本文首先提出英文和中文裡（主語導向）結果描述式和（賓語導向）結果式中的（不及物動詞或形容詞）次要述語的一些語料。何（2007）的LFG/LMT研究假定兩個述語的論元結構會結合成為一個新的合成結構，因而決定一個結果句是否有致使的語意，也決定了論元與語法功能的連結。然而，本文將論證中文結果式複合詞的連結問題需要從更具解釋力的語意角度來解決，致使性的決定與兩個述語中論元的連結，都屬於語意的議題。具體來說，本文根據語意，論證兩種次要謂語的存在，一是內在致使狀態改變，另一是外在致使；它們分別是間接致使和直接致使。致使式必須區分成三類，非致使、間接致使和直接致使。本文進一步論證，當一個論元進行內部致使的變化時，常會和動作者連結，而當一個論元進行外部致使變化時，則常會和經歷者連結。

In the first part, I provide some data of secondary predicates in English and Mandarin on consequence-depictives (SUBJ-oriented) and resultatives (OBJ-oriented), which adopt an intransitive verb/adjective for their secondary predicate. In the second half, I present an account of the linking issue on “resultative” compound predicates in Mandarin Chinese, building on the LFG/LMT work of Her (2007), who assumed that the argument structures of each predicate merge to give a composite structure, which determines whether a resultative sentence is semantically causative or not, and from which the arguments link to grammatical functions. I argue here that the facts require a more articulated semantics, for unlike Her’s analysis, the determination of causativity and the linking of the arguments of the two predicates is fully an issue of semantics; specifically, I argue that there are two types of secondary predicates in terms of their semantics, namely those with internally- and externally-caused changes of state (see Levin and Rappaport Hovav: 1995, McKoon and Macfarland: 2000), which are respectively “indirect-causative” and “direct-causative”; causativity should be categorised into three types, non-causative, indirect-causative, and direct causative. I further argue that the argument undergoing internally-caused change always links to Actor and that the one undergoing externally-caused change (a truly “affected” argument) always links to Undergoer.