M. Iriskulov, A. Kuldashev a course in Theoretical English Grammar Tashkent 2008

R e s u l t a t i v e C o n s t r u c t i o n 
The Resultative Construction is argued to be a metaphorical extension of the 
caused-motion construction. The semantics of the construction involves the patient, 
that is why resultatives can only be applied to arguments which potentially 
undergo a change of state as a result of the action denoted by the verb. Resultatives 
can apply to: 
- direct objects of some transitive verbs, e.g.: I had brushed my hair smooth. 
You killed it stone-dead.; 
- subjects of particular intransitive verbs, e.g.: The river froze solid.; 

---

175 
- “fake” objects, i.e. post-verbal arguments that do not bear the normal 
argument
relation to the verb, e.g.: She laughed herself crooked.
Thus, resultative construction can be defined as
Subject (Agent) – Predicate (Cause-Become) – Object (Patient) – Obl-
adjective or prepositional phrase (Result-Goal)  for transitive resultatives, and
Subject (Patient) – Predicate (Become) – Obl (Result-Goal) for intransitive 
resultatives. 
Semantic constraints are proposed to explain extensions.
(Animate) Instigator Constraint: subject in the 2-argument resultative 
construction must hold the role of an (animate) instigator and it is not necessarily 
an agent, since no volitionality is required, e.g.: She coughed herself sick. 
Inanimate instigators are also possible, e.g.: The alarm clock ticked the baby 
awake. Instrument subjects are not possible, e.g.: * The hammer pounded the metal 
flat. 
Aspectual Constraint: the change of state must occur simultaneously with the 
endpoint of the action denoted by the verb. This constraint rules out cases in which 
there is any time delay between the action denoted by the verb and the subsequent 
change of state, e.g.: He ate himself sick. (implies that the agent’s continuous 
eating made him sick).