A lexical semantic analysis of faa complex predicates in

0. Abstract A complex predicate is an integration of two or more semantically identifiable elements, acting as a single predicate unit in terms of grammatical relations such as the sharing of subjects and objects. Many analyses in the literature assume that complex predicates are formed at a level of argument structure where the contributing predicates of the complex restructure their arguments to form a single but complex argument structure (Alsina 1993 for Romance, Butt 1995 for Urdu, and Loedrup 1996 for Norwegian).This paper proposes an alternative approach in which complex predicate formation is done, not by argument structure restructuring or predicate composition (Alsina 1993), but by conceptual structure restructuring or predicate integration (Bodomo 1997). The analysis is couched in an LFG-like framework which incorporates a level of conceptual structure (Hellan 1996, Jackendoff 1997). The empirical motivation for this lexical semantic approach to complex predicate formation is based on Norwegian complex predicate data such as Per fikk reparert bilen 'Per got the car repaired' (Loedrup 1996). 1.0. The facts and earlier analyses Earlier analyses of Norwegian complex predicates include the pioneering studies of Taraldsen (1991) and Loedrup (1996). These mainly concern complex predicates formed with the verbs la 'let' and faa'get'. The following sentences in (1) and (2) illustrate the two types of complex predicates in Norwegian. (1) vi lot løslate fang-ene 1.PL let.PAST release.INF prisoner-DEF.PL 'We allowed the prisoners to be released' (2) Per fikk reparert bil-en Per get.PAST repair.PARTICIPLE car-DEF.SG 'Per got the car repaired' I will refer to the former as a permissive complex predicate and the latter as a faa 'get' complex predicate. For the permissive complex predicate, Taraldsen proposes that both la 'let' and a verb like løslate 'to release' project the same VP and thus constitute a complex predicate. We shall not have much to say about the permissive complex predicates or la 'let' constructions in this paper. We shall instead concentrate on faa 'get' complex predicate constructions as shown in (2). Sentence (2) as it stands can be ambiguous. It could mean either that Per was able to repair the car by himself or that or he got someone to repair it. Loedrup (1996) distinguishes between the two interpretations of faa'get' constructions, calling the first instance where the subject is agent of repair the active interpretation and the second where the subject is a benefactive of 21