Linguistik-Klassifikation
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (204)
- Article (160)
- Working Paper (27)
- Preprint (23)
- Conference Proceeding (17)
- Report (5)
- Book (3)
Language
- English (439) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (439)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (439)
Keywords
- Syntax (100)
- Thema-Rhema-Gliederung (37)
- Wortstellung (37)
- Deutsch (31)
- Englisch (29)
- Generative Transformationsgrammatik (29)
- Relativsatz (27)
- Intonation <Linguistik> (25)
- Bantusprachen (22)
- Prädikat (22)
- Semantik (21)
- Formale Semantik (17)
- Informationsstruktur (16)
- Pronomen (16)
- Optimalitätstheorie (15)
- Prosodie (15)
- Topikalisierung (15)
- Japanisch (14)
- Interrogativsatz (13)
- Koreanisch (13)
- Phonologie (13)
- Russisch (13)
- Sinotibetische Sprachen (13)
- Adjunkt <Linguistik> (12)
- Anapher <Syntax> (12)
- Chinesisch (12)
- Nominalphrase (12)
- Referenzidentität (12)
- Kasus (11)
- Koordination <Linguistik> (10)
- Valenz <Linguistik> (10)
- Bindungstheorie <Linguistik> (9)
- Extraposition (9)
- Linguistik (9)
- Morphosyntax (9)
- Niederländisch (9)
- Nungisch (9)
- Passiv (9)
- Pragmatik (9)
- Spracherwerb (9)
- Tibetobirmanische Sprachen (9)
- Kontrastive Linguistik (8)
- Oberflächenstruktur <Linguistik> (8)
- Tagalog (8)
- Tiefenstruktur (8)
- Genus verbi (7)
- Head-driven phrase structure grammar (7)
- Klitisierung (7)
- Lexikologie (7)
- Sprachverstehen (7)
- Thematische Relation (7)
- Topik (7)
- Adverb (6)
- Chewa-Sprache (6)
- Freier Relativsatz (6)
- Grammatische Kategorie (6)
- Kontrastive Syntax (6)
- Morphologie (6)
- Referenz <Linguistik> (6)
- Reflexivpronomen (6)
- Syntaktische Kongruenz (6)
- Transitivität (6)
- Verb (6)
- Adverbiale (5)
- Bulgarisch (5)
- Grammatiktheorie (5)
- Griechisch (5)
- Kongress (5)
- Lokativ (5)
- Malagassi-Sprache (5)
- Personalpronomen (5)
- Satz (5)
- Skopus (5)
- Spezifität (5)
- Sprachstatistik (5)
- Sprachtypologie (5)
- Vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft (5)
- syntax (5)
- Argumentstruktur (4)
- Aufsatzsammlung (4)
- Ellipse <Linguistik> (4)
- Ergativ (4)
- Ergänzung <Linguistik> (4)
- Französisch (4)
- Funktionale Kategorie (4)
- Generative Grammatik (4)
- Gradpartikel (4)
- Infinitkonstruktion (4)
- Italienisch (4)
- Kindersprache (4)
- Morphonologie (4)
- Nebensatz (4)
- Negation (4)
- Norwegisch (4)
- Polnisch (4)
- Prädikation (4)
- Präposition (4)
- Qiang-Sprache (4)
- Quantifizierung <Linguistik> (4)
- Raising (4)
- Satztyp (4)
- Spaltsatz (4)
- Ungarisch (4)
- Adjektiv (3)
- Argument <Linguistik> (3)
- Aspekt <Linguistik> (3)
- Austronesische Sprachen (3)
- Definitheit (3)
- Demonstrativpronomen (3)
- Ergänzungsfragesatz (3)
- Extraktion <Linguistik> (3)
- Genitiv (3)
- Hebräisch (3)
- Hypotaxe (3)
- Inkorporation <Linguistik> (3)
- Interrogativpronomen (3)
- Konjunktion (3)
- Kontrastive Grammatik (3)
- Kopula (3)
- Modalverb (3)
- Neugriechisch (3)
- Objekt (3)
- Plural (3)
- Quantor (3)
- Referenzsemantik (3)
- Satzanalyse (3)
- Satzglied (3)
- Satzsemantik (3)
- Scrambling (3)
- Swahili (3)
- Tempus (3)
- Tongaisch (3)
- Verbalphrase (3)
- Afrikanische Sprachen (2)
- Albanisch (2)
- Artikulation (2)
- Aspiration <Linguistik> (2)
- Aufforderungssatz (2)
- Baskisch (2)
- Beschränkung <Linguistik> (2)
- Consecutio temporum (2)
- Determinator (2)
- Diskontinuität (2)
- Diskursanalyse (2)
- Diskursrepräsentationstheorie (2)
- Distribution <Linguistik> (2)
- Drung (2)
- Experiment (2)
- Feldlinguistik (2)
- Fokus <Linguistik> (2)
- Funktionsverbgefüge (2)
- Ganda-Sprache (2)
- German (2)
- Gerundium (2)
- Herausstellung (2)
- Hilfsverb (2)
- Indefinitpronomen (2)
- Instrumental (2)
- Inuktitut (2)
- Inversion <Grammatik> (2)
- Isländisch (2)
- Junktur (2)
- Kanuri-Sprache (2)
- Konditionalsatz (2)
- Kontrastive Phonologie (2)
- Kontrolle <Linguistik> (2)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (2)
- Makonde-Sprache (2)
- Modalität (2)
- Morphem (2)
- Nama-Sprache (2)
- Neutralisation <Linguistik> (2)
- Nicht-restriktiver Relativsatz (2)
- Nomen (2)
- Nominalisierung (2)
- Parasitic gap (2)
- Parataxe (2)
- Persisch (2)
- Philippinen-Austronesisch (2)
- Phrasenstruktur (2)
- Phrasenstrukturgrammatik (2)
- Polarität (2)
- Portugiesisch (2)
- Pro-Form (2)
- Prädikativsatz (2)
- Restriktiver Relativsatz (2)
- Resultativ (2)
- Salish-Sprache (2)
- Satzakzent (2)
- Satzteil (2)
- Serialverb-Konstruktion (2)
- Slawische Sprachen (2)
- Sotho (2)
- Spanisch (2)
- Sprachverarbeitung <Psycholinguistik> (2)
- Spurtheorie (2)
- Subjekt (2)
- Temporalsatz (2)
- Tharaka (2)
- Tough-construction (2)
- Unbestimmtheit (2)
- Unterspezifikation (2)
- Wortbildung (2)
- Yoruba-Sprache (2)
- Zulu-Sprache (2)
- case (2)
- dass (2)
- Ableitung <Linguistik> (1)
- Adversativsatz (1)
