Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-sd5qd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-09T21:39:19.615Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Modification of stative predicates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Thomas Ernst
Thomas Ernst*
Affiliation:
University of Massachusetts, Amherst, and Dartmouth College
*
[ternst@linguist.umass.edu]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Manner and locative expressions modifying stative predicates, as in own (something) honestly and (be) quiet in the car, are rare compared to those modifying dynamic predicates, and it has been claimed (for example, in Maienborn 2005 and Katz 2008) that they are systematically excluded on semantic grounds. I argue here that this is not so: in fact, they are perfectly acceptable once the restrictions on them are understood. I propose further that these restrictions take the form of (i) a pragmatic condition that generally bans locative modification of stative predicates, but that may be overridden in certain defined contexts, and (ii) regular semantic incompatibilities between adverbs and stative predicates, which, being semantically ‘impoverished’, have relatively few modifiable semantic features compared to dynamic predicates. These proposals are supported by extensive examples. The conclusions indicate that there is no need to treat states as fundamentally different from other eventualities, whether by invoking Kimian states or by avoiding eventuality variables altogether in their representations.

Keywords

stateseventsstative predicateslocative modificationmanner adverbseventuality variables

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 92 , Issue 2 , June 2016 , pp. 237 - 274
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Asher, Nicholas. 1993. Reference to abstract objects in discourse. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bach, Emmon. 1986. The algebra of events. Linguistics and Philosophy 9. 5–16. DOI: 10.1007/BF00627432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonami, Olivier, Godard, Danièle; and Kampers-Manhe, Brigitte. 2004. Adverb classification. Handbook of French semantics, ed. by Corblin, Francis and Swart, Henriette de, 143–84. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Carlson, Gregory N. 1977. Reference to kinds in English. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Carlson, Gregory N. 1982. Generic terms and generic sentences. Journal of Philosophical Logic 11. 145–81. DOI: 10.1007/BF00278382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace. 1976. Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. Subject and topic, ed. by Li, Charles N., 22–55. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Chierchia, Gennaro. 1995. Individual-level predicates as inherent generics. The generic book, ed. by Carlson, Gregory N. and Pelletier, Francis Jeffry, 176–223. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Condoravdi, Cleo. 1992. Individual predicates in conditional clauses. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, ms.Google Scholar
Diesing, Molly. 1992. Indefinites. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dowty, David. 1979. Word meaning and Montague grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckardt, Regine. 1998. Adverbs, events, and other things. Tübingen: Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engelberg, Stefan. 2005. Kimian states and the grammar of predicative adjectives. Theoretical Linguistics 31. 331–47. DOI: 10.1515/thli.2005.31.3.331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ernst, Thomas. 1984. Towards an integrated theory of adverb position in English. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Ernst, Thomas. 2002. The syntax of adjuncts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ernst, Thomas. 2003. Semantic features and the distribution of adverbs. Modifying adjuncts, ed. by Fabricius-Hansen, Cathrine, Lang, Ewald, and Maienborn, Claudia, 30734. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ernst, Thomas. 2014. The syntax of adverbs. The Routledge handbook of syntax, ed. by Carnie, Andrew, Sato, Yosuke, and Saddiqi, Daniel, 108–30. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Erteschik-Shir, Nomi. 2007. Information structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernald, Theodore. 2000. Predicates and temporal arguments. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geuder, Wilhelm. 2000. Oriented adverbs: Issues in the lexical semantics of event adverbs. Tübingen: University of Tübingen dissertation.Google Scholar
Geuder, Wilhelm. 2006. Manner modification of states. Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 10. 111–24.Google Scholar
Higginbotham, James. 1985. On semantics. Linguistic Inquiry 16. 547–93. Online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4178457.Google Scholar
Higginbotham, James. 2000. On events in linguistic semantics. Speaking of events, ed. by Higginbotham, James, Pianesi, Fabio, and Varzi, Achille, 49–79. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higginbotham, James. 2005. Event positions: Suppression and emergence. Theoretical Linguistics 31. 349–58. DOI: 10.1515/thli.2005.31.3.349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Husband, E. Matthew. 2012. On the compositional nature of states. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jäger, Gerhard. 2001. Topic-comment structure and the contrast between stage level and individual level predicates. Journal of Semantics 18. 83–126. DOI: 10.1093/jos/18.2.83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kamp, Hans. 1979. Events, instants, and temporal reference. Semantics from different points of view, ed. by Bäuerle, Rainer, Egli, Urs, and Stechow, Arnim von, 376–418. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, Graham. 1997. Against underlying states. Proceedings from the twelfth meeting of the Israeli Association of Theoretical Linguistics, 120–40.Google Scholar
Katz, Graham. 2000. Anti-Neo-Davidsonianism. Events as grammatical objects, ed. by Tenny, Carol and Pustejovsky, James, 393–416. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Katz, Graham. 2003. Event arguments, adverb selection, and the stative adverb gap. Modifying adjuncts, ed. by Fabricius-Hansen, Cathrine, Lang, Ewald, and Maienborn, Claudia, 455–74. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Katz, Graham. 2008. Manner modification of state verbs. Adjectives and adverbs, ed. by McNally, Louise and Kennedy, Christopher, 220–48. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Koontz-Garboden, Andrew. 2010. The lexical semantics of derived statives. Linguistics and Philosophy 33. 285–324. DOI: 10.1007/s10988-011-9082-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika. 1991. Modality. Semantics: An international handbook of contemporary research, ed. by Stechow, Arnim von and Wunderlich, Dieter, 639–50. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika. 1995. Stage level and individual level predicates. The generic book, ed. by Carlson, Gregory N. and Pelletier, Francis Jeffrey, 125–75. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika. 2000. Building statives. Berkeley Linguistics Society 26. 385–99. DOI: 10.3765/bls.v26i1.1131.Google Scholar
