The semantics of verbs

Verb Class
Logical Structure
STATE	predicate'(x) or (x,y)
ACHIEVEMENT	BECOME predicate' (x) or (x,y)
ACTIVITY (+/- Agentive)	(DO (x) [ predicate' (x) or (x,y)])
ACCOMPLISHMENT	CAUSE  , where  is normally an activity predicate and  an achievement predicate.

These LSs are starting point for the interpretation of the thematic relations in RRG. Thematic relations are defined in terms of argument positions in the decomposed LS representations, following Jackendoff [Jac90]. Their repository and distribution among the verb classes is presented in the table below:
Patient is associated with the single argument of a single-argument stative verb of state or condition, as in The watch is broken. Theme is the second argument of two place stative verbs, e.g. the magazine in The magazine is on the desk. the desk is a locative, the first argument of two-place locational stative verbs. Experiencer is the first argument with a two place stative perception verbs. The single argument of a motion activity verb is a theme, as it undergoes a change of location: The ball rolled. The first argument of a non-motion activity verb is an effector, the participant which does some action and which is unmarked for volition and control as in The door squeaks. Such interpretation of thematic roles leads to the conclusion that the thematic roles in RRG are independently motivated.
LS and thematic roles are part of the semantic representation in RRG. Thematic roles function as one of the links between the semantic and syntactic representation. Semantic macroroles, Actor and Undergoer are the other link. Macroroles conceptually parallel the grammatical notions of arguments in a transitive predication. Being an immediate link to the level of Syntactic Functions, they control the assignment of syntactic markers to the arguments of the verb. It should be noted that the rich delineation of the lexical representations in the RRG model is well suited for the description of typologically different languages.
The classes of verbs in the table above cover different cognitive dimensions of language. The main cognitive distinction is drawn between two conceptual categories such as State and Activity. State verbs are subclassified into two major classes comprising locational and non-locational verbs. Among the non-locational verbs, the following subclasses are distinguished: state or condition, perception, cognition, possession and equational verbs. Activity verbs are subdivided with respect to the control component. Uncontrolled verbs are further subclassified with respect to the motion component.
Comparing approaches in Case Grammar oriented models and RRG
A common characteristic for the approaches to the classifications of verbs sketched in this subsection is that they search for a subset of recurrent semantic components and semantic roles that are relevant for the description of thematic relations. The two approaches reveal some interesting parallels concerning the decompositional analysis of verb meanings with regard to the subclassification of verbs into more or less equivalent types; thus states = states, activity = action, achievement = process, accomplishment = action-process. Since the LSs in the RRG model correspond to the thematic relations that other theories associate with a verb in their lexical entry, there is some partial similarity that the classifications of verbs within the two frameworks share. These two frameworks also show some overlap as far as the semantic affinity of the major subclasses of verbs is concerned.
The frameworks differ with regard to (a) the choice of description model, e.g. hierarchy vs. matrix model, (b) the level of semantic granularity in the subclassification of verbs, (c) the function that thematic relations play in the semantic representation in the respective frameworks.
The issues addressed within these frameworks turn attention, in the first place, to some basic linguistic questions that have to be answered when approaching the description and formalization of the lexical meaning in lexicons designed for both general and NLP purposes. The classification of verbs w.r.t. thematic relations should be seen as a preparatory stage that aims at a partial semantic representation of the lexical meaning of verbs. It has to be well adjusted to the chosen model of the semantic representation, which in turn has to be integrated with the model of syntactic representation. LCS-Based Verb Classification
Let us now introduce the Lexical Conceptual Structure (LCS), which is an elaborated form of semantic representation, with a strong cognitive dimension. The LCS came in part from the Lexical Semantics Templates (see above) and from a large number of observations such as those of [Gru67]. The present form of the LCS, under which it gained its popularity, is due to Jackendoff [Jac83], [Jac90]. The LCS was designed within a linguistic and cognitive perspective, it has some similarities, but also major differences, with approaches closer to Artificial Intelligence such as semantic nets or conceptual graphs. The LCS is basically designed to represent the meaning of predicative elements and the semantics of propositions, it is therefore substantially different from frames and scripts, which describe situations in the world like going to a restaurant or been cured from a desease. It is not specifically oriented toward communication acts or toward the representation of abstract objects of the world (by means of e.g. state of affairs, complex indeterminates), represented as objects, as in Situation Semantics (e.g. a complex indeterminate to model a person who utters an sentence).