Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-54qdv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T02:57:18.612Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Twistin' the Night Away

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2026

Ray Jackendoff
Ray Jackendoff*
Affiliation:
Brandeis University
*
Program in Linguistics and Cognitive Science, Volen Center for Complex Systems, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA 02254-9110 [jackendoff@binah.cc.brandeis.edu]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The ‘time‘-away construction, exemplified by We slept the whole afternoon away, proves to have a complex set of syntactic and semantic properties. In particular, the NP the whole afternoon behaves syntactically like a direct object, even though it is clearly not licensed by the verb sleep. This construction is shown to be distinct from two others that it superficially resembles, the resultative and the way-construction. It is also compared with a number of other semi-idiomatic VP constructions. Two approaches for licensing the NP object are compared: a lexical rule approach, in which sleep away is treated as a complex verb that licenses the object, and a constructional approach, in which V NP away is listed as a meaning-bearing construction that licenses both the verb and the object.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 73 , Issue 3 , September 1997 , pp. 534 - 559
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anshen, Frank, and Aronoff, Mark. 1988. Producing morphologically complex words. Linguistics 26. 641–55.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan (ed.) 1982. The mental representation of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan, and Moshi, Lioba. 1990. Object asymmetries in comparative Bantu syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 21. 147–85.Google Scholar
Carrier, Jill, and Randall, Janet. 1992. The argument structure and syntactic structure of resultatives. Linguistic Inquiry 23. 173–234.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Culicover, Peter. 1972. OM-sentences. Foundations of Language 8. 199–236.Google Scholar
Culicover, Peter, and Jackendoff, Ray. 1997. Semantic subordination despite syntactic coordination. Linguistic Inquiry 28. 195–217.Google Scholar
Dowty, David. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67. 547–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emonds, Joseph E. 1970. Root and structure-preserving transformations. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles, and Kay, Paul. 1993. Construction grammar coursebook. Berkeley: University of California, ms.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles, and Kay, Paul; and O'Connor, Mary Catherine. 1988. Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions. Language 64. 501–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gleitman, Lila R., Gleitman, Henry, Miller, Carol; and Ostrin, Ruth. 1996. Similar, and similar concepts. Cognition 58. 321–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldberg, Adele. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele. 1996. Jackendoff and construction-based grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 7. 3–19.Google Scholar
Hale, Ken, and Keyser, Samuel Jay. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. The view from Building 20, ed. by Hale, Kenneth and Keyser, Samuel Jay, 53–109. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hoekstra, Teun, and Mulder, R. 1990. Unergatives as copular verbs. Locational and existential prediction. The Linguistic Review 7. 1–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1990. Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1996a. Conceptual semantics and cognitive semantics. Cognitive Linguistics 7. 93–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1996b. The proper treatment of measuring out, telicity, and perhaps even quantification in English. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 14. 305–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1997. The architecture of the language faculty. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar, vol. 1. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Levin, Beth. 1993. English verb classes and alternations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Levin, Beth, and Hovav, Malka Rappaport. 1991. Wiping the slate clean: A lexical semantic exploration. Cognition 41. 123–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levin, Beth, and Hovav, Malka Rappaport. 1995. Unaccusativity: At the syntax-lexical semantics interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Levin, Beth, and Hovav, Malka Rappaport. 1996. Two types of derived accomplishments. Proceedings of the First LFG Conference, Grenoble.Google Scholar
Lombardi, Linda. 1984. Away with the passive. Waltham, MA: Brandeis University, ms.Google Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 1992. The way-construction and the semantics of direct arguments in English: A reply to Jackendoff. Syntax and semantics, vol. 26: Syntax and the lexicon, ed. by Stowell, Tim and Wehrli, Eric, 179–88. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Michaelis, Laura, and Lambrecht, Knud. 1996. Toward a construction-based theory of language function: The case of nominal extraposition. Language 72. 215–47.Google Scholar
Pinker, Steven, and Prince, Alan. 1991. Regular and irregular morphology and the psychological status of rules of grammar. Berkeley Linguistics Society 17. 230–51.Google Scholar
Pollard, Carl, and Sag, Ivan. 1987. Information-based syntax and semantics, vol. 1. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Simpson, Jane. 1983. Resultatives. Papers in lexical-functional grammar, ed. by Levin, Lori, Rappoport, Malka, and Zaenen, Annie, 143–57. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Talmy, Leonard. 1978. Figure and ground in complex sentences. Universals of human language 4, ed. by Greenberg, Joseph, Ferguson, Charles, and Moravcsik, Edith. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Tenny, Carol. 1994. Aspectual roles and the syntax-semantics interface. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, Amos. 1977. Features of similarity. Psychological Review 84. 327–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar