Linguistik
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (94)
- Article (24)
- Working Paper (11)
- Preprint (9)
- Conference Proceeding (5)
- Book (4)
- Report (2)
- Review (2)
Language
- English (113)
- German (28)
- Portuguese (4)
- Croatian (3)
- French (1)
- mis (1)
- Multiple languages (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (151) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (151) (remove)
Keywords
- Syntax (151) (remove)
Institute
German particles usually bring great difficulties to German students. One of these particles, doch, is very often used, especially in conversation. In this paper its various uses are discussed, as well as eases where it can be replaced by other particles, adverbs or conjunctions, without changing the illocution (that is, the intention of the speaker). This study is based on the work of HELBIG, who differentiates eight varieties of doch. Each of them is discussed here according to syntactic, semantic and pragmatic criteria and made explicit through examples.
This article discusses some syntactic peculiarities of Chinese yes/no questions. Starting from the observation that Standard Mandarin shares significant typological features with prototypical SOV languages, Chinese is treated as an underlyingly verb-final language. Based on this heuristic principle, A-not-AB, AB-not-A and AB-not questions are uniformly derived by means of one simple raising rule that operates within the sentence constituent V'. This novel idea is elaborated on in great detail in the first part of the article. In contrast to the prevailing trend, it is argued that the question operator contained in A-not-A and A-not sentences CANNOT be raised to "Comp". In consequence, A-not-A and A-not questions are "typed" in the head position of a sentence-internal functional phrase that we call Force2 Phrase (F2P) in the present paper. This position is not to be confused with Drubig's (1994) Polarity 1 Phrase (PollP), in the head position of which assertive negations and an abstract affirmative element are located. The existence of a head position F2° other than Poll° is supported by the fact that F2° can be occupied by certain overt question operators, such as assertive shi-bu-shi, which are compatible with negations. In contrast to the assertive question operator shi-bu-shi which is obligatorily associated with information focus, non-assertive shi-bu-shi serves as a compound focus and question operator whose focus feature is complex insofar as it is composed of two subfeatures: a contrastivity and an exhaustivity subfeature. Non-assertive shi-bu-shi is obligatorily associated with identificational focus in the sense of Kiss (1998). In accordance with some basic ideas of Chomsky's checking theory, the two subfeatures of the complex focus feature carried by the non-assertive shi-bu-shi operator check a correlating subfeature in the head position of a corresponding functional phrase (Contrastive Phrase and Focus Phrase, respectively). The question feature contained in the non-assertive shi-bu-shi operator is attracted by the head of Force1 Phrase (F1') at the level of LF. Due to the fact that F1° is sentence-final, the question feature of non-assertive shi-bu-shi must be Chomsky-adjoined to F1'. Unlike identificational focus phrases which are inherently contrastive, topics are non-contrastive in the default case. As separate speech acts, they are located in a c-commanding position outside the sentence structure. Semantically, there is a difference between Frame-Setting Topics and Aboutness Topics. As shown in the article, both A-not-A and A-not questions on the one hand and yes/no questions ending with ma on the other can be used in neutral and non-neutral contexts. The decisive advantage of mu questions, however, is that their question operator has scope over the whole sentence.
