1. Gradience in Split Intransitivity Mara van Schaik - The Turkish Pattern -

2. The Threads Current views on split intransitivity (= SI) The gradience approach Telicity vs agentivity Turkish diagnostic tests Unaccusativity mismatches A possible solution Conclusions

3. Current views on SI The Unaccusative Hypothesis –unaccusative vs unergative predicates The role of semantics –projectionist approaches thematic/aspectual structure  syntax –constructional approaches syntax  semantic interpretation Gradience in SI –verbs have various degrees of ‘unaccusativity’ or ‘unergativity’ (within and across languages)

4. The Gradience Approach Arguments pro Sorace’s hierarchy (ASH/SIH) Change of location selects BE (least variation) Change of state Continuation of a pre-existing state Existence of state Uncontrolled process Controlled process (motional) Controlled process (non-motional) selects HAVE (least variation)

5. The Gradience Approach Typological predictions 1. Other tests in Romance & Germanic obey the ASH 2. Tests in languages without AS obey the ASH 3. ‘Core’ verbs pass more tests than ‘non-core’ verbs Problems 1. Impersonal passive constructions in German 2. Quantifier floating in Japanese 3. Turkish diagnostic tests

6. Telicity vs agentivity Semantic features underlying the ASH –telicity (predicate feature)  aspectual structure determines the upper half of the ASH –agentivity (argument feature)  thematic structure determines the lower half of the ASH Problems –the impersonal passive test –some ‘active-inactive’ languages

7. Telicity vs agentivity An alternative proposal Foley’s Actor-Undergoer hierarchy Actor:volitional performer causing an event or change of state sentience movement A U stationary causally affected incremental theme Undergoer:undergoing a change in state

8. Turkish diagnostic tests The -mIş participle (= -mIş) The impersonal passive (= IP) The -(y)ArAk gerund (= -(y)ArAk) Other tests

9. Turkish diagnostic tests The -mIş test –prenominal participle –‘postterminative’ / stative-resultative value Examples: a. çürü-müş yiyecek ‘rotten food’ (unaccusative) rot-mIş food b. *koş-muş çocuk ‘run child’ (unergative) run-mIş child

10. Turkish diagnostic tests The IP test –attaches the passive suffix –good diagnostics: past & future (not aorist - generic) Examples: a. Gösteri boyunca bağır-ıl-dı.(unergative) demonstration throughout shout-PASS-PAST.3per ‘It was shouted throughout the demonstration.’ b. *Ay, dün burada çok fena kay-ıl-dı. (unaccusative) oh yesterday here very badly skid-PASS-PAST ‘Oh, yesterday it was skidded here very badly.’

11. Turkish diagnostic tests The -(y)ArAk test –denotes simultaneous or consecutive action –the two verbs must be both unacc. or both unerg. Examples: a. Kız [(top) oyna-y-arak] şarkı söyle-di. (unergative) girl ball play-Y-ArAk sing-PST ‘The girl, while playing (ball), sang.’ b. *Kız [(top) oyna-y-arak] kay-dı. (unaccusative) Girl ball play-Y-ArAk slip-PST ‘The girl, while playing (ball), slipped.’

12. Turkish diagnostic tests Other tests et- ‘do’ vs ol- ‘be’ compounds (unerg. vs unacc.) -Irken ‘while’ vs -IncE ‘when’ (the same) -GAn, -tI vs. -mA nominalizations (the same) -Ik adjectives (unaccusative)

13. Mismatches: -mIş Change of location –‘arrive’, ‘go’, ‘exit’, ‘enter’ occur with -mIş plus an adverbial (of path/manner/time) –‘rise’, ‘descend’, advance’ freely occur with -mIş State –position Vs (‘sit’, ‘lie’) and psychological states (‘be scared’) freely occur with -mIş –‘exist’ must take an adverbial

14. Mismatches: -mIş Uncontrolled process –some bodily function Vs (‘sweat’, ‘blush’, ‘sleep’) freely occur with -mIş, some (‘shiver’, ‘cough’, ‘dream’) take an adverbial, some (‘bleed’) do not occur with -mIş Controlled process –manner of motion Vs (‘run’, ‘swim’, ‘climb’) occur with -mIş plus a path adverbial –non-motional Vs (‘talk’, ‘work’) occur with -mIş plus an adverbial

15. Mismatches: IP Change of location –occur in IPs with agentive implicit subject (e.g. ‘come’) Change of state –psychological changes (‘get bored’) occur in IPs Uncontrolled processes –body function Vs (‘sneeze’, ‘shiver’, ‘hiccup’, ‘sweat’) occur in IPs

16. Mismatches: -(y)ArAk Uncontrolled processes –‘cry’ may coocur with ‘come’ (about a child) –‘scream’ may coocur with ‘be born’ (the same) – ‘sway’ may coocur with ‘slip’ (about a drunkard) –‘sparkle’ may coocur with ‘go out’ (about light) –‘foam’ may coocur with ‘pull back’ (about the sea) –‘sweat’ may coocur with ‘die’ (about a person)

17. Mismatches Sorace’s ASH is challenged by -mIş & IP tests –definite change of location Vs cannot occur with -mIş without an adverbial (non-core behaviour) –(agentive) change of location Vs occur in IPs (the same) –manner of motion Vs can occur with -mIş if accompanied by a path adverbial –non-motional controlled processes can occur with -mIş and an adverbial –psychological change of state verbs occur in IPs

18. Mismatches Foley’s hierarchy is challenged by the -mIş test –both agentive and non-agentive motion Vs occur with -mIş –psychological states and positions also occur with -mIş

19. A possible solution The IP depends on the degree of agentivity of the implicit subject (confirmed by Foley’s hierarchy) –(telic) change of location Vs may occur in IPs The -mIş test seems to depend on the degree of telicity & agentivity of the construction –(telic) change of state Vs with non-agentive arguments pass the test as unaccusatives (e.g. ‘melt’) –telic change of location Vs pass the test as unaccusatives (e.g. ‘fall’, ‘flee’)

20. A possible solution Most Turkish motion Vs are not inherently telic. –in the company of a path adverbial they become telic and pass the -mIş test Problem –non-motional controlled processes occur with -mIş and an adverbial An alternative solution –Turan: -mIş does not test unaccusativity, but is rather ‘associated with verbs with a consequent state’

21. Conclusions Turkish -mIş, IP, -(y)ArAk test results: –change of state Vs are core unaccusatives in Turkish –controlled process (non-motional) Vs are core unerg. –intermediate classes exhibit variation –agentive motion Vs are underspecified for telicity –telicity plays no role in the IP test, but seems to be relevant in the -mIş and -(y)ArAk tests –there are doubts as to the validity of the -mIş test