trustme.bro/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim
A one-place predicate takes a single argument, whereas a two-place predicate takes two arguments.
the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
refutedsupported
the weight of evidence
4 sources for · 0 against
AS REPORTEDno primary record reached; this is what the reporting says

Reference literature in syntax confirms that predicates are classified by their valency, where one-place predicates take a single argument and multi-argument structures such as two-place predicates take multiple arguments.

Evidence for · 4
2008 · cited by 0
Bas Aarts. Sentence ( 4 ) has a predicate that takes only one argument . We will call such predi- cates one - place predicates ( or monadic predicates ) . ( 5 ) is like ( 1 ) above : the predi- cate investigate requires the presence of two ... This successful textbook gives students a thorough grounding in the basics of sentence structure and acquaints them with the essentials of syntactic argument. Now updated and expanded, the third edition features an additional chapter on grammatical indeterminacy, a case study on subordinating conjunctions and prepositions, and new exercises.
See more details
The analysis

rails:sufficiency:supported:single_source:for=1+2p:against=0+0p | v55:sufficiency

More for · 3
cited by 0
constructions as two-place Stative predicates, as opposed to the analysis of them as one-place in FSUG, provides … in (20a) the watch is a patient, the single argument of a single-argument stative verb of state or condition … or more nuclei combine to form a single, com- plex nucleus with a single set of core arguments. This is
1992 · cited by 0
constructions as two-place stative predicates, as opposed to the analysis of them as one-place in FSUG, provides … in (20a) the watch is a patient, the single argument of a single-argument stative verb of state or condition … or more nuclei combine to form a single, com- plex nucleus with a single set of core arguments. This is
cited by 0
raising predicate. Arguments of the control predicate, on the other hand, have to fulfill their semantic requirements, and interpreted as the argument of the In linguistics, control is a construction in which the understood subject of a given predicate is determined by some expression in context. Stereotypical instances of control involve verbs. A superordinate verb "controls" the arguments of a subordinate, nonfinite verb. Control was intensively studied in the government and binding framework in the 1980s, and much of the terminology from that era is a. Fred asked you to read it. - asked is an object control verb. b. Fred expects you to read it. - expects is a raising-to-object verb. a. Jim forced her to say it. - forced is an object control verb. b. Jim believed her to have said it. - believes is a raising-to-object verb. The control predicates ask and force semantically select their object arguments, whereas the raising-to-object verbs do not. Instead, the object of the raising verb appears to have "risen" from the subject position of the embedded predicate, in this case from the embedded predicates to read and to have said. In other words, the embedded predicate is semantically selecting the argument of the matrix predicate. What this means is that while a raising-to-object verb takes an object dependent, that dependent is not a semantic argument of that raising verb. The distinction becomes apparent when one considers that a control predicate like ask requires its object to be an animate entity, whereas a raising-to-object predicate like expects places no semantic limitations on its object dependent.
Everything we examined (4) — 3 independent sources
This check searched the claim as stated. It did not run a separate search for evidence against it.
  1. English Syntax and Argumentationreferenceno side taken
  2. Advances in Role and Reference Grammarreferencesame source L2no side taken
  3. Advances in Role and Reference Grammarreferencesame source L2no side taken
  4. Control (linguistics)referenceno side taken
This receipt carries no identity, shared or not. Sharing publishes your connection to it, not your data.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
trust me, bro: win the argument, pass the class, survive peer review.
This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work · Dispute this receipt