Nobody naturally uses such verb-less sentences.
Such verbs create a strong sense of forward movement halted.
Such verbs are called strong and weak, respectively.
Rarely do we use technical verbs, although such verbs are possible, but by our use of nouns we transform people and their doings into things.
Quine (1908 2000) discussed in some detail, such verbs are "referentially opaque," and this feature seems to be a peculiar manifestation of the intentionality of the states they describe.
Is the Relational Analysis therefore false of such verbs?
This is a cover term including actions, activities, situations, conditions, processes, etc., which can be predicated by such verbs as occur, last, begin, end, cause, etc. (Peterson1997: 92).
King (pp. 345 6) claims, first, that there is a very simple syntactic explanation for the substitution failures that produce ungrammaticalities: such verbs don't take NP complements at all, and so don't take nominal complements, which are NP complements.
Fodor claims that there is no lexical structure to such verbs as "keep", "get", "make" and "put".
See the earlier tables in the body of the paper for the number of alternations attested for such verbs.
