@article{oai:kuis.repo.nii.ac.jp:00000076,
 author = {井上, 和子 and イノウエ, カズコ and INOUE, KAZUKO},
 journal = {Scientific approaches to language},
 month = {Mar},
 note = {P(論文), This paper is concerned first with the question whether or not theta-marking of the subject necessarily results in object Case assignment as is predicted by Burzio's generalization. I will argue that theta-marking and Case-assignment are independent, using a variety of Japanese intransitive and transitive sentences with both simple and complex predicates. Some of them are compatible but the others are incompatible with the above generalization. Hasegawa (2001) is used as one of the theoretical bases, which also argues against this generalization using a variety of Japanese transitive sentences as counterexamples. Both the present paper and Hasegawa (2001) claim the independence of subject theta-marking and Case assignment. The next question is whether or not Case is absorbed only by a predicate incapable of marking the subject with a theta-role. This question is answered in the negative, that is, Case absorption is not dependent on dethematization. Regarding predicative affixes as functional categories represented as v with or without the accusative Case checking function and the lexical property of external theta-marking, we are able to give a unified account for the data supporting and refuting Burzuo's generalization.},
 pages = {79--134},
 title = {Diversity of Clause Structures},
 volume = {2},
 year = {2003}
}