I first consider several case studies that suggest that Pylkkänen’s 2002, 2008Voice-bundling parameter is on the right track. There are bundling languages where it appears that both v and Voice functions are tightly correlated, appearing and disappearing together; and there are splitting languages where the functions are distributed across two distinct projections and can be manipulated independently. The bundling languages I will consider are Chol and Persian, while for splitting languages we look at Hiaki and Chemehuevi. We apply the predictions of the splitting/bundling parameter to the interaction of passive and light verb constructions in Italian, suggesting that it is Voice-bundling.
I then focus narrowly on v, reviewing arguments from Key (2013) and Jung (2015) about productive causatives, applicatives, and passive, looking at Key’s treatment of Turkish causatives and Jung’s discussion of Korean and Hiaki applicatives and causatives. These patterns indicate that productive causatives are not a recursive v, as assumed in Harley (1995, 2013), but instead realize a pure “Caus” category. The verbalizing v and the causativizing Caus are categorically and morphosyntactically distinct. Finally, a sketchy, possibly cartographic picture of the hierarchy of derivational verbal projections begins to emerge.