Verb Semantics and Double Object Constructions A constraint-based approach to Double Object Constructions in German

This paper treats verbs of diverse syntactic and semantic origins that enter into preposition-less double object constructions in German. It develops a fine-grained semantics within a lexicalist approach to grammar. Three semantic components are recognized: situation schemata which represent situational knowledge in the form of a matrix of abstract participant constellations; the attribute designated participant, within the nucleus specification of verbs, which insures linking to subject, independent of thematic entailments, and finally a proto-role representation of thematic information. These semantic components are integrated by means of an attribute-value representation of verb meaning. Three main ditransitive situation types, namely TRANSITIONS, PERTINENCE RELATIONS and INDUCTIONS are introduced. These semantic situation types allow us to capture the semantics of a variety of ditransitive meanings within a system of ditransitive situation-types. Through an account of diathesis alternations in terms of ‘additive phrasal buildup’, the notion of construction is given an independent status within an HPSG style build-up of the grammar. Introduction The success of a grammar that treats the projection of ditransitive verbs in terms of constructions, depends not least on the question whether we can identify a unique ditransitive semantics that corresponds to such a construction type. In this paper I will show that TRANSFER, a concept which is often believed to represent the ‘core-meaning of ditransitive verbs’, is strangely at odds with what we see as the actual array of meanings expressed in German ditransitive constructions. Not only does German allow four different ditransitive subcategorization-frames, in addition also transitive verbs can, by adding a so-called free dative, relatively freely appear in what looks like a ditransitive frame. I will argue that socalled free datives should be classified as arguments – though not as arguments of the verb, but as arguments of the construction as such. Given that ditransitive constructions can include transitive verbs also transitive verbs need to be interpretable within a ditransitive meaning paradigm. It follows that a ditransitive semantics suitable for these constructions must apply to verbs of diverse syntactic and/or semantic origins and that it therefore needs to satisfy