Abstract
I provide an extended review of the monograph, focusing on issues that are connected with the experiencer puzzle. The insights presented in the book are presented chapter by chapter. The approach developed in the monograph is briefly summarized and critically evaluated as innovative and important, targeted at specialists in the generative syntax. Some drawbacks are highlighted. The theory presented in the monograph is inspiring and invites further questions and answers to be validated in cross-linguistic perspective. The analysis is well informed and constitutes an important synthesis of reflexivization patterns and their account in the generative tradition.
Funding source: Centre for Corpus and Experimental Research on Slavic Languages “Slavicus” (Scientific Excellence Incubator) at the University of Wrocław
-
Research funding: This paper was prepared with the financial support of the Centre for Corpus and Experimental Research on Slavic Languages “Slavicus” (Scientific Excellence Incubator) at the University of Wrocław.
References
Alexiadou, Artemis & Gianina Iordăchioaia. 2014. The psych causative alternation. Lingua 148. 53–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.05.010.Search in Google Scholar
Arad, Maya. 1999. What counts as a class? The case of psych verbs. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 35. 1–23.Search in Google Scholar
Bondaruk, Anna & Bogdan Szymanek. 2007. Polish nominativeless constructions with dative experiencers: Form, meaning and structure. Studies in Polish Linguistics 4. 61–99.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1980. Rules and representations. New York: Columbia University Press.10.1017/S0140525X00001515Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin and use. New York: Praeger.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Dowty, David Roach. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67(3). 547–619. https://doi.org/10.2307/415037.Search in Google Scholar
Featherston, Sam. 2002. Coreferential objects in German: Experimental evidence on reflexivity. Linguistische Berichte 192. 45–484.Search in Google Scholar
Grafmiller, Jason. 2013. The semantics and syntactic choice. An analysis of English emotion verbs. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Doctoral dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Hicks, Glyn. 2009. The derivation of anaphoric relations. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.139Search in Google Scholar
Hirsch, Nils. 2018. German psych verbs – Insights from a decompositional perspective. Berlin: Humboldt-Universität ze Berlin PhD dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Jiménez-Fernández, Ángel Luis & Bożena Rozwadowska. 2016. The information structure of dative experiencer psych-verbs. In Bożena Cetnarowska, Marcin Kuczok & Marcin Zabawa (eds.), Various dimensions of contrastive studies, 100–121. Katowice: Wydawnictwo UŚ.Search in Google Scholar
Jiménez-Fernández, Ángel Luis & Bożena Rozwadowska. 2017. On subject properties of datives in psych verbs: A comparative approach. Acta Linguistica Academica 64(2). 233–256. https://doi.org/10.1556/2062.2017.64.2.4.Search in Google Scholar
Manzini, Rita & Kenneth Wexler. 1987. Parameters, binding theory and learnability. Linguistic Inquiry 18. 413–444.Search in Google Scholar
Marín, Rafael & Louise McNally. 2011. Inchoativity, change of state, and telicity: Evidence from Spanish reflexive psychological verbs. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 29(2). 467–502. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-011-9127-3.Search in Google Scholar
Nikolaeva, Liudmila. 2014. The secret life of pronouns. Cambridge, MA: MIT Doctoral dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David. 1995. Zero syntax: Experiencers and cascades. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya. 2002. The theta system–An overview. Theoretical Linguistics 28(3). 229–290. https://doi.org/10.1515/thli.28.3.229.Search in Google Scholar
Rothmayr, Antonia. 2009. The structure of stative verbs. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.143Search in Google Scholar
Rozwadowska, Bożena. 1989. Are thematic relations discrete? In Roberta Corrigan, Fred Eckman & Michael Noonan (eds.), Linguistic categorization (Current Issues In Linguistic Theory 61), 115–130. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.61.09rozSearch in Google Scholar
Rozwadowska, Bożena & Anna Bondaruk. 2019. Against the psych causative alternation in Polish. Studies in Polish Linguistics 1. 77–97. https://doi.org/10.4467/23005920spl.19.007.10987.Search in Google Scholar
Safir, Ken. 2014. One true anaphor. Linguistic Inquiry 45(1). 91–124. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00149.Search in Google Scholar
Tajsner, Przemysław. 2008. Aspects of the grammar of focus. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar
Wiland, Bartosz. 2016. Le charme discret of remnant movement: Crossing and nesting in Polish OVS sentences. Studies in Polish Linguistics 11(3). 133–165.Search in Google Scholar
Witkoś, Jacek, Paulina Łęska, Aleksandra Gogłoza & Dominika Dziubala-Szrejbrowska. 2020. Bind me tender, bind me do! Dative and accusative arguments as antecedents for reflexives in Polish. Berlin: Peter Lang.10.3726/b16471Search in Google Scholar
Żychliński, Sylwiusz. 2016. On some aspects of the syntax of object experiencers in Polish and English. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.Search in Google Scholar
© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
