The claim made in this paper is that various aspects of this analysis
are unmotivated, in particular details of the constituency and the presence
of the functional category D. It will be argued that the standard GB/MP
analysis is the consequence of a theory in which grammatical functions
are represented in terms of constituent structure, and that an approach
in which grammatical functions are modeled as a distinct dimension of linguistic
structure is better able to account for both the grammatical functions
and the constituency. On the other hand, it supports the hypothesis that
the structure of the action nominal in Hebrew includes both verbal and
nominal projections. In LFG terms, the Hebrew action nominal is what Bresnan
(1997) calls a “mixed category,” and it is shown how Bresnan’s theory accounts
for the mixed properties of the action nominal without derivations and
empty categories. It is also argued that the lexicalist implementation
of the NP-over-VP analysis of mixed categories is superior to the derivational
implementation in the analysis of Hebrew action nominals, in that it provides
an account of both the pattern with accusative "objects" and the so-called
"passive" pattern.