- Affirmativer Polaritätsausdruck (1)
- Affix (1)
- Ainu-Sprache (1)
- Akan-Sprache (1)
- Akkusativ mit Infinitiv (1)
- Algorithmus (1)
- Allomorph (1)
- Ambiguität (1)
- Amerikanisches Englisch (1)
- Apposition (1)
- Argument linking (1)
- Aschanti-Sprache (1)
- Aspekt (1)
- Asymmetrie (1)
- Auslassung (1)
- Ausrufesatz (1)
- Auxiliarkomplex (1)
- Bahasa Indonesia (1)
- Bairisch (1)
- Bantoid (1)
- Basaa-Sprache (1)
- Baushi (1)
- Belebtheit <Grammatik> (1)
- Belhare (1)
- Bemba-Sprache (1)
- Berlin <2001> (1)
- Bewegungsverb (1)
- Casus obliquus (1)
- Chinese (1)
- Chomsky (1)
- Demokratische Republik Kongo (1)
- Determinativ (1)
- Dialektologie (1)
- Disambiguierung (1)
- Diskontinuierliches Element (1)
- Ditransitives Verb (1)
- Doppelter Akkusativ (1)
- Doppelter Nominativ (1)
- Dutch (1)
- Einbettung <Linguistik> (1)
- Eindeutigkeit (1)
- Epenthese (1)
- Erkenntnistheorie (1)
- Evidenz (1)
- Existentialsatz (1)
- Expressivität <Linguistik> (1)
- Faktiv (1)
- Finite Verbform (1)
- Fipa (1)
- Frage (1)
- Fragebogen (1)
- Funktionsverb (1)
- Galloitalienisch (1)
- Gebundenes Morphem (1)
- Gefühl (1)
- Generalisierte Phrasenstrukturgrammatik (1)
- Genus (1)
- Georgisch (1)
- Glue Semantics (1)
- Gradadverb (1)
- Grammatikalisation (1)
- Grammatikalität (1)
- Grammatische Relation (1)
- Hakha Chin (Lai) (1)
- Halkomelem (1)
- Hausa (1)
- Haya (1)
- Herero-Sprache (1)
- Immediate Dominance/Linear Precedence (1)
- Impersonale (1)
- Implikatur (1)
- Inchoativ (1)
- Indirekter Interrogativsatz (1)
- Infinitiv (1)
- Infix (1)
- Insertion <Linguistik> (1)
- Irisch (1)
- Je suis Charlie (1)
- Kamerun (1)
- Kausativ (1)
- Khoisan (1)
- Kognitive Entwicklung (1)
- Komitativ (1)
- Komoren (1)
- Komparation (1)
- Konfiguration <Linguistik> (1)
- Kongo-Sprache (1)
- Kongressbericht (1)
- Konsekutivsatz (1)
- Konstruktionsgrammatik (1)
- Kontrastive Semantik (1)
- Kopulasatz (1)
- Korrelativsatz (1)
- Kymrisch (1)
- Lerntheorie (1)
- Lexicalized Tree Adjoining Grammar (1)
- Linksverzweigende Konstruktion (1)
- Logische Form <Linguistik> (1)
- Lokale Präposition (1)
- Luiseño-Sprache (1)
- Makua-Sprache (1)
- Malawi (1)
- Markiertheit (1)
- Mboshi-Sprache (1)
- Methodologie (1)
- Minimal Recursion Semantics (1)
- Mittelenglisch (1)
- Modalität <Linguistik> (1)
- Modifikation <Linguistik> (1)
- Modifikator (1)
- Morphologie <Linguistik> (1)
- Move-alpha (1)
- Mura-Sprache (1)
- Mögliche Welt (1)
- Mündlichkeit (1)
- Negativer Polaritätsausdruck (1)
- Nicht-kanonisches Subjekt (1)
- Niger-Kongo-Sprachen (1)
- Nilosaharanische Sprachen (1)
- Nilotische Sprachen (1)
- Niue-Sprache (1)
- Noam (1)
- Nomen agentis (1)
- Nominalsatz (1)
- Nominativ (1)
- Notwendigkeit (1)
- Numerativ (1)
- Objektsatz (1)
- Ono <Papuasprachen> (1)
- Opaker Kontext (1)
- Oslo <1999> (1)
- Paiwan (1)
- Palauisch (1)
- Palaung (1)
- Parametrisierung (1)
- Partikelverb (1)
- Partitiv (1)
- Partizip Perfekt (1)
- Perfekt (1)
- Phonetik (1)
- Phrasenkompositum (1)
- Phrasenmarker (1)
- Phraseologie (1)
- Pirahã (1)
- Possessivität (1)
- Potsdam <2002> (1)
- Proportionalsatz (1)
- Proto-Indo-European (1)
- Proto-Tibetobirmanisch (1)
- Präpositionalphrase (1)
- Präsupposition (1)
- Range Concatenation Grammar (1)
- Rattenfängerkonstruktion (1)
- Reduktion <Linguistik> (1)
- Reduplikation (1)
- Reflexivierung (1)
- Reflexivsatz (1)
- Regelordnung (1)
- Relativpronomen (1)
- Relevanz <Linguistik> (1)
- Reziprozität (1)
- Reziprozität <Linguistik> (1)
- Richtungsangabe (1)
- Robust Minimal Recursion Semantics (1)
- Romanische Sprachen (1)
- Rumänisch (1)
- Saharanische Sprachen (1)
- Samoanisch (1)
- Satzadverb (1)
- Satzellipse (1)
- Satzverbindung (1)
- Schriftlichkeit (1)
- Schwedisch (1)
- Semantische Lizenzierung (1)
- Senufo (1)
- Serbian (1)
- Serbisch (1)
- Skandinavische Sprachen (1)
- Sprachgeschichte (1)
- Sprachproduktion (1)
- Sprachtheorie (1)
- Sprachverarbeitung (1)
- Sprachwahrnehmung (1)
- Stativ <Grammatik> (1)
- Steigerungspartikel (1)
- Stochastik (1)
- Strukturelle Grammatik (1)
- Strukturelle Phonologie (1)
- Subkategorisierung (1)
- Suppire (1)
- Suppire-Sprache (1)
- Syntaxbaum (1)
- Taiwan-Austronesisch (1)
- Teilsatz (1)
- Temporaladverb (1)
- Thai (1)
- Thailändisch (1)
- Theory of mind (1)
- Tibetobirmanische Sprachen ; Nungisch (1)
- Tonologie (1)
- Tschuktschisch (1)
- Tswana (1)
- Tswana-Sprache (1)
- Tukangbesi (1)
- Tumbuka-Sprache (1)
- Type-Token-Relation (1)
- Türkisch (1)
- Umgangssprache (1)
- Universalgrammatik (1)
- Valenz (Linguistik) (1)
- Venetisch (1)
- Verbalkomplex (1)
- Verbalkompositum (1)
- Vietnamese (1)
- Vokal (1)
- Vokalharmonie (1)
- Vokativ (1)
- W-Bewegung (1)
- Xhosa (1)
- Zentralkhoisan-Sprachen (1)
- Zulu (1)
- acceptability (1)
- agree (1)
- also (1)
- anticausatives (1)
- argument dislocation (1)