Kubota, Ai. 2015. Transforming manner adverbs into subject-oriented adverbs: Evidence from Japanese. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 33. 1019–46. DOI: 10.1007/s11049-015-9287-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information structure and sentence form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landman, Fred. 1992. The progressive. Natural Language Semantics 1. 1–32. DOI: 10.1007/BF02342615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landman, Meredith, and Morzycki, Marcin. 2003. Event-kinds and the representation of manner. Western Conference on Linguistics (WECOL) 14. 136–47. Online: http://www.fresnostate.edu/artshum/linguistics/documents/WECOL%202002%20VOLUME%2014.pdf.Google Scholar
Levin, Beth, and Rappaport-Hovav, Malka. 1995. Unaccusativity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, David. 1973. Counterfactuals. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Magri, Giorgio. 2009. A theory of individual-level predicates based on blind mandatory scalar implicatures. Natural Language Semantics 17. 245–97. DOI: 10.1007/s11050-009-9042-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maienborn, Claudia. 2001. On the position and interpretation of locative modifiers. Natural Language Semantics 9. 191–240. DOI: 10.1023/A:1012405607146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maienborn, Claudia. 2003a. Against a Davidsonian analysis of copula sentences. North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 33. 167–86.Google Scholar
Maienborn, Claudia. 2003b. On Davidsonian and Kimian states. Existence: Semantics and syntax, ed. by Comorovski, Ileana and Heusinger, Klaus von, 107–30. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Maienborn, Claudia. 2004. Apragmatic explanation of the stage level/individual level contrast in combination with locatives. Western Conference on Linguistics (WECOL) 15. 158–70. Online: http://www.fresnostate.edu/artshum/linguistics/documents/WECOL%202003%20VOLUME%2015.pdf.Google Scholar
Maienborn, Claudia. 2005. On the limits of the Davidsonian approach: The case of copula sentences. Theoretical Linguistics 31. 275–316. DOI: 10.l5l5/thli.2005.31.3.275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maienborn, Claudia, and Schäfer, Martin. 2012. Adverbs and adverbials. Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, ed. by Heusinger, Klaus Von and Portner, Paul, 1390–1420. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
McConnell-Ginet, Sally. 1982. Adverbs and logical form: A linguistically realistic theory. Language 58. 144–84. DOI: 10.2307/413534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNally, Louise. 1998. Stativity and theticity. Events and grammar, ed. by Rothstein, Susan, 293–307. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mittwoch, Anita. 2005. Do states have Davidsonian arguments? Some empirical consequences. Event arguments: Foundations and applications, ed. by Maienborn, Claudia and Wöllstein, Angelika, 69–87. Tübingen: Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moltmann, Friederike. 2013. On the distinction between abstract states, concrete states, and tropes. Genericity, ed. by Mari, Alda, Beyssade, Claire, and Prete, Fabio del, 293–311. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Morzycki, Marcin. 2005. Adverbial modification of adjectives: Evaluatives and a little beyond. Event structures in linguistic form and interpretation, ed. by Dölling, Johannes, Heyde-Zybatow, Tatjana, and Schäfer, Martin, 103–26. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Morzyci, Marcin. 2011. Degrees and state kinds. Handout from a paper given at the Workshop on Modification, Madrid.Google Scholar
Parsons, Terence. 1990. Events in the semantics of English: A study in subatomic semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Parsons, Terence. 2000. Underlying states and time travel. Speaking of events, ed. by Higginbotham, James, Pianesi, Fabio, and Varzi, Achille C., 81–93. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piñon, Christopher. 2007. Manner adverbs and manners. Handout for paper presented at 7. Ereignissemantik-Konferenz, Tübingen.Google Scholar
Potts, Chrisopher. 2005. The logic of conventional implicatures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ramat, Paolo, and Ricca, Davide. 1998. Sentence adverbs in the languages of Europe. Adverbial constructions in the languages of Europe, ed. by van, Johan Auwera, der, 187275. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian. 2005. Post-Davidsonianism. Theoretical Linguistics 31. 359–73. DOI: 10.1515/thli.2005.31.3.359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian. 2008. Verb meaning and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawlins, Kyle. 2003. A study in some adverb denotations. Amherst: University of Massachusetts honors thesis.Google Scholar
Rothmayr, Antonia. 2009. The structure of stative verbs. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothstein, Susan. 2004. Structuring events. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothstein, Susan. 2005. States and modification: A reply to Maienborn. Theoretical Linguistics 31. 375–81. DOI: 10.1515/thli.2005.31.3.375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schäfer, Martin. 2005. German adverbial adjectives: Syntactic position and semantic interpretation. Leipzig: University of Leipzig dissertation.Google Scholar
Schäfer, Martin. 2008. Resolving scope in manner modification. Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 7. 351–72. Online: http://www.cssp.cnrs.fr/eiss7/schaefer-eiss7.pdf.Google Scholar
Smith, Carlota. 1997. The parameter of aspect. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stalnaker, Robert. 1968. A theory of conditionals. Studies in logical theory, ed. by Rescher, Nicholas, 98–112. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen (ed.) 2009. Alternatives to cartography. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vendler, Zeno. 1967. Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar