Saveria Colonna, B. Laca, Leticia López, Eduardo Correa Soares
On the basis of corpus and experimental evidence, this paper claims that the ongoing process of change affecting the use and interpretation of the [Present under Past] pattern in subjunctive argument clauses in some Spanish varieties is sensitive to the syntactic/semantic type of the clause. The pattern deviates from Sequence-of-Tense grammar in not giving rise to double access effects. In the variety explored in this paper, this only happens in the argument clauses of causative, directive, and volitional predicates, i.e. in a type of clause which is held to be lower in a scale of clausehood than the argument clauses of predicates of belief and assertion.@font-face{font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;mso-font-charset:0;mso-generic-font-family:auto;mso-font-pitch:variable;mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal{mso-style-parent:"";margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-pagination:widow-orphan;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Calibri;mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;mso-bidi-font-family:Calibri;}div.Section1{page:Section1;}
{"title":"When the present lies in the past: [Present under Past] in subjunctive clauses in Uruguayan Spanish","authors":"Saveria Colonna, B. Laca, Leticia López, Eduardo Correa Soares","doi":"10.16995/glossa.7904","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.7904","url":null,"abstract":"On the basis of corpus and experimental evidence, this paper claims that the ongoing process of change affecting the use and interpretation of the [Present under Past] pattern in subjunctive argument clauses in some Spanish varieties is sensitive to the syntactic/semantic type of the clause. The pattern deviates from Sequence-of-Tense grammar in not giving rise to double access effects. In the variety explored in this paper, this only happens in the argument clauses of causative, directive, and volitional predicates, i.e. in a type of clause which is held to be lower in a scale of clausehood than the argument clauses of predicates of belief and assertion.@font-face{font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;mso-font-charset:0;mso-generic-font-family:auto;mso-font-pitch:variable;mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal{mso-style-parent:\"\";margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-pagination:widow-orphan;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Calibri;mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;mso-bidi-font-family:Calibri;}div.Section1{page:Section1;}","PeriodicalId":46319,"journal":{"name":"Glossa-A Journal of General Linguistics","volume":"220 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89380672","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Simple broad focus intransitives in English have been observed to occur with variable nuclear accent (NA) placement on either the subject or verb. This variability can be difficult to acquire in a second language (L2), especially when the speaker’s first language (L1), such as Spanish, has less flexible NA placement. Learners tend to transfer L1 intonational patterns into their L2, but there is still more to understand about the learning trajectory. Furthermore, the factors driving the NA placement alternation in intransitives is still not completely understood for L1 speakers; there is a debate about whether NA placement is driven by syntactic factors, such as verb type, pragmatic factors, or a combination of the two. The study reported in this paper used an oral production task to elicit broad focus intransitives from both L1 English speakers and L1 Spanish L2 English learners. Verb type and expectedness were crossed in stimuli construction in order to test the effects of both syntactic and pragmatic factors on NA placement for both speaker groups. The results indicate that L1 speakers are most likely to produce NA on the subject in with expected unaccusative verbs, and to produce NA on the verb in all other conditions. L2 speakers show a stronger preference for utterance-final NA placement on the verb, which is likely transferred from the preferred pattern of their L1. At the same time, L2 learners of higher proficiency do show evidence of acquiring the utterance-final NA placement pattern, especially in the with expected unaccusative verbs.
{"title":"Nuclear Accent placement in broad focus intransitives in native and non-native English: an investigation of syntactic and pragmatic factors","authors":"S. A. Landblom, T. Ionin","doi":"10.16995/glossa.5810","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.5810","url":null,"abstract":"Simple broad focus intransitives in English have been observed to occur with variable nuclear accent (NA) placement on either the subject or verb. This variability can be difficult to acquire in a second language (L2), especially when the speaker’s first language (L1), such as Spanish, has less flexible NA placement. Learners tend to transfer L1 intonational patterns into their L2, but there is still more to understand about the learning trajectory. Furthermore, the factors driving the NA placement alternation in intransitives is still not completely understood for L1 speakers; there is a debate about whether NA placement is driven by syntactic factors, such as verb type, pragmatic factors, or a combination of the two. The study reported in this paper used an oral production task to elicit broad focus intransitives from both L1 English speakers and L1 Spanish L2 English learners. Verb type and expectedness were crossed in stimuli construction in order to test the effects of both syntactic and pragmatic factors on NA placement for both speaker groups. The results indicate that L1 speakers are most likely to produce NA on the subject in with expected unaccusative verbs, and to produce NA on the verb in all other conditions. L2 speakers show a stronger preference for utterance-final NA placement on the verb, which is likely transferred from the preferred pattern of their L1. At the same time, L2 learners of higher proficiency do show evidence of acquiring the utterance-final NA placement pattern, especially in the with expected unaccusative verbs.","PeriodicalId":46319,"journal":{"name":"Glossa-A Journal of General Linguistics","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86307836","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Like all modern Celtic languages Welsh exhibits initial consonant mutation with both lexical and morphosyntactic triggers. Owing to the complexity of the system and the sociolinguistic situation of Welsh, change and variation in the system seems inevitable, and evidence for change has been observed in production. Less work, however, has focused on speakers' attitudes and expectations in perception. We used an online auditory acceptability judgement survey to investigate expectations for different morphosyntactic soft-mutation triggers. Respondents listened to sentences with canonical and non-canonical mutation patterns and used Likert scales to indicate for each sentence whether they would use the same pattern themselves and whether they would expect it from others. Almost all respondents expected some variation, even in their own production, but two main clusters of respondents could be identified: ``Conservative'' respondents whose expectations were close to canonical mutation patterns and ``Variable'' respondents whose expectations were considerably more flexible. First-language status was the only demographic variable to predict respondent attitudes, and confirms that L2 Welsh speakers accept noncanonical mutation to a greater extent than L1 Welsh speakers. We also compared different mutation triggers, with the tentative conclusion that apparently identical triggers may not in fact be identical for all speakers, and that trigger transparency may be an important factor in predicting variability.
