allocate_GOAL

Hierarchy

Not three co-arguments of one V predicting a stable DOC and a transfer. Surface count can name the president, 14M BTC, and the ministry — but the listed third is a Goal individual y via English to, not a Purpose property via for (earmark). HAVE(y,m) is optional / speaker-variable, not required. Writing those three as sisters of a grant-like Appl_HAVE predicts a productive DOC and a drawing-rights challenge to e2. English keeps the middle.

14M BTC = one MeasureP. Orthography is not extra arity. Amount and Denomination share one Case object. Composition is V(Theme), not V(n)(U). Hom(m, e): the designation is measured by the quantity.

Working hierarchy: Agent > Theme > Goal (> optional Purpose, Time, Source — high / peripheral). Theme outranks Goal for measuring; Goal can promote in passive (unlike earmark’s Beneficiary).

∃e [ DESIGNATE(e)
  ∧ THEME(e, m)
  ∧ GOAL(e, y)
  ∧ Hom(m, e) ]
  · HAVE(y, m) optional / speaker-variable — not listed as required

English frames · Case clothes

Theme object; Goal as to-PP that can promote. DOC is degraded / speaker-variable (?*allocated the ministry 14M*) — between earmark (no) and grant (yes). Four-place surface: to-Goal + for-Purpose.

1. ✓ The president allocated 14M BTC to the ministry. canonical · to-Goal
2. ✓ The president allocated 14M BTC to the ministry for tech. four-place · to-Goal + for-Purpose
3. ✓ They allocated funds to the lab to buy energy. Purpose infinitive · Type B extra
4. ✓ They allocated the surplus. Goal contextually bound
5. ✓ They allocated 14M for tech. Goal dropped · looks like earmark · packaging change
6. ? The president allocated the ministry 14M BTC. DOC · degraded / speaker-variable
7. ?* Allocated the ministry 14M … same DOC cut · many prefer to-frame
8. ✓ Wasn’t 14M BTC allocated to the ministry? Theme QP promotes
9. ✓ Wasn’t the ministry allocated 14M BTC? Goal promotes · grant-like · * on earmark Ben
10. * Wasn’t the ministry earmarked 14M BTC? earmark contrast · Ben ≠ ACC
11. ✓ Wasn’t the lab granted 14M BTC? grant · HAVE Recipient promotes cleanly
12. * They allocated new technology 14M BTC. Purpose ≠ DOC object
13. * They allocated 14M BTC that Trump wins. Goal ≠ settlement Content
14. * They allocated Kim to the night desk. allocate_POST · off this page
15. * They allocated blame to the contractor. allocate_ASCRIBE · off this page
16. * They allocated three hours to the problem. allocate_SLOT · off this page

MeasureP WH · denomination diagnostics

WH forces Amount ≠ Denomination inside one Case object. Verbal WH sees the Theme MeasureP, not unit and degree as two objects of allocate. Same MeasureP pattern as pay_GIVE’s Amount, sell’s Price, charge_FEE’s fee, deduct’s decrement, bet’s Stake, and earmark’s Resource — here the MeasureP is the addressed Theme (ACC), and Goal stays a selected to-PP (or promoted).

1. ✓ How much BTC did the president allocate to the ministry? unit bound
2. ✓ How much did the president allocate to the ministry? unit contextually bound
3. ✓ How much of what did they allocate to the ministry? n and U inside host
4. ✓ In what / of what / in what denomination did they allocate 14M?
5. ✓ What did they allocate to the ministry? bare WHAT · Theme
6. * What did they allocate 14M to the ministry? LBC · stranded n
7. * What 14M did they allocate to the ministry? U does not invert over n
8. ✓ Who did they allocate 14M BTC to? Goal
9. ✓ What did they allocate 14M BTC for? / What for …? Purpose extra
10. ? What did they allocate 14M BTC to? Goal is an individual, not a use
11. * Who did they earmark 14M BTC to? to-Goal is wrong cloth on earmark
12. ✓ How much BTC did they allocate to whom? Superiority · Theme > Goal
13. * To whom did how much BTC they allocate? Superiority

Superiority ranks Agent > Theme > Goal > (optional Purpose / Time / Source). Amount and Denomination never compete as two verbal WH-items. Polish GEN-neg, when elicited, should land on the Theme QP in the to-frame — or track Goal ACC if a speaker’s allocate puts Goal in ACC (assignTASK cloth lesson).

Geometry · allocate_GOAL ≠ earmark ≠ grant_GIVE ≠ sell ≠ bet

In The president allocated 14M BTC to the ministry, the BTC is addressed to an office. The ministry need not HAVE drawing rights. Spending is not e2. That is Allocation with Goal flavour — between Purpose-restriction (earmark) and conferral (grant).

• ≠ earmark. Shared designation, MeasureP, authority, Type B Purpose, missing spend-true. Split: listed third is Goal individual y via to (allocate) vs Purpose property P via for (earmark). Goal promotes (✓ Wasn’t the ministry allocated 14M?); earmark Beneficiary does not (*ministry was earmarked 14M*). HAVE idle on earmark, sliding on allocate.
• ≠ grant_GIVE. Shared promotable human third and to-frame available. Split: grant requires Appl_HAVE / HAVE-RIGHT; allocate’s HAVE is optional. Grant has productive DOC; allocate’s DOC is degraded / speaker-variable. Drawing-rights follow-up challenges grant e2; on allocate it is speaker-variable (budget-speak vs disbursement-speak).
• ≠ book / reserve / schedule. Same Allocation family (Index 2 lists those three). Split: reserve a cabin for the team is Beneficiary; schedule for Friday is Time; allocate 14M BTC to the ministry is Goal. Earmark is Purpose flavour of the same family.
• ≠ sell. Sell: Recipient HAS goods; Price stays inside for. Allocate: Theme is ACC MeasureP of the designation; to the ministry is Goal, not Price. No SWAP inversion. Spending not entailed.
• ≠ bet. Shared MeasureP packaging. Split: bet’s third is settlement Content (Proposition); allocate’s is a Goal individual. *allocate 14M that Trump wins — Goal is not Settle(p).
• ≠ charge_FEE / pay_GIVE / deduct / credit_FIN. Shared MeasureP Hom available. Split: chargeFEE / pay write levy or Appl_HAVE transfer; deduct writes FROM decrement; credit_FIN writes ledger HAS_ON_BOOKS. Allocate tags/addresses a line without requiring those results.
• HAVE as sliding feature. Follow-up No — the ministry never received drawing rights: idle challenge to earmark e2; default challenge to grant e2; speaker-variable on allocate. That middle is why institutional English keeps this verb.
• Restriction / address-true is e2. A follow-up that denies spending or HAVE does not (by default) deny the allocate event. Reallocate redirects Goal; later event.

Shells, ApplP, and Case

VoiceP  [ the president
  VP  [ √ALLOCATE_GOAL   [ MeasureP  [ Amount 14M ] [ N BTC ] ] ]
  GoalP / Appl_GOAL  [ to  [ the ministry ] ]
  (PurpP  [ for  [ tech ] ]) ]

Voice introduces Agent with AUTHORITY(x,e) as a selectional / felicity conjunct — not a fifth argument. Presidents, treasuries, CFOs, protocols, and statutes pass; bare persons need a hat; weather fails. Theme sits as Incremental Theme of the designation. Goal attaches as Appl_GOAL / wrapper-K — listed enough to promote, not listed enough to be a stable second object the way grant’s Recipient is. Purpose, when present, is Type B outside the first phase. Putting required HAVE in is how the grant cloth is written — a different root packaging.

English assigns ACC to the Theme. Goal is to-PP (or promoted to subject / degraded DOC object). Purpose, Time, Source are further PPs. Passive promotes Theme QP as a whole, or Goal (✓), never Amount alone, never U alone, never Purpose into subject.

Underivables (English · this root)

1. * New technology was allocated 14M BTC. Purpose ≠ ACC
2. * 14M was allocated BTC to the ministry. Amount ≠ separate passive
3. * BTC was allocated 14M to the ministry. U ≠ separate passive
4. * What did they allocate 14M to the ministry? LBC · stranded n
5. * They allocated 14M BTC that Trump wins. Goal ≠ Content
6. * The weather allocated 14M BTC to the ministry. Voice filter
7. * Wasn’t the ministry earmarked 14M BTC? earmark Ben cloth · use this root / grant
8. * They allocated Kim to the night desk. POST distractor · off page
9. * They allocated blame to the contractor. ASCRIBE distractor · off page
10. * They allocated three hours to the problem. SLOT distractor · off page
11. * Who didn’t they earmark 14M BTC to? to-Goal is allocate cloth on earmark

NegQ pointer · association sites

Negative questions on allocate_GOAL read the Allocation-plus-Goal geometry; they do not invent a fourth theta name. Neg sits high and associates downward. Cheap inner associate = Theme QP in the to-frame (Goal if promoted / DOC accepted). Purpose stays a for-PP when present. Spend-true missing as default; HAVE challenge speaker-variable.

Open items

• Japanese wariate / tō-o waru / ni-Goal — now live at allocate-goal-ja.html (o-Theme, ni-Goal; Double-o unused; yotō / ategau lean earmark). Remaining: companion productivity of 配分する / 充当する.
• Mandarin 拨给 / 分配给 / 把. 给 writes Goal (allocate diagnostic); 为了 marks Purpose (earmark diagnostic); 把 fronts the whole QP. Predicted from the comparison paper, not elicited. spec
• Romance destinar / allouer / affecter / stanziare. DAT / à / a Goal clitic is the allocate diagnostic; cheap Neg associate. destinar a is hinge (Goal-leaning, still not full HAVE unless coerced toward conceder / otorgar). Companion elicitation. spec
• Polish GEN-neg on allocation — GEN on the Theme QP in the to-frame, not on Purpose, not on a stranded unit; Goal DAT/PP should refuse GEN unless Goal is ACC. Same prediction as bet / deduct / credit_FIN. spec
• DOC speaker map — which registers accept ?*allocated the ministry 14M*; NegQ cheapness tracks that cloth.
• HAVE sliding — budget-speak vs disbursement-speak packaging tests; do not force grant’s drawing-rights default.
• Outer CAUSE (make the treasury allocate …). Site on the making vs on the designation; Goal may promote under wrap; HAVE still not required.
• POST / ASCRIBE / SLOT distractors — keep off this NegQ profile; separate stubs if deepened later.

Corpus filenames

Primary extract for this micro-entry; companions supply earmark sister geometry and Neg association. DOCX originals under the Tritransitive lit tree (lit/grok-tritransitive/files/). Text extract used this tick: /workspace/allocate_earmark_extract.txt (from Allocate_Earmark_Comparison.docx). Sister page: earmark.html.