In linguistics, a resultative (abbreviated res) is a form that expresses that something or someone has undergone a change in state as the result of the completion of an event. Resultatives appear as predicates of sentences, and are generally composed of a verb (denoting the event), a post-verbal noun phrase (denoting the entity that has undergone a change) and a so-called resultative phrase (denoting the state achieved as the result of the action named by the verb) which may be represented by an adjective, a prepositional phrase, or a particle, among others. For example, in the English sentence The man wiped the table clean, the adjective clean denotes the state achieved by the table as a result of the event described as the man wiped.
Resultative constructions Resultative constructions are set syntactic patterns used to express resultativeness. Within these structures, the object NP is viewed as having undergone some change of state, and the change is viewed as a result achieved through the action expressed by the combination of the verb and the result phrase. The word order of the elements is said to be constant and crucial in conveying the resultative meaning; under this analysis, the output in its entirety is regarded as having a more complex meaning than the sum of its components' individual meanings. This constructional approach has been proposed in order to account for the semantic differences between standalone verbs that have no intrinsic resultative meaning and their resultative counterparts (e.g. hammer versus hammer... flat).
Systems of differentiation
Resultative constructions can be described in the framework of a sign-oriented approach: morphological signals and word order signals (based on the ordering of lexical items) interact in order to create meaning. This interaction generates a system of oppositions based on two types of differentiation: differentiation of the referent from other referents in the lexicon and differentiation of the referent from itself.
Classes of resultative constructions Semantically, resultative constructions can be part of one of four major classes, defined by two attributes: causative vs. non-causative, and property vs. path. (See table below.) These classes are distinguished by the relation between the noun phrase undergoing the change expressed by the resultative (referred to as the host) and the resultative construction itself. In causative resultatives, the host is the direct object of the resultative construction; the subject causes the host to undergo a change. In noncausative resultatives, the host is the subject of the resultative construction; the sentence states a change of state or position. In property resultatives, the host comes to have the property expressed by the resultative construction. In path resultatives, the resultative construction describes a path that is traversed by the host.
Traditional view Defining the role and category of resultatives has inspired numerous approaches from linguists. Traditionally, certain tenses and aspects have been attributed to resultatives. Namely, the present perfect aspect is pointed to in explaining resultative constructions like I have written them a letter. There is a stress on the sense of completeness inherent in resultatives: A: Have you cleaned the windows? B: No, I haven't finished them yet. B: Yes, but I haven't finished them yet In this example, answering negatively entails that either some or none of the windows have been cleaned, but you cannot answer positively unless the entire task is completed. The task does not require successful completion as found in the example He has not passed his exam. It has been demonstrated, however, that resultatives exist independently of the perfect in sentences like I turned this offer down, creating the need to reexamine the role of resultatives. To address this, it has been claimed that the resultative expresses both a state and the preceding action it has resulted from. This emphasizes that the resultative describes how a state was acted upon. Therefore, it must use the passive form. However, this analysis does not account for phrases such as I turned this offer down, which use the active rather than the passive voice.
Sign-oriented analysis Sign-oriented analyses present an aspectual contrast, in which the approach is based on the boundaries of predication within a time-field. An action is perceived as a whole within a predication or it could be perceived as the predication within the boundaries. A markedness relationship is one between the perfective and imperfective. This analysis argues against the view that the resultative meaning is identical to the perfect. Below are sentences where the verbs in the perfect do not have the ‘element of result’ in their meaning: I’ve seen it before. It’s only been three or four times that we’ve come face to face. In the sentences above ‘the element of result’ does not seem apparent. It is argued that the concrete result and the result phase should be distinguished from each other.
The Guillaumean approach This aspectual approach shows the relation between an action and its result. The Guillaumean approach posits that the English verb has two moments, one where any duration, any developments, or any actualizations take place within the event's duration.
The resultative as a feature of English Yet another approach to resultativeness views it as “a fundamental semantic distinctive feature which cuts across almost all traditional categories: verb, noun, adjective, infinitive, gerund, participle, particle, auxiliary”. It is claimed that the resultative should be a distinctive feature in language instead of being a subcategory within the verbal aspect realm.
As a system of oppositions
… excerpt ends here. Continue reading the full article.