- background particles (1)
- causatives (1)
- clefts (1)
- complementation (1)
- cyclicity (1)
- epp (1)
- ergativity (1)
- features (1)
- fieldwork (1)
- focus particles (1)
- free-choice (1)
- gradience grammar (1)
- grammaticality (1)
- hierarchies (1)
- long wh-movement (1)
- passives (1)
- person splits (1)
- phi-features (1)
- phonology (1)
- pirahã (1)
- pp modification (1)
- question formation (1)
- root classes (1)
- stress patterns (1)
- subject inversion (1)
- syntactic decomposition (1)
- temporal gradation (1)
- temporal limitation (1)
- tone (1)
- tones (1)
- word order variation (1)
Institute
- Extern (12)
In this paper, I examine two object control constructions in Korean which differ only in the surface word order: in one of the constructions, the control complement follows the controller, but in the other, precedes it. I argue that the contrast between these constructions cannot be attributed to scrambling. The difference between these constructions can only be captured if one of them is analyzed as OC, and the other as instantiating NOC. Section 2 presents the relevant constructions and their earlier analyses available in the literature; section 3 presents a detailed discussion of differences between the two object control constructions. My proposal for analyzing these constructions is presented in section 4. Section 5 introduces two outstanding questions related to the proposed structures: the status of scrambling in Korean and the analysis of the inverse control construction. Conclusions and general discussion follow in section 6.
Previous work examining the role of antecedent accessibility in pronominal coreference has often linked coreference to prominent structural positions that in turn are linked to information structure statuses such as topic. Three experiments examine the influence of topichood independently of structural prominence by exploring the influence of the pragmatic notion of aboutness on the written production of pronominal coreferring expressions. The results show that being mentioned in an about-phrase increases the likelihood that a referent will be selected as the future topic of a following sentence as well as increasing the proportion of responses with early, pronominal coreference to that referent, at the expense of coreference with the subject. These results suggest that coreference is sensitive to the status of other, structurally non-prominent referents in discourse, and that the pragmatic notion of aboutness influences pronominal coreference.
This volume represents a collection of papers that present some of the results of two projects on control: on the one hand, the project Typology of complement control directed by Barbara Stiebels and funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG STI 151/2-2), and on the other hand the project Variation in control structures directed by Maria Polinsky and Eric Potsdam and funded by the US National Science Foundation (NSF grants BCS-0131946, BCS-0131993; website http://accent.ucsd.edu/). Whereas the first project pursued a lexical approach to control with a semantic definition of obligatory control, the second project has mainly pursued a syntactic approach to control – with special emphasis on less studied control structures (such as adjunct control, backward control, finite control, etc.). Both projects have aimed at extending the research on complement control to structures that differ from the prototypical cases of infinitival complements with empty subjects found in many Indo-European languages; their common interest was to bring in new empirical data, both primary and experimental.
It is the aim of this paper to evaluate the various types of sentential complementation available in terms of complement control cross-linguistically. I will propose a lexical classification of control classes on the basis of the instantiated subordination patterns. I want to focus on an important distinction, namely that of structural vs. inherent control. Structural control is found with predicates that select a clausal complement whose structure requires argument identification and thus 'induces' control. Infinitival complements are prototypical cases for this kind of control because in most languages infinitival complements can only 'survive' in structures of control or raising. The interesting question is which predicates license structural control and which cross-linguistic differences emerge between potential licensors. Inherent control is found with predicates that require control readings independent of the instantiated structure of sentential complementation (e.g. a directive predicate such as zwingen 'force'). In addition, I will recapitulate and add arguments for the dual lexical-syntactic nature of complement control.
