Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (30524)
- Part of Periodical (11892)
- Book (8260)
- Doctoral Thesis (5706)
- Part of a Book (3710)
- Working Paper (3386)
- Review (2878)
- Contribution to a Periodical (2338)
- Preprint (2056)
- Report (1544)
Language
- German (42393)
- English (29194)
- French (1067)
- Portuguese (723)
- Multiple languages (309)
- Croatian (302)
- Spanish (301)
- Italian (194)
- mis (174)
- Turkish (148)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (75130) (remove)
Keywords
- Deutsch (1038)
- Literatur (807)
- taxonomy (760)
- Deutschland (543)
- Rezension (491)
- new species (449)
- Frankfurt <Main> / Universität (341)
- Rezeption (325)
- Geschichte (292)
- Linguistik (268)
Institute
- Medizin (7688)
- Präsidium (5156)
- Physik (4426)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (2697)
- Extern (2661)
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (2372)
- Biowissenschaften (2180)
- Biochemie und Chemie (1973)
- Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies (FIAS) (1672)
- Center for Financial Studies (CFS) (1630)
In the course of the ME period, HAVE began to encroach on territory previously held by BE. According to Rydén and Brorström (1987); Kytö (1997), this occurred especially in iterative and durational contexts, in the perfect infinitive and modal constructions. In Early Modern English (henceforth EModE), BE was increasingly restricted to the most common intransitives come and go, before disappearing entirely in the 18th and 19th centuries. This development raises a number of questions, both historical and theoretical. First, why did HAVE start spreading at the expense of BE in the first place? Second, why was the change conditioned by the factors mentioned by Rydén and Brorström (1987) and Kytö (1997)? Third, why did the change take on the order of 800 years to go to completion? Fourth, what implications does the change have for general theories of auxiliary selection? In this paper we’ll try to answer the first question by focusing on one the earliest clearly identifiable advance of HAVE onto BE territory – its first appearance with the verb come, which for a number of reasons is an ideal verb to focus on. First, come is by far the most common intransitive verb, so we get large enough numbers for statistical analysis. Second, clauses containing the past participle of come with a form of BE are unambiguous perfects: they cannot be passives, and they did not continue into modern English with a stative reading like he is gone. Third, and perhaps most importantly, come selected BE categorically in the early stages of English, so the first examples we find with HAVE are clear evidence for innovation. We will present evidence from a corpus study showing that the first spread of HAVE was due to a ban on auxiliary BE in certain types of counterfactual perfects, and will propose an account for that ban in terms of Iatridou’s (2000) Exclusion theory of counterfactuals.
It has often been noticed that one syntactic argument position can be realized by elements which seem to realize different thematic roles. This is notably the case with the external argument position of verbs of change of state which licenses volitional agents, instruments or natural forces/causers, showing the generality and abstractness of the external argument relation. (1) a. John broke the window (Agent) b. The hammer broke the window (Instrument) c. The storm broke the window (Causer) In order to capture this generality, Van Valin & Wilkins (1996) and Ramchand (2003) among others have proposed that the thematic role of the external argument position is in fact underspecified. The relevant notion is that of an effector (in Van Valin & Wilkins) or of an abstract causer/initiator (in Ramchand). In this paper we argue against a total underspecification of the external argument relation. While we agree that (1b) does not instantiate an instrument theta role in subject position, we argue that a complete underspecification of the external theta-position is not feasible, but that two types of external theta roles have to be distinguished, Agents and Causers. Our arguments are based on languages where Agents and Causers show morpho-syntactic independence (section 2.1) and the behavior of instrument subjects in English, Dutch, German and Greek (section 2.2 and 3). We show that instrument subjects are either Agent or Causer like. In section (4) we give an analysis how arguments realizing these thematic notions are introduced into syntax.
Verbs, nouns and affixation
(2008)
What explains the rich patterns of deverbal nominalization? Why do some nouns have argument structure, while others do not? We seek a solution in which properties of deverbal nouns are composed from properties of verbs, properties of nouns, and properties of the morphemes that relate them. The theory of each plus the theory of howthey combine, should give the explanation. In exploring this, we investigate properties of two theories of nominalization. In one, the verb-like properties of deverbal nouns result from verbal syntactic structure (a “structural model”). See, for example, van Hout & Roeper 1998, Fu, Roeper and Borer 1993, 2001, to appear, Alexiadou 2001, to appear). According to the structural hypothesis, some nouns contain VPs and/or verbal functional layers. In the other theory, the verbal properties of deverbal nouns result from the event structure and argument structure of the DPs that they head. By “event structure” we mean a representation of the elements and structure of a linguistic event, not a representation of the world. We refer to this view as the “event model”. According to the event model hypothesis, all derived nouns are represented with the same syntactic structure, the difference lying in argument structure – which in turn is critically related to event structure, in the way sketched in Grimshaw (1990), Siloni (1997) among others. In pursuing these lines of analysis, and at least to some extent disentangling their properties, we reach the conclusion that, with respect to a core set of phenomena, the two theories are remarkably similar – specifically, they achieve success with the same problems, and must resort to the same stipulations to address the remaining issues that we discuss (although the stipulations are couched in different forms).
