The valence of Dutch weather verbs

Abstract

In this thesis, I explore the valence of Dutch weather verbs. Traditionally, these verbs have been analyzed as avalent, taking the weather subject het ‘it’ to be an expletive. However, recently is has been argued for English weather verbs, previously subjected to the same avalent analysis, that they are valent (Krejci 2014, Levin 2017). This is a relevant line of research, as some event structure theories are unable to account for avalent verbs (e.g. Levin 1999) and the supposed avalent status has been taken as a diagnostic tool (Lasnik & Uriagereka 1988). The English weather subject it under this new analysis is a referential argument and weather verbs are a subclass of substance emission verbs. I extend this analysis to Dutch. In line with the argument by Krejci (2014) and Levin (2017), I show that Dutch weather verbs behave differently from raising verbs (which take an expletive subject) when it comes to their argument selection. The Dutch weather subject also behaves differently from the expletive raising subject. Specifically, only the weather subject is able to enter into referential relations with other elements, a property belonging to full referential arguments. Additionally, I present evidence from valence-increasing morphology, arguing that the ability of weather verbs to occur with this morphology indicates that they are valent. When turning to the issue of the meaning of the fully referential weather subject, I argue that Dutch weather verbs are a subclass of substance emission verbs. This is in line with Krejci (2014) and Levin (2017). Potashnik (2012) argues that emission verbs take a causative subject. This corresponds to my findings regarding weather verbs combined with valence-increasing morphology.