INSTANTIATIONS AND (OBLIGATORY VS. OPTIONAL) ACTANTS 
Jfirgen KUNZE 
Central Institute of Linguistics 
Academy of Sciences of the GDR 
Prenzlauer Promenade I@9-152 
Berlin 
DDR-1100 
Abstract: A formalism for ~he representation 
of "semantic emphases" is introduced, using 
principal and accessory instantiatiQns. It 
m~es it possible to convert predicate ex- 
pressions inbo network-like structures. As 
an application criteria for ooligatory and 
optional actants are dealt with. 
I. The formal framework 
- A set X of objects, denoted by x, y, Zo 
- A set E of events, states, actions, ..., 
denoted by el, e2, .... 
- A set L of places, denoted by 11, 12, .... 
- A set T of intervals (span~or moments) on 
the time axis, denoted by tl, t2, .... 
- A se~ of functions f1' f2' ..o, which are 
mappings between the sets X, E, L and T. 
- A se~ of relaUions in E, L and T as e. g. 
e I ~e 2 (e I is a partial event, ... of e2J 
11 ~ 12, t I ~ t2, t I starts t2, 
t I finishes t 2 etco (Allen (1984); Bier- 
winch (1988) for the general framework). 
- Finally a set of primitive semantic predl- 
cares BI, B2, .o., ~hat may have as argu- 
ments elements of X, L and T as well as 
propositions A, ioe. predicates B wluh 
their (aopropriate) arguments. 
While ~he elements of the first four sets 
have the character of variables, the func- 
tions, relations and predicates are fixed 
and interpreted in a characteristic way. 
We use here the following functions: 
loc(e) = l: The location of e is 1. 
~ime(e) = t: The time of e is to 
If e is a path, one may define Init(e) = e' 
and fln(e) = e" (cf. Bierwisch 41988)). One 
has time(inlt(e)) starts time(e) etc. 
We will use the following predicates: 
ACT(x) CAUSE(A 1 ,A 2) 
HAVE(x,y) CHANGE(A1,A2) (from A I ~o A 2) 
NOT (A) aT( A I , A 2) ( o onj unct i on) 
BECome(A) d~f CHANGE(NOT(A),A) 
On the basis of these formal components 
one has to give a definition of wellformed 
expressions. One needs furthermore an axiom 
system expressing the fundamental properties 
of the predicates. We skip this here° 
2. Instaatiations 
For each proposition A we assume an addi- 
tlonal argument place that is filled in by an 
element e of Eo We say that "e is an Instan- 
tiation of A" or "e instantiates A" and write 
A~\] (Bierwisch (1988), Reichenbach (19#8))o 
We introduce here a distinction between 
two types of Instantiations, namely 
- principal instantiations, representing a 
semantic emphasis, denoted by e p, 
- accessory instantlations, denoted by eao 
For each primitive predicate in a given 
inventory one Instantiatlon rule has to be 
formulated. The rules are applied recurslvely 
and provide a means for "calculating" the 
Instantlations for complex propositions. The 
results are network-like structures consistq 
ing of conditions only on the level of the 
sets X, E, L and T. 
ACT(x) Is\]| e is an action of x. 
HAVE(x,y)\[e\] , e is a state, that involves 
x's having (owning, ...) of yo 
NOT(A) \[e\]$ a condition, that implies ~.&~e\]. 
It should be note~ that for concrete A's con- 
crete rules can be formulated (preserving 
presuppositions and certain arguments). 
In the next rules the index i = 1,2 indi- 
cates whether the first or the second argumen~ 
yields the principal Instantlation. For the 
index j = 1,2 we use ~he convention "j ¢ i"o 
CAUSEi(A1,A a) \[e\] : 
(e is a pair (el,e2)) ^ (A l\[e~) ^ (A2\[e2\]) ^ 
(e I causes e2) ^ (e i = e p) A (ej = e a) ^ 
(tlme(el) = tlme(e2) = time(e)) ^ 
(loc(e I) = loc(e 2) = lot(e)) 
This is the rule for simultaneous causation 
356 
where one has unity of time and place. 
CH~NGEi(A1,A2)\[e\]: 
(~ is a path) A(init(e) = el) ^ (fin(e) = e2)A 
(~21(AI,NOT(A~)) \[e~ ^ ET'(Aj,NOT(AI)) \[ej\] 
(el = ep) A (e~ = e a) 
This preserves the semantic emphasis on A i 
and allows a new index for the second ~\]T. 
