This paper argues that it is the causative structuration of the motion situation that seems to be the crucial factor determining the status of intransitive verbs of locomotion and their potential to enter into a certain set of syntactical configurations. More specifically, the paper attempts to provide arguments against the commonly held view that locomotion verbs in directed motion constructions are unaccusative (this applies to both intransitive structures and transitive causative structures). If the subject argument of an intransitive manner of locomotion verb displays reduced agentivity (i.e. if it displays properties of both an agent and a patient), it is not admitted into transitive causative structures, in spite of the alleged unaccusativity of verbs that are admitted into them. The inability of path verbs to causativize is explained by appealing to the fact that these types of verbs render motion as not forming part of an energetic (i.e. a causal) chain. Related to this is the fact that the subject argument of these verbs falls outside the agent vs. patient classifi cation, which is commonly claimed to be directly related to the verb’s unergative vs. the unaccusative status, respectively.