1. Für die Vertretung eines eine Nebenhandlung einführenden zweiten Rhemas im Satz lassen sich drei Haupttypen aufstellen: a) "finiter" Typus mit der fast ausschließlichen Vertretung durch Nebensätze; b) "nominaler" Typus mit der Vertretung durch Nominalbildungen, wie Partizipien und Verbalnomina, letztere mit vollständigem Paradigma und genitivischer Patiensbehandlung; c) "infinitivischer" Typus mit der Vertretung durch sogenannte "infinitivische Bildungen", die sich nach formalen und junktionalen Kriterien von den finiten Bildungen abtrennen lassen. Innerhalb der Haupttypen, spez. (da auf idg. Sprachraum dominant) innerhalb des "infinitivischen" Typus lassen sich die Einzelsprachen bzw. Sprachfamilien in Untertypen-Gruppen zusammenfassen. Dabei gibt es einheitliche und Misch-Typen, je nachdem, ob "infinitivische Bildungen" gleicher oder verschiedener Ausprägung vertreten sind. 2. Die Stufen entsprechen Zuständen auf dem Wege zur Erstarrung von rein nominalen Bildungen zu dem verbalen System zugeordneten "infinitivischen" Formen. Die Erstarrung eines nominalen Kasus zu einern "Absolutiv", d.h. einer nicht-nominalen und nicht-finiten Form mit koinzidenter Funktion (die Gleichzeitigkeit des zweiten Rhemas mit dem Prädikat angibt), hängt dabei an der Ubernabrne akkusativischer Rektion sowie der Herauslösung der Form aus dem paradigmatischen Zusammenhang. Die Erstarrung eines nominalen Kasus zu einem ("erweiterten") "Infinitiv", d.h. einer nicht-nominalen und nicht-finiten Form in mehreren syntaktischen und semantischen Funktionen (Subjekts- und Objektsfunktion, iussive und historische Funktion, hauptsächlich aber finale Funktion) zeigt sich ebenfalls an der Übernahrne akkusativischer Rektion und der Herauslösung aus dem Paradigma; dazu kommt aber noch, daß sich der Weg von der Abdeckung einer Funktion zu der mehrerer Funktionen bei dieser Formation nachvollziehen läßt: 3. Zu "Infinitiven" erstarrende Formen stehen ursprünglich in finaler Funktion. Der Übergang in die Objekts- bzw. Subjektsfunktion erfolgt in Verbindung mit prädikaten, die von solchen Verben repräsentiert werden, die der Form ihre finale Konnotation belassen, die aber gleichzeitig die Interpretation der Form als ("patientisches") Objekt bzw. als Subjekt ermöglichen. Dies ist der Fall bei vielen Verben, die man als "Modalverben" bezeichnen kann. Die Erstarrung der "infinitivischen" Formation ist vollzogen, wo die Interpretation als Objekt bzw. Subjekt obsiegt; hier kann die Form ins temporale wie diathetische System eingeordnet werden, und auch andere Funktionen abdecken. 4. Der Verlust der finalen Konnotation der Form macht es erforderlich, für die finale Funktion eine neue Vertretung zu bilden. Soweit hierzu wieder nominale, zu "Infinitiven" Übergehende Bildungen verwendet werden, liegt eine Restitution des durch den Haupttypus bestimmten Systems vor; ein Haupttypuswechsel, angezeigt durch die neue Abdeckung speziell der finalen Funktion durch Nebensätze, ist für den idg. Sprachraum selten (liegt z.B. beim Übergang vom Agr. zum Ngr. vor).
The paper starts with a semantic differentiation between the notions of sentence topic and discourse topic. Sentence topic is conceived of as part of a semantic predication in the sense of Y. Kim's work. Discourse topic is defined, as in N. Asher's Segmented Discourse Representation Theory, as a discourse constituent that comprises the content of (part of) the larger discourse.
The main body of the paper serves to investigate the intricate connection between the two types of topic. For restricting the context of investigation, a specific relation between discourse constituents, Elaboration, is chosen. If Elaboration holds between two discourse constituents, one of them can be identified as the explicit discourse topic with respect to the other one. Whereas an elaborating sentence - with or without a sentence topic - is used to infer a 'dimension' for extending the discourse topic, the role of the sentence topic if it occurs is to mark an 'index' for predication along that dimension. The interaction of elaborating sentences and their topics is modelled by means of channel theoretic devices.'
