PREPOSITION ASSIGNMENT IN ENGLISH 283
and into, as the logical choice for (20), based on the semantics of the verb,
insert, and our practical knowledge of locks. The same general LS thus
underlies both prepositions. Given the assumptions of the Prototype
Approach to categorization, the shared semantic structure of the two
lexemes in these contexts does not present a problem. In categorizing the
polysemes which instantiate the predictive functions of a given preposition,
we accept the assumptions of Rosch's Prototype Approach. We assume that
polysemes share some, but not necessarily all, semantic components. The
atomic predicates, like stative and activity verbs, are listed in the lexicon,
specifying these predicative functions. The LSs of case-marking or non-pre
dicative functions are based on the predicative forms, plus the sentential
operators and connectors used in the verb classification system.
2.3 Prepositional classification
The prepositional analysis proposed in this study is based on a three-way
distinction of prepositional functions.
2.3.1 Class one: Non-predicative prepositions
Class one prepositions are those which mark verbal arguments in LS. Three
sub-classes are distinguished:
(a) those prepositions which are both syntactically and semantically
necessary, e.g., the locative preposition in a sentence with put,
where the syntactic valence of the verb equals the semantic val
ence of three;
(b) those which are semantically necessary but may be syntactically
unrealized, e.g., serve with/to, where with marks the theme not
specified and to marks the locative not specified in (23a,b).
(23) a. John served the guests.
b. John served the wine
In these contexts, the semantic and syntactic valences of the verb serve, dif
fer.
(c) those prepositions which are syntactically and semantically
optional but which mark arguments of the verb when they are
realized, e.g., break against, where against specifies a locative
argument of the verb not realized in sentence (24a).