350 LAURA Α. MICHAELISThis predicate, as indicated, licenses both an actor and undergoer. The
argument denoting the effector will be linked to the A macrorole, and will
accordingly receive PrP status. Of the remaining arguments, locative and
theme, theme outranks locative for U. As indicated, however, it is the loca
tive which maps onto the U macrorole — in violation of the A/U hierarchy
— and hence, as a non-PrP macrorole core argument, receives accusative
case. The theme argument, deprived of its rightful status as U, should,
according to the principle of marked linkage (26), receive either ablative or
genitive case. In fact, the theme argument of this predicate is genitive, and
this is predictable given the case-pattern of the stative predicate memini: its
LS is contained within that of admoneo. The case-pattern parallelism
obtaining between memini and admoneo is duplicated among statives of
lack and abundance and their respective causative counterparts, the
removal and transfer verbs. Within RRG, accomplishment predicates are
derivative of state predicates; one might hence wish to regard the theme
coding displayed by the statives as basic, and treat that of the corresponding
three-place predicates as a function of the theme coding of their intransitive
state counterparts. Does there then exist some means by which to predict
the theme coding licensed by the stative?
Among the three types of state predicates, whether ablative or genitive
case will be chosen to express the linking described in (26) appears to be a
function of the subclass to which the particular stative belongs: verbs of
recollection take genitive objects; state verbs of both lack and abundance
take ablative or, less frequently, genitive objects. Given the class of the
intransitive stative, one can thence predict the case of the corresponding
non-macrorole core (theme) argument in the case pattern of its causative
counterpart. Hence, as seen, genitive theme coding characterizes verbs of
both recollection and reminding; ablative/genitive variation in theme-cod
ing likewise characterizes both statives denoting lack and abundance and
their respective causative counterparts, the removal and transfer verbs.
Again, within the RRG lexical decomposition system, such parallelism can
be attributed to the fact that the generalized LS's of removal and transfer
verbs subsume some representation of the corresponding statives (verbs of
lacking and abundance, respectively) as effected states.
We might now briefly examine the application of the linking algorithm,
and the principle of marked-linkage coding (26), to statives denoting abun
dance and lack, and to their respective causative counterparts. The applica
tion of the linking rules to the stative predicates in the two groups rep-