[…] we distinguish SoAs [states of affairs] into [+controlled] and [-controlled]. An SoA is [+con] if its first argument has the power to determine whether or not the SoA will obtain. If so, the first argument entity is the “controller” of the SoA. The following are examples of [+con] and [-con] SoAs: (23) a. John opened the door [+con] b. John was sitting in the garden [+con] (24) a. The substance was red [-con] b. The three fell down [-con] In the most usual interpretation of (23a-b) it is John who determines whether or not the SoA obtains. John could have decided not to open the door, or not to sit in the garden. John is the controller of these SoAs. In (24a), however, the substance can’t help being red, and in (24b) the tree could not have decided not to fall. The substance/ the tree are non-controlling participants in these SoAs.
- Dik (1989), a pag.96