with the –NO/–TO suffix, as
is exemplified in (6) and (7):
(6) Kupowano kwiaty.
bought flowers.acc
‘[People/They] bought flowers.’