English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

According to the hypothesis of semantic determination, meaning is a key to verb behavior; verb fall into classes on the basis of shared components of meaning, and members in the same semantic class may share patterns of behavior. This paper aims to verify the validity of component analysis in predicting syntactic behavior. It first makes a brief introduction to causative alternation, then compares the meaning components and usage of three verbs, i.e., break, cut and bake. Finally, two contradictions are found in the alternation analysis of these verbs. Therefore, the component analysis cannot completely predict their alternation type. Consequently, the explanatory power of this hypothesis is very limited as far as causative alternation is concerned.

On the Explanatory Power of the Hypothesis of Semantic Determination to Causative Alternation