The overgeneration problem and the case of semipredicatives in Russian 39
(38) a. The Numeration contains lexical elements only.
b. Functional categories are selected from the Lexicon as needed.
c. Access to the Lexicon is a Last Resort operation.
Then, since there are (at least) two sizes of infinitivals and structure is built from the
bottom up, VP will merge with the matrix V if it can. Only if it cannot will functional
material (eventually leading to C and the SD) be introduced into the structure.
Putting aside these speculations about how to resolve the overgeneration problem
under VB, let us return to the MTC model. Given that dative cannot be assigned in the
absence of CP and OC involves a bare TP, the paramount issue here is for all intents and
purposes identical to that encountered by VB: How can projection of CP be avoided
when not required? The solutions appear the same as well, in that the OC structure
must be chosen when possible and superfluous structure should be eschewed. It seems
to me that for a V to merge with a VP and absorb VP’s external theta-role along with its
own (Babby’s VB) is no different than saying V is an OC verb and can merge directly
with TP (Hornstein’s MTC). Another way of putting it is this: an OC verb is one whose
subject can be assigned multiple theta-roles at once (VB) or an OC verb is one whose
subject can be in an A-chain bearing multiple theta-roles (MTC). While in Section 6
I will attempt to elaborate a movement account, it seems to me that there may not be
much of substance differentiating the two models.
In sum, we want OC infinitivals to be smaller than other infinitivals, so that only
the latter, larger structure, can accommodate PRO. But the choice of infinitival size,
hence the presence or absence of PRO, must be made locally, i.e. without looking
ahead to subsequent structure. This can be done on the basis of what the infinitival
clause merges with. Considerations of economy then dictate that if the smaller struc-
ture, which does not allow for PRO, is viable, then that more economical structure
should be used.
- Semipredicatives versus other adjectives
In order better to understand the peculiar properties of semipredicatives, it is useful
to compare them to ordinary predicate adjectives. While they generally pattern sim-
ilarly, there are some important differences which need to be addressed. The most
striking of these is that, whereas we have seen that when semipredicatives cannot
agree, they appear in the dative, ordinary adjectives are instrumental in what seem
to be the same contexts.^22 A proposal is made that, unlike ordinary adjectives, the
- There is a great deal of descriptive and analytical work on the syntax and semantics
of predicate adjectives. See for example Franks (1995: Chapter 6), Pereltsvaig (2007), and
Richardson (2007), as well as Bailyn (2012: §5.1). Madariaga (2006) tackles the question of