Tense and The Time Argument of A Predicate

Abstract

The main purpose of the paper is to investigate Case alternation for the embedded subjects of the mit- 'believe' type verb and the periphrastic causative verb ha- 'do' constructions which hinges on whether their embedded clause contains a stative or nonstative predicate. We argue that the Case alternation at issue follows from interaction between the two types of matrix verbs selecting thematically different clausal arguments and the distinct (syntactic) licensing requirements for stative and nonstative predicates. More specifically, the PC verb ha- selects as its clausal complement an Action argument, whereas mit-type verbs a Propositional argument. We suggest that the two distinct theta-role taking clausal complements are distinguished in terms of theta-binding of the time arguments of the predicates within them. In the M-verb construction (and Nominative and Dative causatives), the time argument of the embedded predicate is thetabound by the embedded tense features. In Accusative causatives, on the other hand, the time argument of the embedded predicate is theta-bound by the matrix tense features after theta- identification with that of the matrix causative verb. The possibility of a stative predicate but the impossibility of a nonstative verb within the ECM context of the M-verb construction is interpreted as implying that· only the time argument of the latter, but not that of the former, requires [ + tense] features for theta-binding of its time argument. We propose that the time argument of a stative verb is theta- bound by a temporally-universal non-delimiter operator. Our analysis of the stative vs. nonstative distinction in the two constructions has as a consequence that [+tense] features are present when the embedded subjects are Nominative Case marked, whereas they are entirely absent within the ECM context of Korean.