<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Aptos;
panose-1:2 11 0 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"CMU Serif";
panose-1:2 0 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman \(Body CS\)";
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;}
p.gmail-msonospacing, li.gmail-msonospacing, div.gmail-msonospacing
{mso-style-name:gmail-msonospacing;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;}
p.m5141292198331641886gmail-msonospacing, li.m5141292198331641886gmail-msonospacing, div.m5141292198331641886gmail-msonospacing
{mso-style-name:m_5141292198331641886gmail-msonospacing;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"CMU Serif";
color:windowtext;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-ligatures:none;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:153886386;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-2071950492 299957964 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-text:"\(%1\)";
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:.75in;
text-indent:-.5in;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></style>
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif"">Hi Chao – Yes, _<i>buy</i>_ and _<i>sell</i>_ have four semantic arguments (standard analysis since Fillmore (1982?) and Jackendoff (1990?) (citing from memory without having checked these specific
works) and _<i>cut</i>_ has three. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif"">But the phrase ‘formally realized as an oblique’ seems problematic to me. In my view, there is no clear morphosyntactic difference between obliques and adjuncts except that a proper subset of obliques
are more or less obligatory and to that extent could be argued to be subcategorized for by the verb (or governed by the verb, in the traditional (pre-GB) sense of ‘government’).
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif"">But this obligatoriness should in my view not be taken to be a definitional property, because that would cut out the vast majority of obliques, which are not obligatory, yet are semantically clearly
not modifiers. And that is, afaik, the whole point of distinguishing between obliques and adjuncts: to capture the fact that the latter, but not the former, are modifiers.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif"">The primary difference between obliques and adjuncts is not morphosyntactic, but semantic. To be sure, it is never a happy outcome when semantic properties are needed to underpin morphosyntactic categories
or vice versa. But the closer one gets to talking about form-meaning mapping, the harder it becomes to avoid such hybrid definitions.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif"">Time location specifications are usually treated as adjuncts = modifiers. One exception (among a few) is _<i>last</i>_ as in (1). Locatives are usually treated as adjuncts = modifiers. One exception
(among a few) is _<i>live</i>_ as in (2). Motion verbs commonly take path obliques, as illustrated in (3):<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:.75in;text-indent:-.5in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">
<![if !supportLists]><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><span style="mso-list:Ignore">(1)<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><i><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif"">The meeting lasted from 9am until 10:20.</span></i><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:.75in;text-indent:-.5in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">
<![if !supportLists]><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><span style="mso-list:Ignore">(2)<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><i><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif"">Sally lived in Buffalo in those days.</span></i><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:.75in;text-indent:-.5in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">
<![if !supportLists]><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><span style="mso-list:Ignore">(3)<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><i><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif"">Floyd went from the Dean’s office to the library.</span></i><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif"">Finally, a puzzle: every event necessarily occupies a spacetime region. So (2) and (3) describe eventualities that we know must have occurred during particular moments in time, regardless of whether
these are specified. So how then can we say that <i>in those days</i> in (2) is a modifier, whereas
<i>in Buffalo</i> is an oblique? This is not at all a trivial problem. I could imagine treatments in which all time-positional and locative expressions are regarded as obliques. However, I would argue that is precisely the fact that all eventuality designators
are by necessity compatible with spacetime specifications that limits the predictive power of the former for the occurrence of the latter.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif"">HTH! – Juergen<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif"">Fillmore, C. J. (1982). Frame semantics. In The Linguistic Society of Korea (ed.),
<i>Linguistics in the Morning Calm</i>. Soeul: Hanshin. 111-137.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif"">Jackendoff, R. (1990).
<i>Semantic structures</i>. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;color:black">Juergen Bohnemeyer (He/Him)<br>
Professor, Department of Linguistics<br>
University at Buffalo <br>
<br>
Office: 642 Baldy Hall, UB North Campus<br>
Mailing address: 609 Baldy Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260 <br>
Phone: (716) 645 0127 <br>
Fax: (716) 645 3825<br>
Email: </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><a href="mailto:jb77@buffalo.edu" title="mailto:jb77@buffalo.edu"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;color:#0078D4">jb77@buffalo.edu</span></a></span><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;color:black"><br>
Web: </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><a href="http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/" title="http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;color:#0563C1">http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/</span></a></span><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;color:black"> <br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Office hours Tu/Th 3:30-4:30pm in 642 Baldy or via Zoom (Meeting ID 585 520 2411; Passcode Hoorheh) </span><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;color:black"><br>
<br>
There’s A Crack In Everything - That’s How The Light Gets In <br>
(Leonard Cohen) </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">-- <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE" style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE" style="font-family:"CMU Serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div id="mail-editor-reference-message-container">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<b><span style="color:black">From: </span></b><span style="color:black">Chao Li <chao.li@aya.yale.edu><br>
<b>Date: </b>Monday, July 8, 2024 at 07:39<br>
<b>To: </b>Juergen Bohnemeyer <jb77@buffalo.edu><br>
<b>Cc: </b><LINGTYP@listserv.linguistlist.org><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [Lingtyp] Distinction between semantic arguments and semantic adjuncts<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Hi Juergen,</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Thank you for all your information. If semantic arguments are participants predictable from the verb’s meaning (regardless of how they are overtly realized in real use), will
<i>buy</i> and <i>sell</i> have four semantic arguments to you? Will <i>cut</i> have three?