This questionnaire focuses on control structures that are instantiated by predicates that take a state of affairs (SOA) argument. Noonan (1985) has called these predicates 'complement-taking predicates'; I will use the notion of SOAAtaking predicates (SOAA = state of affairs argument).
Prototypically, complement control is instantiated by certain classes of verbs; however, adjectives (be eager to) and nouns (e.g. nominalizations such as promise) may function as control predicates as well. 'Control' refers to the pattern of argument identification between an argument of the SOAA-taking predicate and an argument of the SOAA-head. In the literature the notion of 'equi deletion' or 'equi-NP deletion' has been used (following Rosenbaum 1967), which refers to structures in which an overt argument of the matrix predicate is identified with a covert argument of the embedded predicate. This questionnaire aims at a cross-linguistic application of the notion of control and thus uses a semantic definition of complement control. It extends the notion of control to other patterns of referential dependency between arguments of a SOAA-taking predicate and of the embedded predicate.
In anaphora resolution theory, it has been assumed that anaphora resolution is based on a reversed mapping of antecedent salience and anaphora complexity: minimal complex anaphora refer to maximal salient antecedents. In order to ex-amine whether and by which developmental steps German children gain command of this mapping maxim we conducted an experiment on production and comprehension of intersentential pronouns including the three pronoun types zero, personal, and demonstrative pronoun. With respect to antecedent salience, the experiment varied syntactic role (subject/object) and in/animacy. Six age groups of children (age range from 2;0 to 6;0) and an adult control group has been tested. The hypothesis arising from the mapping maxim is that zero pronoun correlates with more salient antecedents than personal and demonstrative pronoun, the latter correlating with the least salient antecedents. The results are: In production, children first establish the opposition of zero pronoun with animate antecedents vs. demonstrative pronoun with inanimate antecedents. In a next step, syntactic role comes into play and a more complex system opposing the three presented pronoun types is established. In comprehension, however, the effect of pronoun type re-mains weak and antecedent features remain a strong factor in reference choice. However, also adults employ pronoun type and antecedent features. The oldest children and the adults show variation in personal pronoun resolution according to the animacy pattern of the potential antecedents. In case of identical animacy features, the subject is the preferred candidate; in case of distinct animacy features, there is a tendency to choose the object antecedent.
The 48th volume of the ZAS Papers in Linguistics presents selected papers from the conference on Intersentential pronominal reference in child and adult language held at the ZAS in December, 2006. The conference, organized by the project Acquisition and disambiguation of intersentential pronominal reference, brought together leading researchers dealing with anaphora resolution in diverse theoretical approaches and the acquisition perspective on pronominal reference taken by the ZAS project.
Rawang (Rvwàng) is a Tibeto-Burman language spoken in the far north of Myanmar (Burma), and is closely related to the Dulong language spoken in China. Rawang manifests a kind of hierarchical person marking on the predicate which marks first person primarily (in several different ways - suffixes, change of final consonant, vowel length - and up to five times within one verb complex), and second person indirectly with a sort of marking similar to the inverse marking found in some North American languages: it appears when there is a first person participant, but that referent is not the actor, and when the second person is a participant. This system is quite different from those that reflect semantic role (e.g. Qiang) or grammatical relations (e.g. English).
Rawang [...] is a Tibeto-Burman language spoken by people who live in the far north of Kachin State in Myanmar (Burma), particularly along the Mae Hka ('Nmai Hka) and Maeli Hka (Mali Hka) river valleys (see map on back page); population unknown, although Ethnologue gives 100,000. In the past they had been called ‘Nung’, or (mistakenly) ‘Hkanung’, and are considered to be a sub-group of the Kachin by the Myanmar government. Until government policies put a stop to the clearing of new land in 1994, the Rawang speakers still practiced slash and burn farming on the mountainsides (they still do a bit, but only on already claimed land), in conjunction with planting paddy rice near the river. They are closely related to people on the other side of the Chinese border in Yunnan classified as either Dulong or Nu(ng) (see LaPolla 2001, 2003 on the Dulong language). In this paper, I will be discussing the word-class-changing constructions found in Rawang, using data of the Mvtwang (Mvt River) dialect of Rawang, which is considered the most central of those dialects in Myanmar and so has become something of a standard for writing and inter-group communication.
Morphology
(2007)
Introduction
(2007)
Information structure
(2007)
Semantics
(2007)
This paper presents psycholinguistic evidence on the factors governing the resolution of German personal pronouns. To determine the relative influence of linear order versus grammatical function of potential antecedents, two interpretation-preference tasks were designed. Their specific aim was to disentangle salience factors conflated in previous research on pronoun interpretation, such as linear or-der, first mention and topicalization. Experiment 1 tested pronoun resolution to non-sentence-initial position (scrambling) and Experiment 2 tested pronoun resolution to sentence-initial position (topicalization). The results across different verb types and across different syntactic contexts in Experiments 1 and 2 show that grammatical function, yet neither linear order, first mention nor topicalization predicts pronoun resolution in German.
This paper discusses results from a corpus study of German demonstrative and personal pronouns and from a reading time experiment in which we compared the interpretation options of the two types of pronouns (Bosch et al. 2003, 2007). A careful review of exceptions to a generalisation we had been suggesting in those papers (the Subject Hypothesis: "Personal pronouns prefer subject antecedents and demonstratives prefer non-subject antecedents") shows that, although this generalisation correctly describes a tendency in the data, it is quite wrong in claiming that the grammatical role of antecedents is the relevant parameter. In the current paper we argue that the generalisation should be formulated in terms of in-formation-structural properties of referents rather than in terms of the grammatical role of antecedent expressions.
