Íslenskt mál og almenn málfræði - 2020, Síða 130

On Platzack’s minimalist account, arguments are (first) merged in these
positions and then, in non-presentational sentences, moved further up in
order to check various features. In presentational sentences the pivot
remains in the position where it was first merged. The root also raises to
v, but that does not affect the relative order of the role positions, see (14a)
for example. In non-presentational sentences, the highest argument is
normally raised to a Spec position in IP and then, in declarative main
clauses, further raised to Spec,CP. Presentational sentences in Swedish
arise when an expletive is merged in Spec,vP, the position reserved for
Agents of transitive verbs, and then raised. Consequently, no Agent can
be merged there and we do not find any transitive presentational sen-
tences. For Icelandic, where the expletive is assumed to be merged in
Spec,CP, Agents can be merged in Spec,vP and then raise to become IP-
pivots. But this does not explain why Agents have to raise in Icelandic.
In the next sections we look in more detail at what thematic roles can
be associated with pivots in the two languages and discuss how this con-
strains the possible positions for pivots with respect to the structure in
(15). We continue to use the terms IP-pivot and VP-pivot although the
latter is really a vP-pivot. We start by looking at presentational sentences
with Theme pivots, which is also the unmarked case.11
3.2 Theme pivots
Presentational sentences often have verbs that express existence, appear-
ance and disappearance. These verbs take a single argument which is a
Theme and are often referred to as unaccusative.12
(16) Det hade visst försvunnit ett brev från skrivbordet. (Swe.)
expl had apparently disappeared a letter from desk.def
‘A letter had apparently disappeared from the desk.’
(17) Það hafði víst horfið bréf af skrifborðinu. (Ice.)
expl had apparently disappeared letter from desk.def
‘A letter had apparently disappeared from the desk.’
Engdahl, Sigurðsson, Zaenen and Maling130
11 Sundman (1980), Askedal (1986) and Sveen (1996) look at what types of verbs are
used in presentational sentences in Norwegian and Swedish. Ekberg (1990) looks at theta
roles, more specifically at the locative argument that is often present. Here we concentrate
on the thematic role of the pivot, limiting ourselves to the most common ones. Engdahl et
al. (2020) investigate in addition Cause, Instrument and Stimulus in Swedish.
12 See Perlmutter (1978), Burzio (1986) and Thráinsson (2007:250 n. 2).