From this rule one obtains the conditions for 
B~O 1(A) = CHANGE 1 (NOT(A), A) (=CFASE(NOT(A) ) ) 
B\]6C2(A) = CHANGE2(NOT(A),A) (usual BEC(A)). 
Note thai; ETk(A,A)\[e\] eq A\[eJ for all k, A 
and e, BEC has one "degree of freedom" lesso 
ETi(A 1 ~A 2 ) e : 
(e i = e ) A( j = )^ 
(time(el) = time(e2) = time(e)) 
This way )~T becomes an unsymmetric predicate° 
3o Instanl;iations and actants 
We illust:eate the notions defined above by a 
sample of German verbs with three necessary 
actants: the source x, the goal z, end the 
(transferred) Object y. Under some simplifi- 
cations we may assume the following expres- 
slon-scheme as basic pattern for this group: 
( 1 ) O,~s~fl/a(ACT(x/z), 
CHANGE1/2(HAV~(x,y),HAVE(z,y))) 
In (1) 16 expressions are summarized, which 
one may obtain by choosing the upper index 
of CAUSE, the argument of AOT, the upper In- 
dex of CH~GE and the upper index of the sec- 
ond occurrence of ~ in the CHANGEi-~le. 
An occurrence of a predicate in an expres- 
sion representing a certain sememe is called 
an inhere~:,.t occurrence, if this occurrence 
has to be instantiated for a sufficlen~ de- 
scriptlon of ~hls sememe. The inherent occur~ 
fences have to fulfil some condi~ionsl 
The inheren~ occurrences ~e closed under 
principal instantiations: If B(..o,A,..o) 
is an i~herent occurrence of B, and the 
predicate A yleids the principal insian- 
tia~ion of B, then the uppermost predicate 
of A is an inherent occurrence° 
The Inheren~ occurrences are closed bottom- 
up: if :In B(°..,A,...) the occurrence @f 
the upper.mos~ predicate of A is inherent, 
then th~ occurrence of B is ~mherento 
in (I) it is sufficient to mark (after thelr 
i~stan~ia~:\[e~) both occurrences of ET as pri- 
ma~ely i~1~rent occurrences (i. e. init(e) 
a~d fln(e) are necessary). For co~cre~e some- 
mes one may add further inherent occurrences 
in accordance with the afore~said conditions. 
The possibilities depend on the distribution 
of principal instantiationso 
Each element of X occurring in an expres- 
sion a role can be assigned tos 
- ACT( ) defines in (I) the role "agent". 
By spelling out the second argument of CAUSE 
in (1) without the details of Instantlatlons 
we obtain four partial conditions: 
HAVE(x,y) \[inlt(e)\] A NOT(HAVE(z,y)) \[init(e)\] 
NOT(HAVE(x,y)) \[fln(e)\] A HAVE(z,y) \[fin(e)\] 
Here e is the instantiation of CHANGE. 
- The occurrences of x in the first and the 
third partial expression define together 
the role "source" for Xo 
- The occurrences of z in the second and the 
fourth partial expression define together 
the role "goal" for Zo 
- The occurrences of y in the first and the 
fourth partial expression define together 
the role "object" for y. 
In this sense we may speak of role defin- 
ing occurrences. They are independent of the 
distribution of the hypes of insbantiations. 
Now we are able to formulate the follow- 
ing principle: 
(2) An actant is obligatory in a certain role 
iff all its defining occurrences for 
this role are direct arguments in inher- 
ent occurrences of predicates. 
In order to avoid mixing up surface and 
deep phenomena one should note thaS the argu- 
ments of ACT in (1) for the verbs considered 
under A. ~ H. are subjects (in active voice) 
and hence "obligatory". This assigmnent pre- 
dominates over (2) in passive voice, too: In 
C. the aciant z e. g. is according to (2) ob- 
ligatory as goal and agent, but being the 
subject in active voice, not obligatory in 
passive voice. The same applies for the sub- 
jects in passive voice. 
In (3) we list the first eight possibili- 
ties of (1) with the following abbreviations 
in the corresponding columns: 
1. upper index of CAUSE 
2o argument 9f ACT 
3. upper index of CHANGE and the first ET 
4. upper index of the second ET 
5. distribution of source, object and goal 
according to (2) (optional: in brackets) 
357 
6. the principal instantions within the 
predicate CHANGE express an emphasis on 
BEC(NOT(HAVE(x,y))) : from 
BEC(HAVE(z,y)) ~ to 
one argument of CHANGE: from to 
7. distribution of the actants taking into 
account the agent in active voice 
(3) 1. 2. 3. ~. 5. G. 7. 