In what follows, I first briefly review Perlmutter (1968, 1970), in which it is argued that aspectual verbs are ambiguous between control and raising. I suggest that while the argument for the raising analysis is solid, the arguments supporting the control analysis of aspectual verbs are less so. As an alternative hypothesis to consider, I introduce the structural ambiguity hypothesis. In Section 3, I review three recent analyses of control and raising. Although there are important differences among them, they all share the basic assumption that the control/raising distinction is due to differences in selectional restrictions that the lexical items impose. Under such an assumption, the lexical ambiguity hypothesis is the only available option. In Section 4, I present evidence for the structural ambiguity hypothesis from studies concerning aspectual verbs in languages from four distinct families, German (Wurmbrand 2001), Japanese (Fukuda 2006), Romance languages (Cinque 2003), and Basque (Arregi Molina-Azaola 2004). These data strongly suggest that across languages aspectual verbs can appear in two different syntactic positions, either below or above vP, or the projection with which an external argument is introduced (Kratzer 1994, 1996, Chomsky 1995). Given these findings, I argue that it is the aspectual verbs' position with respect to vP which creates the control/raising ambiguity. When an aspectual verb appears in a position that is lower than vP, an external argument takes scope over the aspectual verb. Thus, it is interpreted as control. When an aspectual verb appears in a position that is higher than vP, on the other hand, it is the aspectual verb that takes scope over an entire vP, including the external argument. Thus, it is interpreted as raising. In section 5, I extend the scope of this study to include a discussion of want-type verbs in Indonesian, as analyzed in Polinsky & Potsdam (2006). Polinsky & Potsdam argue that the Indonesian want-type verbs must be raising in at least certain cases where they allow a rather peculiar interpretation. Although they assume that there are also control counterparts of the want-type verbs, I argue that applying the proposed analysis to the want-type verbs does away with the need for stipulating two distinct lexical entries for these verbs. Section 6 concludes the paper.
The causative/anticausative alternation has been the topic of much typological and theoretical discussion in the linguistic literature. This alternation is characterized by verbs with transitive and intransitive uses, such that the transitive use of a verb V means roughly "cause to Vintransitive" (see Levin 1993). The discussion revolves around two issues: the first one concerns the similarities and differences between the anticausative and the passive, and the second one concerns the derivational relationship, if any, between the transitive and intransitive variant. With respect to the second issue, a number of approaches have been developed. Judging the approach conceptually unsatisfactory, according to which each variant is assigned an independent lexical entry, it was concluded that the two variants have to be derivationally related. The question then is which one of the two is basic and where this derivation takes place in the grammar. Our contribution to this discussion is to argue against derivational approaches to the causative / anticausative alternation. We focus on the distribution of PPs related to external arguments (agent, causer, instrument, causing event) in passives and anticausatives of English, German and Greek and the set of verbs undergoing the causative/anticausative alternation in these languages. We argue that the crosslinguistic differences in these two domains provide evidence against both causativization and detransitivization analyses of the causative / anticausative alternation. We offer an approach to this alternation which builds on a syntactic decomposition of change of state verbs into a Voice and a CAUS component. Crosslinguistic variation in passives and anticausatives depends on properties of Voice and its combinations with CAUS and various types of roots.
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.
In the recent literature there is growing interest in the morpho-syntactic encoding of hierarchical effects. The paper investigates one domain where such effects are attested: ergative splits conditioned by person. This type of splits is then compared to hierarchical effects in direct-inverse alternations. On the basis of two case studies (Lummi instantiating an ergative split person language and Passamaquoddy an inverse language) we offer an account that makes no use of hierarchies as a primitive. We propose that the two language types differ as far as the location of person features is concerned. In inverse systems person features are located exclusively in T, while in ergative systems, they are located in T and a particular type of v. A consequence of our analysis is that Case checking in split and inverse systems is guided by the presence/absence of specific phi-features. This in turn provides evidence for a close connection between Case and phi-features, reminiscent of Chomsky’s (2000, 2001) Agree.
In this paper I argue in favor of a Matching Analysis for German relative clauses. The Head Raising Analysis is shown to fail to account for parts of the reconstruction pattern in German, especially cases where only the external head is interpreted and the absence of Principle C effects. I propose a Matching Analysis with Vehicle Change and make consistent assumptions about possible deletion operations in relatives so that the entire pattern can be captured by one analysis which therefore proves superior to previous ones.
Reflexive pronouns as central anaphoric elements are subject to general principles determined by Universal Grammar and shared by all languages that use reflexives as part of their grammatical structure. In addition to these general conditions, there are language particular properties, which different languages can exhibit on the basis of different regulations. One variation of this sort is the particular role of Reflexives in German, which can show up as improper Arguments, which are subject to standard syntactic and morphological conditions, but do not represent an argument of the head they belong to. Hence the particular property is the effect of syntactic, morphological and semantic conditions. A simple illustration of the phenomena I will explore in this contribution is based on the following observation.
Research on a variety of structurally different languages suggests that information is assigned to grammatical form in way of preferred representations of arguments. These preferences can be captured by four interacting constraints which are based on the analysis of spoken and written discourse. These constraints represent measurable discourse preferences: pragmatically unmarked utterances seem to follow them blindly and widely. Consequently, the preferences motivating these constraints seem to represent the default structuring of discourse in immediate relation to elementary grammatical form. Discourse is no longer viewed as acting upon grammatical form, but as being ‘grammatical’ itself.
Agreement is traditionally viewed as a cross-referencing device for core arguments such as subjects and (primary) objects.1 In this paper, I discuss data from Bantu languages that lead to a radical departure from this generally accepted position: agreement in a subset of Bantu languages cross-references a (sentential) topic rather than the subject. The crucial evidence for topic agreement comes from a construction known as subject-object (S-O) reversal, where the fronted patient agrees with what has uniformly been taken to be a `subject marker'. The correct analysis of S-O reversal as a topic construction with `topic agreement' explains a range of known facts in the languages in question. Furthermore, synchronic variation across Bantu in the presence/absence of S-O reversal and in the properties of the (topic/subject) agreement marker suggests a diachronic path from topic to subject marking. The systematic variation and covariation in the syntax of Bantu languages and the historical picture that it offers would be missed altogether if we continue to reject the idea that the notion of topic can be deeply grammaticized in the form of agreement.
