0
  1. Just as the determiner function is not always realised by determinatives (as illustrated by the genitive NP determiners above), so many of the determinatives can have other functions than that of determiner.
  2. Direct object arguments are associated with a wide range of semantic roles, but in other canonical clauses than those expressing agent–patient situations, the direct object has the same grammatical properties as the NP expressing the patient in agent–patient clauses.

In #1, 'other...than...' has the meaning of 'in addition',and in #2 'except for'.

Are there some criteria for determining which meaning is intended? Or only by contenxt?

1 Answer 1

0

I would suggest that other means different in both cases.

(1) Many determinatives can have different functions (from the one already mentioned).

(2) In canonical clauses [which are] different from those expressing agent-patient situations...

2
  • Could 'so many of the determinatives can have other functions than that of determiner.' be changed to 'so many of the determinatives can have other functions except that of determiner' without modifying the meaning?
    – Mr. Wang
    Commented Feb 5 at 2:23
  • No. I understand (1) to mean that determinatives can sometimes have the function of determiner, but can also have different functions. Commented Feb 5 at 8:32

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .