Abstract
This chapter focuses on case-assignment to objects of intensional verbs. It is demonstrated how the analysis of Irrealis Genitive proposed in Chap. 4account for the distribution of Irrealis Genitive in clauses that contain intensional predicates. Intensional Genitive is licensed only by those verbs which also license subjunctive mood, i.e. weak intensional verbs. This fact is accounted for under the present analysis, which relates Irrealis Genitiv to the absence of REC and treats them as a counterpart of subjunctive mood within the nominal domain. Two types of interpretations of sentences with weak intensional verbs are further distinguished: Location-Oriented Attitude and Instantiation-Oriented Attitude. The relation between these types of interpretation, case-marking and REC is discussed. The chapter also discusses case-related properties of individual intensional verbs, as well as certain syntactic restrictions that affect the distribution of genitive case-marking.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Certain exceptions can be found. Thus, the Russian verb ždat''wait', which is a weak intensional predicate, often takes an indicative complement clause. However, its complement clauses can be subjunctive as well, as illustrated in (3c); in addition, it licenses subjunctive mood in relative clauses embedded within its scope. Semantics of such relative clauses and its relation to the notion of commitment will be addressed in Chap. 6.
- 2.
In this respect, my approach differs from Zimmermann (1993), who claims that even proper names that function as complements of intensional verbs receive a property interpretation.
- 3.
The verb iskat’ ‘seek’ cannot take a clausal complement; however, it licenses subjunctive relative clauses within NPs that are interpreted under its scope (see example (3f)).
- 4.
Note that accusative case-marking is possible as well. Speakers' judgments vary regarding the choice of case in this sentence. The reason for the acceptability of the accusative has to do with two factors. First, the object can receive a definite interpretation (recall that in Russian, there is no definite article, so definiteness is generally not marked grammatically). In this case, the object may carry existential presupposition and, thus, REC. Second, variation in judgments points to the relevance of language change: accusative came to be an acceptable option by virtue of becoming the default case.
- 5.
Not all weak intensional verbs license abstract accusative complements. Apparently, the availability of an appropriate interpretation (whereby EC is present) is possible only with some of these verbs. It is available with zasluživat''deserve', as shown in (21), as well as with iskat''seek', whose properties will be discussed in more detail in Sect. 5.4.
- 6.
In fact, the person could also be uncertain as to whether the object exists. But, deciding to search for the object despite the uncertainty, the person chooses to act as if the object existed.
- 7.
A similar example is treated in Franks (1995) as acceptable; however, my informants consider this sentence ungrammatical, and I share their judgment.
References
Bailyn, John F. 1997. Genitive of negation is obligatory. In Annual workshop on formal approaches to Slavic linguistics: The Cornell meeting, ed. W. Browne, E. Dornisch, N. Kondrashova, and D. Zec. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.
Borschev, Vladimir, Elena V. Paducheva, Barbara H. Partee, Yakov G. Testelets, and Igor Yanovich. 2008a. Russian genitives, non-referentiality, and the property-type hypothesis. In Formal approaches to Slavic linguistics: The Stony Brook meeting (FASL 16), ed. A. Antonenko et al. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publishers.
Borschev, Vladimir, Elena V. Paducheva, Barbara H. Partee, Yakov G. Testelets, and Igor Yanovich. 2008b. Russian genitives, non-referentiality, and the property-type hypothesis. Handout of talk given at Cornell University, Ithaca.
Farkas, Donka F. 1985. Intensional descriptions and the romance subjunctive mood. New York: Garland.
Farkas, Donka F. 2003. Assertion, belief and mood choice. Paper presented at the workshop on Conditional and Unconditional Modality, ESSLLI, Vienna.
Franks, Steven. 1995. Parameters of Slavic morphosyntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Heim, Irene. 1992. Presupposition projection and the semantics of attitude verbs. Journal of Semantics9: 183–221.
Kagan, Olga. 2007. Property-denoting NPs and non-canonical genitive case. In Proceedings of semantics and linguistic theory 17 (SALT 17), ed. Tova Friedman and Masayuki Gibson, 148–165. Ithaca: CLC Publications, Cornell University.
Kagan, Olga. 2010. Genitive objects, existence and individuation. Russian Linguistics34(1): 17–39. doi:10.1007/s11185-009-9051-x.
Kiparsky, Paul, and Carol Kiparsky. 1970. Fact. In Progress in linguistics, ed. Manfred Bierwisch and K. Heidolph, 143–173. The Hague: Mouton.
Miyoshi, Nobuhiro. 2002. The genitive of negation in Slavic: A minimalist approach. In Proceedings of tenth annual workshop on formal approaches to Slavic linguistics: The second Ann Arbor meeting, ed. J. Toman. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.
Neidle, Carol. 1988. The role of case in Russian syntax. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Schwarz, Florian. 2008. On NEEDING propositions and LOOKING FOR properties. In Proceedings of semantics and linguistic theory XVI (SALT 16). Ithaca: CLC Publications.
van Geenhoven, Veerle, and Louise McNally. 2005. On the property analysis of opaque complements. Lingua115: 885–914.
Zimmerman, Ede. 1993. On the proper treatment of opacity in certain verbs. Natural Language Semantics1: 149–179.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kagan, O. (2013). Irrealis Genitive and Relative Existential Commitment: Part 1. In: Semantics of Genitive Objects in Russian. Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, vol 89. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5225-2_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5225-2_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-5224-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-5225-2
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)