《Light Verbs and the Ergative Hypothesis Light Verbs and the Ergative Hypothesis》.pdf

Light Verbs and the Ergative Hypothesis Author(s): Shigeru Miyagawa Reviewed work(s): Source: Linguistic Inquiry, Vol. 20, No. 4 (Autumn, 1989), pp. 659-668 Published by: The MIT Press Stable URL: /stable/4178649 . Accessed: 24/11/2011 07:00 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms Conditions of Use, available at . /page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@. The MIT Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Linguistic Inquiry. REMARKS AND REPLIES 659 Light Verbs and the Ergative Hypothesis Shigeru Miyagawa Grimshaw and Mester (1988) argue that the Japanese verb suru is a light verb (see Jespersen (1954))because it is devoid of 0-roles. It acquires 0-roles by occurringwith a nominal.A of the verb is that this nominalcan 0-role-bearing peculiarproperty light function as the direct object of the light verb. (1) Taroo ga Maryni HANASI o sita. Taro Nom MaryDat talk Acc suru Tarotalkedto Mary. In the object-verbcomplex hanasi o suru, the 0-roles of the nominalhanasi talk are andMestercall transferredto the lightverb by a process Grimshaw ArgumentTransfer, and the light verb in turn assigns them to the internal (Mary) and external (Taroo) arguments. One problemwith Grimshawand Mesters analysisis that they incorrectlyassume that