A. I z I ~ (x)y(z) from to (x)y z 
B. I z I 1 x(y(k)) from x(y)z 
c. 1 z 2 2 ((x)y)z to ((x)y)z 
D. I z 2 I (x)y(z) from to (x)y z 
E. I x I 2 (x)y(z) from to x y(z) 
F. I x I I x(y(z) ) from x(y(z)) 
G. 1 x 2 2 ((x)y)z to x(y)z 
H. I x 2 I (x)y(z) from to x y(z) 
These eight possibilities refer to the fol- 
lowing German verbs (among many others): 
A. wegnehmen, abnehmen (take aw~/of_~f), 
entwenden (~, filch) 
(~) Die Oma nasa (dem Baby) die Schere weg. 
(5) Er hat (der alien Frau) de~ schweren Kof- 
fer abgenommen. (so she needn't carry it) 
B. besteblen (ro_~b, steal from) 
(6) Er hat die Frau (um 1OOO Mark ) bestohlen. 
C. stehlen (steal) 
(7) Er hat ((der Frau) 1000 ~ark) gestohlen. 
D. annehmen (~~ (borrow) 
(8) Rr hat (yon der Frau) 1000 Mark geb orgt. 
(so he has some money now) 
E. verschenken (give aw~), ~, ausgebeq 
(give ou__~t, ~), ausliefern (delive__~r), 
verleihen (lend (out)) 
(9) Gebe junge Katzen ab! (somebody wants to 
get rid of the kittens) 
(10) Hams ha~ das Spielzeug (an die Kinder) 
verschenkt. (so he has no toys any more) 
Fo liefern (delive_~r) 
(11) Die Firma liefert ~uns) das Papier). 
G. beschenken ( rp_~nt s. o.), bellefern 
(furnis____~h, ~) 
(12) Hans hat die Kinder (mit Spielzeug) be- 
schenkt. (so taey have some toys now) 
(13) Die Firma bellefert uns (mit Papier). 
H. schenken (make A present of s. th. ~o 
s. o_..__~.), lelhen (lend, not borrow) 
(I@) Hans schenkte (den Kindern) Spielzeug. 
There is some support for 6. in (3) by 
- the resultatlve aspect (a clear difference 
between A. and D. and between E. and H., on 
the other hand a great similarity between 
A. and E. and between D. and H.), 
- the prefixes, forming three types ("from", 
"over" and "to" except be-, vet-, o.o). 
In German exists a rich system of preftxu 
derivatives in this group, their detailed 
examination confirmes the distinctions 
proposed here. Verbs like Gbernehme~ (tak~ 
over) or ~bcrgeben, Gberreichen (ban 
ove___~r) belong to both from-to-cases A. and 
D. or E. and H., respectively° 
The remaining eight cases (upper index of 
CAUSE is 2) represent the passive voice of 
A. - H. a~d some other verbs, e. g. 
H~ bekommen, erhalten (receiv_~e) 
(15) Die Kinder bekamen (yon Hans) Spielzeug0 
The distribution (x)y(z) (under 5.) turns 
into (x)y z (under (7.). For these verbs the 
passive voice is impossible° 
Just the basic verbs nehmen and eb~ (and 
some more, e. g. fibergeben) do not meet the 
scheme in every detail: They may occupy sev~ 
eral positions of show a different distri- 
bution or optional ao~ants. It goes without 
s~ylng that for many of the considered verbs 
the expression (I) has to be specified, i. eo 
HAVE is too general. Moreover stealln~ is 
against the law, presentlng is connected 
with some benefit of z etc .... 
The classification of this verb group is 
in keeping with Schumacher (1986), p. 72d fro 
Other groups of verbs (e. g. "Informing"~ 
mitteile~, oo., e rfahren) have been dealt 
with the same way. Pairs of the type ~o fill 
the bottle with wate~r and to fill water i~o 
the bottle Field another confirmation of 
this formal approach. 
References 

Allen, James F. (198~) Towards a General 
Theoryof Action and Time. Artificial 

Bierwlsch, Manfred (1988) On the Grammar 
of Local Prepositions. Btudla ~rammatlca 
XXIX, Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, p. 1-65 

Relchenbach, Hans (19@8) Elements of Symbolic 
Logic. New York: The Macmillan Compaz~,. 

Sohumacher, Helmu~ ed. (1986) Verben in 
Feldern: Valemzw6rterbuch zu~ Syntax trod 
Semantlk deutscher Verben. Schrlften des 
Instltuts fGr deutsche ~, vol. q, 
Berlin, New York: de Gru~er. 
