An argument by Kratzer (2000) based on Schein (1986, 1993) does not conclusively show that events and thematic roles are necessary ingredients of the logical representation of natural language sentences. The argument claims that cumulative readings of
can be represented only with these ingredients. But scope-splitting accounts make it possible to represent cumulative readings of
in an eventless framework. Such accounts are motivated by obligatory reconstruction effects of
and by crosslinguistic considerations. Kratzer proposes that
occurs in the logical representation of sentences because this allows her to model subject-object asymmetries in the distribution of cumulative
. But the reason for these asymmetries seems to be that
must be c-commanded by another quantifier in order to cumulate with it, no matter what its thematic role is. So the distribution of cumulative
does not provide support for Kratzer’s proposal.