The Fundamentals of Case Grammar:
Part 3
Part 4: The Deep Cases

Dr. JCS: In Case Grammar there are a handful of Deep Cases.

The two primary Deep Cases are Agent and Object. We've already described the Agent as the "doer of the action." Recall the sentences:
  • Columbus discovered America.
  • America was discovered by Columbus.
In both instances, Columbus acts as the Agent. With the obvious exceptions of robots, forces of nature, "Mother Russia" and other anthropomorphisms, Agents are always animate.

Some additional example sentences [with the Agent italicized]:
  • The eagle has landed.
  • What hath God wrought?
  • Nero fiddled.
  • "Waiting for Godot" was composed by Samuel Beckett.

  • Во весь голос запел хор.
  • Моего платья коснулась кошка.
  • О чем воет ветер ночной? (An anthropomorphism!)
  • Этот рассказ был написан Толстым.

Let's first look at the English examples. Note that syntactically the Agent can appear before or after the verb. However, in non-passive constructions the Agent is always the subject of the verb - the verb agrees with it. In English passive constructions the Agent is marked with the preposition by.

In Russian non-passive constructions, the Agent occupies the nominative case. In passive constructions, the Agent is in instrumental case.

RLM: Fine. Let's move on to the other primary Deep Case - the Object.

Dr. JCS: The Object is the "recipient of the action." It can be animate or inanimate. Some example sentences [with the Object italicized]:
  • Who shot Kennedy?
  • Our house burned down.
  • The code was broken by the Nazis.

  • Она накормила ребенка.
  • Лодка утонула в буре.
  • Вопрос был быстро решен.
Note that deep Objects can be surface subjects, both in English and in Russian. Thus, house and code are Objects, the passive "recipients of the action" of the verbs "to burn" and "to break." Likewise, the nominative лодка and вопрос are also, in Case Grammar terms, both Objects, the passive "recipients of the actions" утонуть and решить.

RLM: You call the Agent and the Object the two "primary" Deep Cases. What do you mean by that?

Dr. JCS: What I mean by "primary" Deep Cases is that they are the ones most often expressed in the favorite sentence type of both English and Russian, SVO - Subject/Verb/Object; however, the actual Deep Cases employed in a given sentence are defined by the Case Frames of the verb used, Case Frames being the Deep Cases permissible or required with a particular verb for a particular meaning.

For instance, the verbs "to write" ~ писать and "to read" ~ читать permit both an Agent and an Object. Both are permitted but, at minimum, one or the other is required:
  • Ester (Agent) wrote this letter (Object) yesterday.
  • Ester (Agent) wrote all day.
  • The letter (Object) was written on a typewriter.

  • The judge (Agent) read his sentence (Object).
  • The judge (Agent) read quietly.
  • The sentence (Object) was read aloud.
  • Гончаров (Agent) писал свой роман (Object) десять лет.
  • Она (Agent) пишет чаще всего в своем кабинете.
  • Этoт роман (Object) был написан в прошлом году.

  • Борис (Agent) читал газету (Object) после ужина.
  • Борис (Agent) много читает.
  • Указ (Object) был прочитан по радио.
To sum up, the semantics or meaning of the verbs in question, "to write" ~ писать and "to read" ~ читать, suggest or, better yet, "trigger" specific Deep Cases: those of Agent and/or Object.

With the exception of imperatives, these verbs cannot be used without one or the other or both cases being articulated. Indeed, even when only one case is articulated, the other remains understood.

After all, in the sentence - "The judge read quietly." - it is understood that the judge read something. And when we say - "The sentence was read aloud." - it is understood that someone read the sentence.

The same holds true for the imperative mood: "Write!" ~ Пиши! "Read!" ~ Читай! The unnamed addressee is the Agent and there is something, an Object, to be written or to be read. Otherwise, the commands would make no sense!

RLM: Very good. Let's see what other Deep Cases are "triggered" by other verbs.

Dr. JCS: Let's talk about the Experiencer case which is usually filled by an animate noun. The Experiencer is "the person or other animate affected or experiencing a state expressed by the verb without doing and/or acting out the action."

The Experiencer can appear in Surface Structure in a number of different ways. Here are some examples [with the Experiencer italicized]:
  • Mr. Loman needed a drink.
  • Samantha was chilled by the night.
  • The sharks smelled blood.

  • Мне хочется есть.
  • Она показалась всем старше, чем дочь.
  • Гора видна врагу.

RLM: The verb determines the Case Notions of the nouns, that is, whether a noun might be an Experiencer, an Object or an Agent.

Dr. JCS: Exactly! For example, verbs that express notions like "to be cold, hot, hungry, tired, sad" and the like, all require associated animate nouns to be an Experiencer.

RLM: Let's go on to the Benefactive Case, which also involves animate nouns.

