Download frame

To account for valence alternations of the ‘spray-load’ sort, we propose an underspecification
analysis that first posits, for example, a load-frame and a spray-frame, which are subtypes of a
cause-to-go-to-fr. The latter in turn inherits from both a go-to-frame and a cause-frame. The goto-fr is a subtype of the go-fr. These inheritance relations among frames are pictured in (1).
(1)
frame
cause-fr
go-fr
go-to-fr
cause-to-go-to-fr (cgt-fr)
load-fr
spray-fr
Using the load-fr and spray-fr in the appropriate places, we want to build the lexemes whose
appropriately inflected word forms will appear in expressions such as those in (2).
(2)
a. load hay onto the truck (incremental theme)
b. load the truck with hay (incremental goal)
c. spray paint on the wall (incremental theme)
d. spray the wall with paint (incremental goal)
e. build a house (incremental theme)
f. fill a jar (incremental goal)
We accomplish this by elaborating part of the LEXEME hierarchy, as shown in (3). We define a
subtype of transitive-verb-lexeme, the transport-verb-lexeme type, which obeys the additional
constraints shown in (4). These include a three-element ARG-ST and the cause-to-go-to frame,
whose ACTOR, THEME, and GOAL participants are indexed to the three arguments. Transportverb-lxm has two subtypes (among others not shown), load-lxm and spray-lxm. Their additional
defining constraints are shown in (5) and (6), respectively, which mention the appropriate
frames. There are also two additional subtypes of transitive verbs of relevance: incrementaltheme-(verb)-lexeme and incremental-goal-(verb)-lexeme, whose additional constraints are
shown in (7) and (8). The two types each of the load and spray lexeme, along with the single
types of the fill and build lexemes, inherit from incremental-goal-(verb)-lexeme and incrementaltheme-(verb)-lexeme in the pattern shown at the bottom of (3). The maximal lexemes, which are
represented by the terminal nodes in (3), are exemplified by incr-goal-load-lxm, whose
additional constraints are shown in (9). In (9) “withn” indicates that there will be more than one
lexeme whose form is <with>. Unresolved here, is the issue whether, for example, to posit two
1
different incremental theme lexemes load, one taking on and the other onto, to allow disjunction
in LID values, or to seek another solution.
(3)
transitive-verb-lexeme
transport-verb-lxm
spray-lxm
load-lxm
incr-goal-lxm
incr-theme-lxm
inc-go-spray-lxm inc-th-spray-lxm inc-go-load-lxm inc-th-load-lxm fill-lxm build-lxm
(4)
transport-verb-lxm
ARG - ST

SYN | CAT | XARG




 
SEM








FORM

SEM | FRAMES
(5)
load-lxm


(6)
spray-lxm


(7)
incr-theme-lxm


(8)
incr-goal-lxm
 
(9)
incr-goal-load-lxm 
FORM

SEM | FRAMES
ARG - ST

VAL
ARG - ST

VAL


VAL
[1]NPi,XPj ,XPk
[1]

TOP
[2]

e
INDEX

cgt  fr

ACTOR


FRAM ES
[2]THEM E

GOAL




EVENT


i 

j 
k 

e 




















load  fr 
load


spray  fr 
spray
NPi ,XPJ ,XPk 

NPi ,NPJ ,PPk 
NPi ,XPJ ,XPk 

NPi ,NPk ,PPj 

NPi , NPk , PP[LID with n ]



2