With the rise of minimalism, many concepts related to the geometrical relations of phrase structure held fast to in earlier approaches have been reconsidered. This article deals with distinguishing (relational and technical) properties of specifiers and adjuncts in a Bare Phrase Structure framework (X'-Theory). I extend specific aspects of X-structure relevant to the discussion of specifiers vs. adjuncts. I argue that unique specifiers can be derived from the system and that adjunction, possibly multiple, results from Direct Merge only. The final product is a series of relationships in line with recent thoughts and minimalist premises, but formally more similar to earlier conceptions of the X'-schema.
I address conceptual, empirical and theoretical arguments against multiple specifiers and related issues next, that is beyond the predictions immediately following from the tripartitional view of clause structure proposed in Grohmann (2000). After laying out my motivations to critically consider the issue, I present a set of data that casts serious doubt over the justifications offered to replace Agr with v as the accusative casemarker. Having conceptual and empirical back-up, I then tackle the theoretical validity of specifiers, and ways to distinguish unique specifiers from (multiple) adjuncts. I introduce a version of Bare Phrase Structure that does so, yet keeps the spirit of defining structural identification over relational rather than categorial properties.
This paper pursues the question what the implications of the Anti-Locality Hypothesis could be for the syntax of secondary predication. Focus of the discussion will be an investigation of what their internal structure of small clause complements must look like, how these small clause complements connect to their matrix environments, and what the relevance could be for the formulation of anti-locality presented here. Anti-locality is defined over a tripartite clause structure (split into three Prolific Domains) and a PF-condition on the computation (the Condition on Domain-Exclusivity). The investigation revolves around two leading questions: (i) does the syntax of small clauses involve more structure than simply [SC DP XP] and (ii) do small clauses constitute their own Prolific Domain (or maybe even more)? The results, affirmative answers to both questions, are also relevant for other types of secondary predication.
The left periphery has enjoyed extensive study over the past years, especially drawn against the framework of Rizzi (1997). It is argued that in this part of the clause, relations are licensed that have direct impact on discourse interpretation and information structure, such as topic, focus, clause type, and the like. I take this line of research up and argue in favour of a split CP on the basis of strictly left-peripheral phenomena across languages. But I also want to link the relation of articulated clause structure, syntactic derivations, and information structure. In particular, I outline the basics of a model of syntactic derivation that makes explicit reference to the interpretive interfaces in a cyclic, dynamic manner.
I suggest a return to older stages of generative grammar, at least in spirit, by proposing that clausal derivation stretches over three important areas which I call prolific domains: the part of the clause which licenses argument/thematic relations (V- or θ-domain), the part that licenses agreement/grammatica1 relations (T- or ϕ-domain), and the part that licenses discourse/information-relevant relations (C- or ω-domain). It is thus a rather broad and conceptual notion of "adding" and "omitting" that I am concerned with here, namely licensing of material to relate to information structure, and the desire to find an answer to the question which elements might be added or omitted across languages to establish such links.
Locative inversion in Cuwabo
(2014)
This paper proposes a detailed description of locative inversion (LI) constructions in Cuwabo, in terms of morphosyntactic properties and thematic restrictions. Of particular interest are the use of disjoint verb forms in LI, and the co-existence of formal and semantic LI, which challenges the widespread belief that the two constructions cannot be found in the same language.
This paper proposes a new strategy for accounting for the narrow scope readings of quantificational contrastive topics in Hungarian, which is based on a consideration of the types of questions that declaratives with such contrastive topics can be uttered as partial or complete congruent answers to. The meaning of the declaratives with contrastive topics will be represented with the help of the structured meaning approach to matching questions proposed in Krifka 2002.
This paper discusses a variant of German V2 declaratives sharing properties with both subordinate relative clauses and main clauses. I argue that modal subordination failure helps decide between two rivaling accounts for this construction. Thus, a hypotactic analysis involving syntactic variable sharing must be preferred over parataxis plus anaphora resolution. The scopal behavior of the construction will be derived from its 'proto-assertional force,' which it shares with similar 'embedded root' constructions.