This paper investigates what factors make a particular referent a good antecedent for subsequent pronominal reference. In particular, it explores two seemingly conflicting claims in the literature regarding the effects of topicality and focusing on referent salience. In light of new experimental results combined with a review of existing work, I conclude that neither topicality nor focusing alone can explain referent salience as indicated by patterns of pronoun reference. Rather, the data provide support for a multiple-factor model of salience (e.g. Arnold 1999). More specifically, the results show that grammatical role has a striking effect: being a subject makes a referent more salient than either pronominalization/givenness or focusing alone. Furthermore, the results of the experiment suggest that the likelihood of subsequent pronominal reference is also influenced by structural focusing and pronominalization, but not as strongly as by subjecthood. I argue that these data are best captured by a multiple-factor model in which factors differ in how influential they are relative to one another, i.e. how heavily weighted they are. A single-factor system does not seem adequate for these data.
This paper focuses on restrictions on the ordering of internal constituents of noun phrases in Chichewa, especially when those constituents are discontinuous. The motivation for discontinuity of the NP constituents will be given, together with discussion of constructions that can be subsumed under this rubric but that do not really involve discontinuity in the canonical sense. These are constructions where a topic NP in a left periphery position is either linked anaphorically with a modifier "remnant" or semantically with its hyponym in post-verbal position. According to Guthrie's classification of Bantu languages, Chichewa is placed in zone N unit N31. It is regarded as a dialect of Nyanja, classified as belonging to unit N30 (Guthrie 1967-71).
Russian predicate cleft constructions have the surprising property of being associated with adversative clauses of the opposite polarity. I argue that clefts are associated with adversative clauses because they have the semantics of S-Topics in Büring's (1997, 2000) sense of the term. It is shown that the polarity of the adversative clause is obligatorily opposed to that of the cleft because the use of a cleft gives rise to a relevance-based pragmatic scale. The ordering principle according to which these scale
This paper concerns the distribution of wh-words in Asante Twi, which has both a focus fronting strategy and an in-situ strategy. We show that the focusing and the in-situ constructions are not simply equally available options. On the contrary, there are several cases where the focusing strategy must be used and the in-situ strategy is ungrammatical. We show that the cases in Asante Twi are "intervention effects", which are attested in other languages, like German, Korean, and French. We identify a core set of intervening elements that all of these languages have and discuss their properties.
Since Haiman (1978), a general assumption concerning the information structure of conditional sentences is that "conditionals are topics". However, in Chadic South Bauchi West languages spoken in Northern Nigeria, as well as in Banda Linda, an Adamawa language spoken in the République Centre-Africaine, conditionals share their structure with focus, not topic. This seriously questions Haiman’s claim and forces us to reconsider the facts and characterizations of conditionals, topic and focus in general.
In order to do this, we will first examine the facts of conditionals in some Chadic languages, then their information structure. We will see how both data and theory invalidate Haiman's claim. Then we will see that if they are not topics, they are different from focus as well. We will argue that if the elements which make a topic or a focus can appear in conditionals, these must be separated from what constitutes the identity of conditions. Then, we will see if these can be characterized in the same way as Lambrecht characterizes temporal clauses, viz. as "activated propositions" (Lambrecht 1994). We will finally conclude that they should rather be defined as "fictitious assertions" (Culioli 2000).
Tone as a distinctive feature used to differentiate not only words but also clause types, is a characteristic feature of Bantu languages. In this paper we show that Bemba relatives can be marked with a low tone in place of a segmental relative marker. This low tone strategy of relativization, which imposes a restrictive reading of relatives, manifests a specific phonological phrasing that can be differentiated from that of non-restrictives. The paper shows that the resultant phonological phrasing favours a head-raising analysis of relativization. In this sense, phonology can be shown to inform syntactic analyses.
In my paper, I show that the so-called German right dislocation actually comprises two distinct constructions, which I label 'right dislocation proper' and 'afterthought'. These differ in their prosodic and syntactic properties, as well as in their discourse functions. The paper is primarily concerned with the right dislocation proper (RD). I present a semantic analysis of RD based on the 'separate performative' account of Potts (2004, 2005) and Portner (forthc.). This analysis allows a description of the semantic contribution of RD to its host sentence, as well as explaining certain semantic constraints on the kind of NP in the RD construction.
The collection of papers in this volume presents results of a collaborative project between the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) in London, the Zentrum für allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Typologie und Universalienforschung (ZAS) in Berlin, and the University of Leiden. All three institutions have a strong interest in the linguistics of Bantu languages, and in 2003 decided to set up a network to compare results and to provide a platform for on-going discussion of different topics on which their research interests converged. The project received funding from the British Academy International Networks Programme, and from 2003 to 2006 seven meetings were held at the institutions involved under the title Bantu Grammar: Description and Theory, indicating the shared belief that current research in Bantu is best served by combining the description of new data with theoretically informed analysis. During the life-time of the network, and partly in conjunction with it, larger externally funded Bantu research projects have been set up at all institutions: projects on word-order and morphological marking and on phrasal phonology in Leiden, on pronominal reference, agreement and clitics in Romance and Bantu at SOAS, and on focus in Southern Bantu languages at ZAS. The papers in this volume provide a sampling of the work developed within the network and show, or so we think, how fruitful the sharing of ideas over the last three years has been. While the current British Academy-funded network is coming to an end in 2006, we hope that the cooperative structures we have established will continue to develop - and be expanded - in the future, providing many future opportunities to exchange findings and ideas about Bantu linguistics.
