This paper is about the type of sentences which consist of a subject, a simple eventive verb followed by an aspectual marker, and a bare object. These sentences are generally considered incomplete... Show moreThis paper is about the type of sentences which consist of a subject, a simple eventive verb followed by an aspectual marker, and a bare object. These sentences are generally considered incomplete or ungrammatical. The approach taken here is that they are degraded because they are non-finite. Taking a functional definition of a finite sentence as the point of departure (a finite sentence can independently refer to events in the extra-linguistic world), this paper uses the Reichenbach-Klein framework to determine that a finite sentence must contain CP, TP, AspP and a VP containing an event role (e-role). This e-role must be bound by an aspectual marker. It is argued that what may be wrong with the “incomplete” sentences is that either one of these elements is missing or there is something wrong with the connection between them. What plays a crucial role in these sentences is that there is a mismatch between the bareness of the predicate, which suggests a stative or habitual interpretation, and the presence of an aspect marker, which is incompatible which such a predicate, because it lacks the relevant e-role, so that there is nothing for the aspect marker to bind. It is shown that all measures that can be taken to “complete” these sentences have the function of bringing the e-role, thus undoing the mismatch. This paper relies heavily of the work done by others, such as Kǒng (1994), Hé (1994), Hú and Shí (2005), Gù (2008) and Tsai (2008). What is new is the connection with finiteness. Show less
