Az Eszterházy Károly Tanárképző Főiskola Tudományos Közleményei. 1996. Vol. 1. Eger Journal of English Studies.(Acta Academiae Paedagogicae Agriensis : Nova series ; Tom. 24)

Péter Antonyi: Phrasal verbs: an attempt at a syntactic account

explanation in 3.2 for why we cannot fill in any other position in the PP (i.e. other than the head) in this case. 3.2 Main point and conclusion In any case, Larson's reanalysis rule can be adapted to phrasal verbs, with the important modification that the conditions of application are rather different. While Larson postulated one and only one undischarged theta-role within the V' to validate the reanalysis, here a markedly different condition seems to hold as far as theta-roles are concerned: the V' in phrasal verbs may only be reanalysed if they do not contain any theta-roles at all. The reason for this might have to do with the need to make the V' as Might' as possible in order to facilitate the V' reanalysis with object NPs that are not so 'heavy' on absolute terms (e.g. the customers

, which could obviously be 'heavier' if it were a complex NP), but they may count as 'heavy' relative to a very 'light' V'. Larson also talks about 'light predicate raising' when paraphrasing 'heavy NP shift', which further supports the cruciality of relativ

e phonological 'weights' of constituents in the analysis (Larson 1988:347). One may argue that this condition is almost the exact opposite of Larson's condition for the reanalysis so it is disputable if the two types of V' reanalysis can be identified as one and the same rule applicable on different conditions. Another important condition of Larson's reanalysis is that the NP occupying the Spec of the VP-shell must be 'heavy' enough. This tendency remains valid for the V' reanalysis in phrasal verbs as well but on a different scale. If the NP in question is any heavier than the 'lightest' possible NP (a pronominal: just a small set of features) then the reanalysis is optiona

l, as with Larson. For instance, if it is a full NP comprising a Determiner and a Head such as 'the customers', it is already 'heavier' than a pronominal and consequently the V' reanalysis will be an option. However, if it is a pronominal (i.e. a personal pronoun; the 'lightest' kind of NP) then the reanalysis is not applicabl

e (only the real V is raised), which conveniently explains why we have compulsory 'separation' (see earlier terminology) when the object is a personal pronoun. On the other hand, if the object NP is a complex one (the 'heaviest' case) the separation is quite unacceptable (see (6d) in 1.3), which means that the V'—

> V is obligatory

, as I have indicated may 103