The Bantu language Makhuwa makes a distinction between cojoint and disjoint verb forms. Two hypotheses are made from generalisations on the distribution of the conjoint and disjoint verb forms in Makhuwa. 1) The verb appears in its conjoint form when a focal element occupies the Immediate After Verb (IAV) position; 2) the verb appears in its disjoint form when the IAV position is empty. A syntactic analysis is provided that accounts for these hypotheses if the IAV position is defined in terms of structural rather than linear adjacency between two heads in a direct c-command relation.
In the syntactic analysis two focus projections are proposed: one under TP (Ndayiragije 1999) hosting the disjoint morpheme and one under vP, to whose specifier focal elements move. Non-focal elements remain in-situ. This analysis accounts both for the strong adjacency requirement of a cojoint verb form and its focal object and for the empty IAV position that requires a verb to appear in its disjoint form.
This paper presents a sketch of the prosodic, syntactic and morphological means of expressing focus in Chitumbuka, an underdescribed Bantu language of Malawi. The chief prosodic correlate of focus is boundary narrowing – rephrasing conditioned by focus – which is used not only to signal in situ focus but also in syntactic and morphological focus constructions. Of theoretical importance is the fact that rephrasing does not lend culminative prominence to the focused constituent. Although Chitumbuka has culminative sentential stress, its position remains fixed at the right edge of the clause, independent of the position of focus. This makes Chitumbuka a challenge for theories of focus prosody which claim that the focused constituent must have culminative sentential prominence.
This paper discusses locative inversion constructions in Otjiherero against the background of previous work by Bresnan and Kanerva (1989) on the construction in Chichewa, and Demuth and Mmusi (1997) on Setswana and related languages. Locative inversion in Otjiherero is structurally similar to locative inversion in Chichewa and Setswana, but differs from these languages in that there are fewer thematic restrictions on predicates undergoing locative inversion. As Otjiherero has a three-way morphological distinction of locative subject markers, this shows that there is no relation between agreement morphology and thematic restrictions in locative inversion, confirming the result of Demuth and Mmusi. The availability of transitive predicates to participate in locative inversion in Otjiherero furthermore raises questions about the relation between locative inversion, valency, and applicative marking, and these are addressed in the paper, although further research is needed for a full analysis. In terms of function of the locative subject markers, Otjiherero presents, like Chishona, a split system where all markers support locative readings, but where one of them is also used in expletive contexts. In contrast to Chishona, though, this is the class 16, rather than the class 17 marker.
Genitive focus in Supyire
(2006)
Supyire has two distinct genitive constructions, one consisting of juxtaposed nouns, and the other marked with a particle. This study demonstrates that the marked genitive correlates significantly in natural discourse with contrastive focus as operationally defined in Myhill and Xing (1996). The method used avoids the vicious circularity of many discourse-based studies of focus. Contrastive focus, rather than being "coded", is a pragmatic construal which is dependent on other elements in the communicative context. This construal is only one of the possible construals of the marked genitive (contra Carlson 1994). In this it is not unlike other so-called "contrastive focus" constructions noted in the literature, such as contrastive stress in English.
The impact of the morphological alternation of subject markers on tense/aspect: the case of Swahili
(2006)
Subject markers for the first, second and third person singular in Southern Swahili dialects display morphological variation in that specific forms are chosen with different tense-aspect markers. This paper documents this variation in the different dialects and presents a distributional chart which reveals the symmetric patterns between these subject markers and their corresponding tense-aspect formatives. The study corroborates earlier work in the manifestation of variant morphological tense-aspect formatives of the regional dialects of Swahili by Mazrui (1983).
Introduction
(2006)
The papers in this volume reflect a number of broad themes which have emerged during the meetings of the project as particularly relevant for current Bantu linguistics. [...] The papers show that approaches to Bantu linguistics have also developed in new directions since this foundational work. For example, interaction of phonological phrasing with syntax and word order on the one hand, and with information structure on the other, is more prominent in the papers here than in earlier literature. Quite generally, the role of information structure for the understanding of Bantu syntax has become more important, in particular with respect to the expression of topic and focus, but also for the analysis of more central syntactic concerns such as questions and relative clauses. This, of course, relates to a wider development in linguistic theory to incorporate notions of topic and focus into core syntactic analysis, and it is not surprising that work on Bantu languages and on linguistic theory are closely related to each other in this respect. Another noteworthy development is the increasing interest in variation among Bantu languages which reflects the fact that more empirical evidence from more Bantu languages has become available over the last decade or so. The picture that emerges from this research is that morpho-syntactic variation in Bantu is rich and complex, and that there is strong potential to link this research to research on micro-variation in European (and other) languages, and to the study of morpho-syntactic variables, or parameters, more generally.
Modern theorists rarely agree on how to represent the categories of tense and aspect, making a consistent analysis for phenomena, such as the present perfect, more difficult to attain. It has been argued in previous analyses that the variable behavior of the present perfect between languages licenses independently motivated treatments, particularly of a morphosyntactic or semanticsyntactic nature (Giorgi & Pianesi 1997; Schmitt 2001; Ilari 2001). More specifically, the wellknown readings of the American English (AE) present perfect (resultative, experiential, persistent situation, recent past (Comrie 1976)), are at odds with the readings of the corresponding structure in Brazilian Portuguese (BP), the 'pretérito perfeito composto' (default iterativity and occasional duration (Ilari 1999)). Despite these variations, the present work, assuming a tense-aspect framework at the semantic-pragmatic interface, will provide a unified analysis for the present perfect in AE and BP, which have traditionally been treated as semantically divergent. The present perfect meaning, in conjunction with the aspectual class of the predicate, can account for the major differences between languages, particularly regarding iterativity and the "present perfect puzzle", regarding adverb compatibility.
