“Swarm”与“Spray/Load”论元倒换句异同略考

On the Disparity between "Swarm" and "Spray/Load" Alternations

Levin（1993）视“swarm”类动词为非宾格动词，将它纳入以spray／load为代表的及物动词研究框架，其理由是因为两类动词的处所前置式均隐含某种“完彻性效应”。研究发现，两类倒换句隐含的“完彻性”具有不同性质，不能以此为由将它们归为同类倒换句：spray／load类动词是事件性及物动词，在直接宾语位置上有一个述题，而swarm类动词则是事件性（动态）与状态性（静态）兼而有之，是不及物无终性非作格动词，不能带述题。两类论元倒换句差异明显，宜区别对待。

Levi n （1993） regards the ＂swarm＂ verbs as unaccusatives, treating them in the same way as the ＂spray/ load＂ alternation is studied, just for the reason that a ＂holism＂ is implied in the locative-preposed pattern of the two kinds of verbs. However, it has been revealed that the ＂holistic effect＂ implicit in the locative-preposed form of the two alternations is different in nature, and accordingly this paper argues that the two alternations should not be classified into the same type merely for the apparent similarity. Specifically, ＂spray^load＂ verbs are transitive alternation which has a theme in the slot of the direct object, while the ＂swarm verbs＂, with characteristics of process/dynamics and stativeness/ staticness all in one, are intransitive and unergative taking no theme.