In many languages, a passive-like meaning may be obtained through a noncanonical passive construction. The get passive (1b) in English, the se faire passive (2b) in French and the kriegen passive (3b) in German represent typical manifestations. This squib focuses on the behavior of the get-passive in English and discusses a number of restrictions associated with it as well as the status of get.
In this paper we investigate Greek, an optional clitic doubling language not subject to Kaynes generalization (Jaeggli 1982), and we argue that in this language, doubled DPs are in A-positions. We propose that Greek clitics are formal features that move, permitting DPs in argument positions. This leads to a typology according to which there are two types of clitic/agreement languages -configurational and nonconfigurational ones-, depending upon whether clitics are instantiations of formal features or not.
The paper is structured as follows. Section 2.1 introduces the basic classes of adjectives that constitute the factual core of the paper. Section 2.2 summarizes in greater detail the X° and the XP movement approaches to word order variation within the DP. Section 3 briefly discusses problems for both approaches. Sections 4.1, 5.1, and 5.2 draw from Alexiadou (2001) and contain a discussion of Greek DS and its relevance for a re-analysis of the word order variation in the Romance DP. Section 4.2 introduces refinements to Alexiadou & Wilder (1998) and Alexiadou (2001). Section 5.3. discusses certain issues that arise from the analysis of postnominal adjectives in Romance as involving raising of XPs. Section 6 discusses phenomena found in other languages, which at first sight seem similar to DS. However, I show that double definiteness in e.g. Hebrew, Scandinavian or other Balkan languages constitutes a different type of phenomenon from Greek DS, thus making a distinction between determiners that introduce CPs (Greek) and those that are merely morphological/agreement markers (Hebrew, Scandinavian, Albanian).
Class features as probes
(2008)
In this article, we adress (i) the form and (ii) the function on inflection class features in minimalist grammar. The empirical evidence comes from noun inflection systems involving fusional markers in German, Greek, and Russian. As for (i), we argue (based on instances of transparadigmatic syncretism) that class features are not privative; rather, class information must be decomposed into more abstract, binary features. Concerning (ii), we propose that class features qualify as the very device that brings about fusional infection: They are uninterpretable in syntax and actas probes on stems, with matching inflection markers as goels, and thus trigger morphological Agree operations that merge stem and inflection marker before syntax is reached.
Dieses Buch entstand aus einer Ausstellung, die anläßlich der Verabschiedung von Herrn Dr. Werner Wenzel, dem langjährigen Leiter der Abteilung Frankfurt, vom 19. März bis zum 17. April 1996 in der Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek Frankfurt am Main zu sehen war. Vorwort: Die Sammlung Frankfurter Drucke (Signaturgruppe ,,N.libr.Ff.") der Abteilung Frankfurt der Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek besteht aus über 2500 Bänden aus der Zeit von 1511 bis 1800. Dazu kommen noch einige hundert weitere alte Frankfurter Drucke in anderen Bestandsgruppen der Bibliothek. Einen Hinweis darauf, welcher Anteil der kompletten Frankfurter Buchproduktion der letzten 475 Jahre in der Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek vorhanden ist, mögen folgende Erfahrungen geben: Bei der Bearbeitung von Antiquariats- und Auktionskatalogen konnten wir immer wieder feststellen, daß rund die Hälfte der angebotenen Frankturter Drucke bereits in unserem Bestand zu finden war. Man darf also wohl schätzen, daß um die dreißig bis zu fünzig Prozent aller in Frannkfurt am Main gedruckten Bücher in der Bibliothek archiviert sind. Bis vor wenigen Jahren konnte der Bestand auch durch antiquarische Ankäufe weiter ergänzt werden. Zur Zeit ist dies aus finanziellen Gründen leider nicht möglich. Als Nachweisinstrument für die Frankfurter Drucke existiert in der Abteilung Frankfurt ein "Katalog Frankfurter Drucke (1511-1945)", der außer einem alphabetischen Verfasserteil auch einen Druckerkatalog beinhaltet, in welchem man sich über die Produktion einzelner Drucker oder Verleger ein Bild machen kann. Hier findet man außer den Bestandsnachweisen der Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek und der Senckenbergischen Bibliothek auch Hinweise auf Titel, welche nicht in der Bibliothek vorhanden sind, in den letzten Jahren aber antiquarisch angeboten wurden. Daneben befinden sich hier noch Spezialkarteien zu folgenden Themen: Sekundärliteratur zu Frankfurter Druckern und Verlegern, Frankfurter Notendruck, Frankfurter hebräische Drucke. Ein Versuch, Frankfurter Buchgeschichte durch hundert Beispiele darzustellen, ist natürlich ein bezweifelbares Unternehmen. Bei dieser kleinen Auswahl sollten nur einige, eigentlich zufällige, Einblicke geboten werden. So soll auch die Entscheidung fur diese 12 Drucker und Verleger keine Wertung von deren Bedeutung sein. Die Nichtberücksichtigung anderer Firmen soll ebensowenig eine Abwertung derselben bedeuten.