Alternation ‘Locative alternation’ (Uncoded)

Some intransitive verbs show an alternation between a NOM-INSTR and a LOC-NOM coding pattern. In the first variant, the nominative-marked NP represents the location, and the instrumental-marked NP the instrument (in a broad sense, see FILL, ex. 175). In the second variant, the location is marked with locative and the instrument with nominative case (ex. 227). The word order seems to play a role in the LOC-NOM alignment, see ex. 231. With transitive verbs it is the object status of the arguments that alternates between the patterns. As for intransitive verbs, interviews with consultants point towards a greater 'unmarkedness' of a NOM-LOC-ACC case pattern which is why this one has been chosen as the basic one, albeit being a somewhat arbitrary decision. Here, the instrument is encoded with accusative case, whereas the location is marked with locative case (ex. 230). This pattern alternates with NOM-ACC-INSTR where the location is marked with accusative case, and the instrument with instrumental case (ex. 1). Apparently, it is mainly the coding pattern where the instrument is marked with accusative case (ex. 230) that one can apply the benefactive alternation (ex. 101) on, and applying the benefactive alternation on an NOM-ACC-INSTR resulting in a NOM-DAT-ACC case pattern with the locational NP in accusative case, sounds slightly awkward. However this might be due to my personal usage preferences instead of some underlying linguistic restrictions. Several researchers (e.g., Yeon 2003: 196) have mentioned that such a case alternation brings about a holistic/partial-affectedness interpretation, although this is questionable. Passive alternation can be applied on both coding patterns, which shows that the accusative-marking on an argument is indeed a sign for its object status.

Verb Meaning Verb form Basic coding frame Derived coding frame Occurs Comment # Ex.