This paper proposes a type-shifting analysis of state/change-of-state lability (Koontz-Garboden et al. in Verbhood and state/change of state lability across languages, Ms., 2023): in languages with no overt inchoative morphology, a type-shifting operation, which we dub Inchoative Shift, introduces inchoative semantics where type mismatches would otherwise occur. In combination with a Blocking Principle, drawing on Chierchia’s (Natural Language Semantics 6:339–405, 1998) proposal, the analysis explains the restricted distribution of change-of-state meaning in labile languages, and the fact that change-of-state readings of stative predicates are in complementary distribution with inchoative morphology cross-linguistically. Furthermore, once we augment the Blocking Principle with a notion of structural alternatives (Katzir in Linguistics and Philosophy 30:669–690, 2007), we can provide an explanation for the fact that the presence of periphrastic inchoative constructions does not always block inchoative type-shifting in a language. Our account improves on previous approaches to state/change-of-state lability, such as Koontz-Garboden’s (Journal of Linguistics 43(1):115–152, 2007) coercion analysis, by virtue of making broad and, as we argue, correct predictions about the distribution of state/change-of-state lability and its interaction with other change-of-state expressions cross-linguistically.