</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">(Also, were you defining obliques as semantic arguments (morpho)syntactically realized as an oblique? Or were you intending such semantic arguments as a subset of obliques as far as formal realization is concerned?
If the former, what would you call those expressions that denote, for example, time or location but are also formally realized as an oblique?)
</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Thanks again,</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Chao</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">On Sun, Jul 7, 2024 at 10:31<span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"> </span>PM Juergen Bohnemeyer <<a href="mailto:jb77@buffalo.edu">jb77@buffalo.edu</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in">
<span style="font-family:"CMU Serif"">Dear Chao – In theory, true adjuncts are modifiers, meaning they are not predictable based on the semantics of the verb. In contrast, obliques – semantic arguments that are expressed like adjuncts – must be predictable
from the verb’s meaning. In practice, though, predictability is a matter of degree. For example, Koenig et al. (2008) show that English verbs form a continuum in terms of predicting an instrument. Regarding specifically verbs of cutting, Bohnemeyer (2007)
compares the argument structure properties of such verbs across languages. – Best – Juergen</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in">
<span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in">
<span style="font-family:"CMU Serif"">Bohnemeyer, J. (2007). Morpholexical Transparency and the argument structure of verbs of cutting and breaking.
<i>Cognitive Linguistics</i> 18(2): 153-177.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in">
<span lang="DE" style="font-family:"CMU Serif"">Koenig, J.-P., G. Mauner, B. Bienvenue, & K. Conklin.
</span><span style="font-family:"CMU Serif"">(2008). What with? The anatomy of a role.
<i>Journal of Semantics</i> 25(2): 175-220.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in">
<span style="font-family:"CMU Serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;color:black">Juergen Bohnemeyer (He/Him)<br>
Professor, Department of Linguistics<br>
University at Buffalo <br>
<br>
Office: 642 Baldy Hall, UB North Campus<br>
Mailing address: 609 Baldy Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260 <br>
Phone: (716) 645 0127 <br>
Fax: (716) 645 3825<br>
Email: </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><a href="mailto:jb77@buffalo.edu" target="_blank" title="mailto:jb77@buffalo.edu"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;color:#0078D4">jb77@buffalo.edu</span></a></span><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;color:black"><br>
Web: </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><a href="http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/" target="_blank" title="http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;color:#0563C1">http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/</span></a></span><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;color:black"> <br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Office hours Tu/Th 3:30-4:30pm in 642 Baldy or via Zoom (Meeting ID 585 520 2411; Passcode Hoorheh) </span><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;color:black"><br>
<br>
There’s A Crack In Everything - That’s How The Light Gets In <br>
(Leonard Cohen) </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in">
<span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">-- </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in">
<span lang="DE" style="font-family:"CMU Serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in">
<span lang="DE" style="font-family:"CMU Serif""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div id="m_5141292198331641886mail-editor-reference-message-container">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:1.0in">
<b><span style="color:black">From: </span></b><span style="color:black">Lingtyp <<a href="mailto:lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>> on behalf of Chao Li via Lingtyp <<a href="mailto:lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Sunday, July 7, 2024 at 21:12<br>
<b>To: </b><<a href="mailto:LINGTYP@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">LINGTYP@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>[Lingtyp] Distinction between semantic arguments and semantic adjuncts</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="m5141292198331641886gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Dear Colleagues,
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="m5141292198331641886gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="m5141292198331641886gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">The distinction between argument and adjunct is crucial for many linguistic analyses and much linguistic theorizing. However, how to define the argument and the adjunct and how to clearly distinguish
between the two are controversial. Further complicating the issue is the existence of two related levels, semantic and (morpho)syntactic (e.g. what is semantically considered an argument may be (morpho)syntactically realized as an adjunct, as evidenced by
passive formation in English). To be clear, this query is about the distinction between semantic arguments and semantic adjuncts (or semantic non-arguments). Specifically, in the case of verbs like
<i>buy</i> and <i>sell</i> and in the context of a business transaction that generally involves a buyer, a seller, a transfer of goods, and a transfer of money, how many semantic arguments does each verb have, what are they, and what is the rationale behind
the analysis? Similarly, in the case of <i>cut</i>, how many semantic arguments does it have and will that include the tool used in the cutting too? After all, isn’t the tool a necessary participant of the cutting action and how often do we cut something without
using any tool? Likewise, how many semantic arguments in the case of <i>bring</i>?
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="m5141292198331641886gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="m5141292198331641886gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Particularly, without looking at the different syntactic frames and constructions where these verbs occur or without paying any attention to how they are really used, on what (semantic) grounds
can we say that Participant X is an argument of <i>buy</i>, <i>sell, cut, </i>or<i> bring</i> or that Participant Y is an adjunct of the same verb? For colleagues who’d like to make a further distinction between core arguments and peripheral arguments in addition
to the distinction between arguments and adjuncts, then the following questions arise. Namely, if without looking at the different syntactic frames and constructions where these verbs occur, on what (semantic) grounds can we say that Participant X is a core
argument, a peripheral argument, or an adjunct (of <i>buy</i>, <i>sell</i>, <i>cut</i>, or
<i>bring</i>) and what is the difference between a peripheral argument and an adjunct?
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="m5141292198331641886gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="m5141292198331641886gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Any input would be greatly appreciated. Thank you so much in advance for your time and help!</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="m5141292198331641886gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="m5141292198331641886gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Best regards,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="m5141292198331641886gmail-msonospacing" style="mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify">
<span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Chao</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>