Nominalizations denoting a state or a property

Verbs in the LIKING and ANNOYING semantic types describe states, not activities. They share the same semantic roles, but for LIKING verbs the Experiencer is the A and the Stimulus is the O argument, with this being reversed for ANNOYING verbs. Most verbs in these types form nominalizations, State-nom’s, which describe the state referred to by the verb. Some verbs use the same form for State-nom (zero derivation) while others employ a derivation. A sample is:

A State-nom can be possessed by the noun phrase which is in the Experiencer role—in A function for LIKING and in O function for ANNOYING verbs. For example:

With a nominalization based on a LIKING verb, the stimulus role (the original O) is marked by a preposition, generally of, sometimes for, sometimes either (love for a family member or for a lover, but love of life, of one’s country or of God). For State-nom’s based on verbs from the ANNOYING type, the stimulus role (the erstwhile A) can be included, marked by a preposition; this is typically at, as in (21), but we also find, for example, interest in, worry about, inspiration from.

It is interesting to compare State-nom’s for verbs with similar (and opposite) meanings and to see the difference in forms. Quoting verb/ State-nom:

There is also what could be called ‘unit’ nominalizations of state—hate, love and like. Besides John’s hatred of/love for spinach, we get Bill’s three pet hates/loves are dogs, clergymen and children.

A few verbs from the ANNOYING type form a State-nom which can be used with a ‘counting token’ such as a fit of, to engender a ‘unit’ effect; for instance:

Verbs in the COMPARING and RELATING types refer to neither an activity nor a state, but rather to a kind of property. Here the underlying subject may function as possessor to a nominalization (Property-nom), as in: