Linguistik-Klassifikation
Refine
Year of publication
- 2008 (33) (remove)
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (25)
- Part of a Book (3)
- Preprint (3)
- Article (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (33)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (33)
Keywords
- Koordination <Linguistik> (3)
- Koreanisch (3)
- Präposition (3)
- Adverb (2)
- Japanisch (2)
- Verb (2)
- Adjektiv (1)
- Adjunkt <Linguistik> (1)
- Anapher <Syntax> (1)
- Argumentstruktur (1)
Institute
It has been established since Kanerva’s work that focus conditions phrasing – directly or indirectly – in several other Bantu languages, e.g. Chimwiini (Kisseberth 2007, Downing 2002, Kisseberth & Abasheikh 2004), Xhosa (Jokweni 1995, Zerbian 2004), Chitumbuka (Downing 2006, 2007), Zulu (Cheng & Downing 2006, Downing 2007), Bemba (Kula 2007), etc.
In this paper, I will argue that focus also conditions phrasing in Shingazidja, a Bantu language3 spoken on Grande Comore (or Ngazidja, the largest island of the Comoros).
Many works have been dedicated to the tonology of Shingazidja. The bases of the system were firstly identified by Tucker & Bryan (1970) and reanalyzed by Philippson (1988). Later, Cassimjee & Kisseberth (1989, 1992, 1993, 1998) provide a very convincing analysis of the whole system of the language, and my own research (Patin 2007a) shows a great correspondence with their results. However, little attention has been paid by these authors or others (Jouannet 1989, Rey 1990, Philippson 2005) to the phonology-pragmatics interface, especially on the relation between focus and phrasing. This paper thus proposes to explore this question. It will be claimed that focus, beside syntax, has an influence on phrasing in Shingazidja.
This paper focuses on a specific type of verbless utterance, labeled PVU, which is defined by two properties:
• PVUs are not discourse fragments.
• PVUs can host a phrase in their right periphery which is coreferential with their external argument. This phrase is labeled α-phrase.
PVUs are analyzed as clausal predicative phrases. Although PVUs can have various illocutionary forces, their content type is constrained by their syntactic form. As for α-phrases, they are shown to be right-dislocated phrases. Right-dislocation is analyzed as a local anaphoric phenomenon. This ap proach is consistent with the anaphoric properties of PVUs’ external arguments.
This paper deals with Korean postpositions. They are treated as suffixes in recent lexicalist works. But they differ syntactically from suffixes and we will propose to treat them as clitics, i.e. words combining with a phrase in the syntax and attaching to its last lexical item in the phonology. We treat them as weak syntactic heads, taking into account their head properties and the syntactic similarity between the mother phrase and the host phrase. They take the latter as complement and share most of its syntactic properties. Revising the traditional classification, we divide postpositions into three subtypes: marking, oblique and semantic postpositions, based on their distributional properties, such as optionality, non-nominal marking and stacking, etc. Finally we show how our analysis can be described in the HPSG model.
The claim of this paper is that embedded definites can, despite the appearances, be accounted for on the uniqueness approach. Far from being a surprise, we argue that the behavior of embedded definites is actually expected once two independent facts are taken into account: the ability of noun phrases to take scope, i.e., to be interpreted in a different place from their syntactic position, and the interaction of presuppositions and scope-taking elements. Specifically, we analyze embedded definites as a case of inverse linking (Gabbay and Moravscik, 1974; May, 1977): the embedded definite takes scope over the embedding one. The presupposition of the embedded definite is weakened as a result of the independently motivated process of intermediate accommodation (Kratzer, 1989; Berman, 1991). In our case, this process transfers the presupposition of the embedding definite into the restrictor of the embedded one.
Like other scope-taking processes, inverse linking is generally taken to be subject to locality constraints: if a syntactic island, such as a finite clause boundary, intervenes in the path of a scope-taking element, then the resulting reading is unavailable or degraded (Rodman, 1976). Since our account views embedded definites as cases of inverse linking, we predict that inserting an island into an embedded definite, all else being equal, should lead to a similar degradation. We report results from an online survey with 800 participants that confirm this prediction.
Non-restrictive relative clauses (NRRCs) can modify constituents which undergo 'pragmatic enrichment' when they appear in answers to questions. For example, in an interchange like: 'A: What did Jo think? B: That you should say nothing, which is surprising.' What B says is surprising is that 'Jo thinks ...' On the face of it, this might seem problematic for approaches to NRRCs which assume 'syntactic integration' and to support an 'orphan' analysis, where NRRCs are combined with purely conceptual representations. In this paper we examine a range of elliptical and anaphoric phenomena, and show that this conclusion is misplaced. In fact, the phenomena argue strongly in favour of a syntactically integrated analysis.
This paper deals with the variable position of adjectives in the Romanian DP. As all other Romance languages, Romanian allows for adjectives to appear in both prenominal and post-nominal position. In addition, however, Romanian has a third pattern: the so-called cel construction, in which the adjective in the post-nominal position is preceded by a determiner-like element, cel. This pattern is superficially similar to Determiner Spreading in Greek. In this paper we contrast the cel construction to Greek DS and discuss the similarities and differences between the two. We then present an analysis of cel as involving an appositive specification clause, building on de Vries (2002). We argue that the same structure is also involved in the context of nominal ellipsis, the second environment in which cel is found.
Direct quotation raises three major problems for grammatical modelling: (i) the variety of quoted material (which can be a non linguistic behavior, or a sign in a different language), (ii) the embedding of an utterance inside another one, (iii) a special denotation, the content of the quotation being the utterance itself. We propose a unary rule, which turns the quoted material into a linguistic sign whose content is itself a behavior, which entertains a resemblance relation to the behavior demonstrated by the speaker. Syntactically, direct quotation comes in two varieties: it can be the complement of a quotative verb, or constitutes a head sentence, modified by an adjunct containing a quotative verb whose complement is extracted and identified with its local features.
In this paper we compare the distribution of PPs introducing external arguments in nominalizations with PPs introducing external arguments in the verbal domain. We show that several mismatches exist between the behavior of PPs in nominalizations and PPs in the verbal domain. This leads us to suggest that while PPs in the verbal domain are licensed by functional structure alone, within the nominal domain, PPs can also be licensed via an interplay of the encyclopaedic meaning of the root involved and the properties of the preposition itself. This second mechanism kicks in in the absence of functional structure.
Predicate complements
(2008)
Questions on transitivity
(2008)
This handout (it isn’t a paper) presents phenomena and questions, rather than conclusions, related to the concept of transitivity. The idea is to return to these questions at the end of the Workshop to see if we can have a clearer consensus about the best general analysis of phenomena associated with transitivity. Section 2 presents alternative analyses of transitivity and questions about transitivity in three languages I have worked on. Section 3 discusses a few of the different conceptualisations of transitivity that might be relevant to our thinking about the questions related to these languages or that bring up further questions. Section 4 presents some general questions that might be asked of individual languages.