Dr. JCS: The Benefactive Case obviously involves a "beneficiary", that is, "a person or other animate noun that "benefits," the one to whom or for whom, the action of the verb is performed."

A Benefactive is not the same as an Object, as the following examples illustrate [with Benefactive italicized]:
  • He presented her with a rose.
  • Doctor Einstein was awarded the Nobel Prize.
  • We mailed mother the letter last week.

  • Он открыл мне дверь.
  • Я купил эти цветы для Анны.
  • Помоги мальчику выбрать галстук.

RLM: On the level of Surface Structure we see that the English indirect object can act as the Benefactive. In Russian, the dative case is often used.

But then there's the Dr. Einstein was awarded... sentence and the genitive phrase ...для Анны.



Dr. JCS: Passives (Einstein) and prepositions that add nuance (для Анны, "on somebody's behalf" versus "as a gift") are mere surface syntax.
However, verbs are the centers of sentences!
The suns around which noun phrases orbit!

RLM: Four Deep Cases down... a couple more?
In the sentence we discussed earlier The boy struck the snake with a stick, you noted one of these remaining Deep Cases - the Instrument.

Dr. JCS: Yes, the Instrument is "an inanimate object or force which facilitates the action." In our earlier sentence, the stick fulfilled that function. Some additional examples [with the Instrument italicized]:
  • They arrived by ship from England.
  • The storm felled the tree.
  • She hears music.

  • Она убила его топором.
  • Ольга вернулась в город на метро.
  • Пахнет розами.
Obviously, in Russian the instrumental case marks the Instrument. However, notice that in our second sentence метро, which is in the prepositional case, is used to express the Instrument of the action.

In addition, "verbs of the senses" have special objects, not acted upon but serving as the Instruments of the experience.

RLM: Again, we have to distinguish the Surface Structure, how something is said, from the Deep Structure, what it means.

The interesting sentence for me is:
  • The storm felled the tree.
On the Surface Structure level of English, the noun storm is the subject of the sentence. Yet, it can't be the Agent because it is not animate; rather, it's that "unvolitional" inanimate "force" that you described in your definition of the Instrument.

Dr. JCS: Exactly! Take another sentence:
  • Guns kill people.
The noun guns is the subject on the Surface Structure level. But on the Deep Structure level the noun guns is the Instrument which carries out the action "to kill."

RLM: So the National Rifle Association is right when it says:
  • Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

Dr. JCS: From the perspective of Deep Case Grammar, the NRA is correct. Compare the sentences:
  • Он был убит ружьем.
    He was killed by a rifle.

  • Он был убит милиционером
    He was killed by a policeman.
In the first pair, both in Russian and in English, the "rifle" is the Instrument of the verb "to kill." Whereas in the second pair, in both instances, the "policeman" is the Agent.

The NRA is right! Guns are Instruments not Agents! An excellent example of Case Grammar meets Madison Avenue!

RLM: Speaking of Madison Avenue...

Dr. JCS: Yes! Speaking of Madison Avenue, the only Deep Case that we haven't discussed is the Locative. This case "identifies the location or spatial orientation of the state or action identified by the verb.

Some examples [with Locative italicized]:
  • We met at the beach last summer.
  • Hawaii is warm.
  • Saturday, in the park, seems just like the 4th of July.

  • Они жили около Москвы.
  • Она на заводе работает.
  • В Аляске холодно.
As we can see from these examples, prepositions are used to express the Locative Case both in English and in Russian. - "in, at, on" ~ "в, на, около" etc.

In addition, in English - but not in Russian - a Locative can act as an inanimate subject:
  • International Falls recorded a temperature of -36 degrees yesterday.

RLM: Why can't an Locative function as an inanimate subject in Russian?

Dr. JCS: Theoretically, it can. However, while English speakers oftentimes personify places and institutions, Russians usually don't use such personifications - at least not for their own places and institutions. Rather, Russians tend to use the prepositional case plus the 3rd person plural indefinite form of the verb for such constructions. Some examples:
  • The White House will probably veto the bill.
  • В Кремле подсчитали убытки и убедились, что цена слишком велика.
  • The Maryland MVA requires you to renew your driver's license every five years.
  • В ГАИ потребовали сдачи новых экзаменов на права управления автомобилем.

RLM: Similar sentences with the Russian employing prepositional case phrases, in Deep Case Grammar terms, Locatives, in place of the English personifications. But then, from the perspective of Deep Case Grammar, both "White House" and "Maryland MVA" are also Locatives.

Dr. JCS: Precisely, my young protege! Precisely! As inanimates, they cannot be Agents!

RLM: Why don't we take a well deserved break and then return tomorrow to verbs and Case Frames.

Part 3
Part 4: The Deep Cases