@article{oai:nagoya.repo.nii.ac.jp:00027898, author = {山田, 佳子 and Yamada, Keiko}, journal = {IVY}, month = {Oct}, note = {This paper is concerned with sentences called cognate object constructions illustrated in (1). (1) a. She laughed a hearty laugh. b. She sang a song. It has been claimed that cognate object constructions are devided into two classes depending on their different syntactic behaviors (cf. Yasui (1983)). One is called the adverbial cognate object construction and the other the objective cognate object construction (henceforth, ACOC and OCOC). Objects in OCOCs have such properties that they must cooccur with some modifying adjectives, can be focalized in peudocleft sentences, and can be pronominalized. Adverbial cognate objects, on the other hand, produce exactly the opposite results to what objective cognate objects do. The aim of this paper is to analyse and explain these differences both semantically and syntactically. Typically, this construction involves unergative verbs. The argument of this paper is based on the analysis of unergative verbs in Hale and Keyser (1991, 1993)(henceforth, H & K). I try to explain the diversity by partially modifying their argument. H & K assume that in the Lexicon, unergative verbs have a LRS (Lexical Relational Structure) where an V (which they regard something like a light verb) takes NP as its sister. Their claim is that unergative verbs are derived by incorporation of the head N of the NP to the governing V head. However, they mention little about the occurence of cognate objects. Thus their analysis as it is cannot explain the existence of the two types of unergative verbs and hence of cognate object constructions. What offers the key to a solution is to consider the semantic difference of nouns incorporated into the Vs. Nouns involved in the verbs in ACOC (e.g. laugh) have a property that their referents are dependent on some event V, that is, they refer to some situation created by the event V. On the other hand, nouns involved in the verb in OCOC (e.g. dance) have referents independent of the event V. Based on this consideration, I make an assumption that a noun which has an independent referent can optionally construct its copy in its trace position. According to this assumption, the incorporated noun dance can construct its copy in its trace position by virtue of having an independent referent, which realizes as the objective cognate object. It receives a θ-role, thus behaves as an argument with regard to the performance tests. As for laugh class verbs, construction of the copy is prohibited, not having an independent referent. Instead, this class of verbs optionally extend the structure with an NP adjoining to VP. This yields the ACOC. Since the NP serves as a modifier of the VP, it must appear with an adjective bearing some modifying information. Besides, not being an argument with any θ-role, it cannot passivized. And the property that they cannot pronominalized nor focalized is followed by their non-referentiality.}, pages = {113--132}, title = {同族目的語構文について}, volume = {28}, year = {1995} }