In my article, I address the factors which favor using a verb as labile (both transitive and intransitive, with no formal change required).
Haspelmath (1993) proposes that the key feature which conditions a way of marking (in)transitivity of verbs in the transitive / intransitive verb pair is the spontaneity parameter.
However, the statistical analysis of Haspelmath’s data shows that for labile / ambitransitive verb the main parameter is the lexical semantic class of the verb, not the degree of spontaneity. This lets us discover a more general principle: phenomena which are not purely grammatical, but rather lexico-grammatical (as lability) depend on lexical features, not on generalized grammatical or semantic parameters.
The paper discusses distributional restrictions on the realization of sentential complement as a čto-clause observed in non-agentive uses of verbs of speech act. It is shown that these restrictions apply only when the sentential complement is in the oblique position and that they are related to the argument structure of the predicate (the presence of attitude holder). I present the results of an experimental study using factorial design (familiar to experimental work on island effects), which provide evidence for the grammatical reality of the observed restrictions. Several approaches to the distribution of sentential complements in generative grammar are discussed. I show that the observed restrictions can be accounted for by an approach presupposing the (abstract) Case requirement of nominal as well as sentential complement coupled with a specific mechanism of Case-licensing of sentential complements in oblique positions. The paper sheds new light on the nature of the distribution of sentential complements as opposed to nominal complements.
In the paper I consider the causative constructions in Russian. I examine the use of tense and aspect in constructions with the verbs zastavit’ / zastavljat’ ‘make’ and pozvolit’ / pozvoljat’ ‘let, allow’. I also include the verb delat’ / sdelat ‘make’ in my analysis, though this verb has special syntactic and semantic characteristics.
The striking feature of the causative constructions with eventive subjects is that the tensed forms and temporal adverbs in these constructions do not obligatorily refer to the causing situation. The tensed forms and adverbials sometimes refer only to the caused situation.
I assume that it is the nature of events vs. participants that is responsible for these distinctions. Each dynamic event is associated with some result. I have shown that in some cases what the tense of the causative verb and temporal adverbials refer to is the result of the causing event, and not the causing event in the narrow sense.
The paper looks into the contemporary state of the problem of decision-making and preference of some alternatives over others, discussing intransitivity of relations of superiority: one object is superior to another in a certain aspect, while the second is superior to the third and the third is superior to the first (A>B, B>C, C>A). The authors analyze two broad groups of theories and empirical studies reflecting opposite views on the nature of the relations and rationality of intransitivity of relations of superiority. The authors argue that understanding of intransitivity of superiority relations is no less important line of cognitive development than understanding of transitivity; they should be studied as complementary subjects. Thus it is necessary to study individual differences in cognitive sets with regard to transitivity/intransitivity of superiority, as well as individual characteristics of solving problems of that kind.