Focus on verbal operators such as aspect or tense ("predication focus", lucidly described by Hyman & Watters (1984) under the label "auxiliary focus") has been noticed to exist in African languages of Afroasiatic and Niger-Congo affiliation, but not so far in Saharan. The Saharan language Kanuri is assumed to have substantially reorganized its TAM system, particularly in the perfective aspect domain (Cyffer [2006] dates major changes between the years 1820 and 1900). The paper discusses, for the first time in Kanuri scholarship, the existence of a neat subsystem of predication focus marking by suffix in the perfective aspect which is made up of a total of six conjugational paradigms that uniformly encode predication focus by suffix {-ò}. Kanuri dialects differ in strategies and scope of focus marking encoded in verb morphology. In the light of data from the Yerwa (Nigeria) and Manga (Niger) dialects the paper discusses some "anomalies" with regard to general focus theory which we account for by describing the "Kanuri Focus Shift" as a diachronic process which is responsible for leftward displacement of scope of focus.
Questions in Northern Sotho
(2006)
This article gives an overview of the marking of polar and constituent questions in Northern Sotho, a Bantu language of South Africa. It thereby provides a contribution to the typological investigation of sentence types in the world’s languages. As will be shown, Northern Sotho follows cross-linguistic tendencies in marking interrogative sentences: It uses intonation as main indicator in polar questions and question words as main indicator in constituent questions. Nevertheless, it also shows interesting language-specific variation, e.g. with respect to the location of raised intonation in polar questions, the presence of two pragmatically distinct question particles in polar questions, or a split in the formation of constituent questions based on the grammatical function of the questioned constituent.
Zulu shows an alternation of conjoint and disjoint (conjunctive/disjunctive, short/long) verb forms. Certain contexts suggest that the distribution of these forms is related to focus. For example, certain adverbial expressions receive a focal interpretation when preceded by a conjoint form but not when preceded by a disjoint form. Similarly, a wh-phrase must be preceded by a conjoint form. This has led some researchers to argue or suggest that the alternation encodes focus directly. This paper examines two different focal hypotheses, one in which a disjoint form encodes focus on the verb and another in which the conjoint form encodes focus on the element following the verb. It is shown that both of these hypotheses are inadequate because certain contexts requiring the conjoint form do not display the predicted focal interpretation. Relativization morphology is argued to also support an analysis independent of focus. It is proposed that the alternation is regulated entirely by the position of the verb within the surface constituencies first proposed in Van der Spuy (1993) and that the associated focal interpretations are the result of a range of interpretations permitted within the different constituencies. Elements remaining within the relevant constituent are nontopical, and focus is one of a range of interpretations they can receive.
Beria, a member of the Saharan language family, is one of the rare languages in Africa exhibiting both an ergative and an active/agentive alignment system of grammatical relations.1 While the active/agentive pattern is shown by the participant reference markers, the ergative pattern is attested both in the constituent order and in the focus markers on the core constituents. In the pragmatically unmarked constituent order, the Agent constituent precedes the Patient constituent. An unmarked single constituent immediately preceding the verb may represent a Patient or a Subject argument. In this position, the Agent constituent requires the clitic GU. The focused Patient and Subject constituents are both either marked by the clitic DI or by a cleft construction.
In this paper I argue that the syntax of Eastern Bantu does not make reference to the notion 'syntactic object'. That is, there is no linguistic category of objects that is the target of syntactic rules in Eastern Bantu languages. Instead I propose that syntactic rules broadly distinguish complements and adjuncts as well as category type of complement or adjunct. I argue that Bantu languages are typologically special in that (a) the verb complement structure can be expanded by the valency increasing applicative suffix; and (b) that the class of adjuncts can be expanded through verb concord licensing. Because of these properties, Bantu languages have a much-expanded notion of 'complement' and 'adjunct'. Namely, complements consist of (a) inherent complements (subcategorised by the lexical verb), and (b) derived complements (licensed by the applicative suffix). Adjuncts consist of (a) non-subcategorised modifying constituents in the usual sense and (b) phrases that are licensed by verb concord (i.e. Topics in Bresnan and Mchombo (1987)). I propose that most the differences in the licensing of objects in Bantu are due to two causes: (a) the unusual split in the composition of complements and adjuncts and (b) a set of typological parameter settings.
Complex focus versus double focus : investigations on multiple focus interpretations in Hungarian
(2006)
The main aim of this paper is to point out several problems with the semantic analysis of Hungarian focus interpretation and 'only'. For current semantic analyses the interpretation of Hungarian identificational/exhaustive focus and 'only' is problematic, since in classical semantic analyses 'only' is identified with an exhaustivity operator. In this paper I will discuss multiple focus constructions and question-answer pairs in Hungarian to show that such a view cannot be applied to Hungarian exhaustive focus. Next to this I will discuss possible interpretations of Hungarian sentences containing multiple prosodic foci: complex focus versus double focus. My claim is that in order to interpret multiple focus (in Hungarian) we have to take into consideration the different intonation patterns, the occurrence of 'only', and the syntactic structure as well.
Focus theories distinguish different types of focus according to the pragmatic conditions or communicative point on the one side and different scopes of focus on the other side. The assertion in term focus constructions (Dik 1989), called by others argument focus constructions or identificational sentences (Lambrecht 1994), has the purpose of establishing a relation between an argument and an open proposition. Kar, a north-eastern Senufo language of Burkina Faso, which has the basic word order S-Aux-O-V-other, has at its disposal different strategies to mark argument focus, among them fronting of the focused item. In many West African languages the displacement of the focused argument involves other devices, such as the use of special verb forms. In Kar fronting of a focused argument requires the use of special pronouns in the out-of-focus part of the sentence, called background subject pronouns. They are used in other backgrounded contexts, too, for example in relative clauses, adverbial clauses and constituent questions. Their inconsistent use is attributed to a particular sociolinguistic situation in which the data has been collected. The use of the same focus strategies for completive and contrastive focus suggests that Kar does not distinguish pragmatic conditions on the level of sentence grammar.