@article{oai:nagoya.repo.nii.ac.jp:00019475,
 author = {SAKUMA, Jun'ichi},
 journal = {Journal of the School of Letters},
 month = {Mar},
 note = {Verbs can be divided into two subgroups. One is transitive and the other is intransitive ones. However, the distinction between these two subgroups is not necessarily clear-cut. As a matter of fact, some intransitive verbs of the Finnish language can optionally take an object-like argument. This additional element cannot be counted as one of the arguments required by the matrix predicate. Then, it should be treated as a pseud-object. It is indeed true that a pseud-object has some semantic relations to its matrix predicate, but the semantic relations between them are not so direct that one should infer the correlation between them from their lexical meanings. Transitive sentences describe rather a causal action than a resultant state. On the other hand, intransitive sentences can only represent a resultant state, since they have only one argument. What is characteristic of a pseud-object is that it is formally a second argument but it is substantially not. Thus, sentences containing a pseud-object are results-oriented, but some additional informations can also be expressed together with a resultant state.},
 pages = {19--27},
 title = {On the Pseud-object in the Finnish Language},
 volume = {11},
 year = {2015}
}