{"title":"Variability in speaker expectations of morphosyntactic mutation in Welsh","authors":"Yosiane White, Gareth Roberts","doi":"10.16995/glossa.8730","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.8730","url":null,"abstract":"Like all modern Celtic languages Welsh exhibits initial consonant mutation with both lexical and morphosyntactic triggers. Owing to the complexity of the system and the sociolinguistic situation of Welsh, change and variation in the system seems inevitable, and evidence for change has been observed in production. Less work, however, has focused on speakers' attitudes and expectations in perception. We used an online auditory acceptability judgement survey to investigate expectations for different morphosyntactic soft-mutation triggers. Respondents listened to sentences with canonical and non-canonical mutation patterns and used Likert scales to indicate for each sentence whether they would use the same pattern themselves and whether they would expect it from others. Almost all respondents expected some variation, even in their own production, but two main clusters of respondents could be identified: ``Conservative'' respondents whose expectations were close to canonical mutation patterns and ``Variable'' respondents whose expectations were considerably more flexible. First-language status was the only demographic variable to predict respondent attitudes, and confirms that L2 Welsh speakers accept noncanonical mutation to a greater extent than L1 Welsh speakers. We also compared different mutation triggers, with the tentative conclusion that apparently identical triggers may not in fact be identical for all speakers, and that trigger transparency may be an important factor in predicting variability.","PeriodicalId":46319,"journal":{"name":"Glossa-A Journal of General Linguistics","volume":"106 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77325939","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
There is an ancient debate about whether language is an instrument for thought or for communication. I argue that the distinction is misleading, and that language is an integral part of both, human-specific thought, and communication. The argument is based on the growing consensus that grammatical knowledge – a hallmark of human language – encompasses not only the propositional content of an utterance but also its communicative content. If communicative content is regulated by grammatical knowledge, then it follows that communication is as much a function of language as thought is.
{"title":"Language is for thought and communication","authors":"Martina Wiltschko","doi":"10.16995/glossa.5786","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.5786","url":null,"abstract":"There is an ancient debate about whether language is an instrument for thought or for communication. I argue that the distinction is misleading, and that language is an integral part of both, human-specific thought, and communication. The argument is based on the growing consensus that grammatical knowledge – a hallmark of human language – encompasses not only the propositional content of an utterance but also its communicative content. If communicative content is regulated by grammatical knowledge, then it follows that communication is as much a function of language as thought is.","PeriodicalId":46319,"journal":{"name":"Glossa-A Journal of General Linguistics","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75621718","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper sets out to find the defining characteristics of so-called expletive categories and the consequences the existence of such categories has for Universal Grammar. Looking into different instantiations of expletive subjects and impersonal pronouns, definite articles, negative markers and plural markers in various natural languages, we reach the following generalizations: (i) expletive categories are deficient functional elements interpreted as introducing an identity function at the level of semantic representation, (ii) they can be divided into syntactic expletives, that occur to satisfy some syntactic relationship with another item in the clause, and semantic expletives, that stand in a semantic dependency with some c-commanding category, and (iii) expletive categories tend to develop additional meaning components that are computed beyond core grammar, at the level where speech act-related information is encoded. Our discussion reveals that all categories that have been traditionally considered as expletive in the linguistic literature are interpretable in grammar or beyond and, thus, do not violate Chomsky’s Full Interpretation Principle. We conclude that there are no expletive elements in natural languages and that expletiveness is not a grammatically relevant concept.
{"title":"Expletiveness in grammar and beyond","authors":"Evripidis Tsiakmakis, M. Espinal","doi":"10.16995/glossa.5807","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.5807","url":null,"abstract":"This paper sets out to find the defining characteristics of so-called expletive categories and the consequences the existence of such categories has for Universal Grammar. Looking into different instantiations of expletive subjects and impersonal pronouns, definite articles, negative markers and plural markers in various natural languages, we reach the following generalizations: (i) expletive categories are deficient functional elements interpreted as introducing an identity function at the level of semantic representation, (ii) they can be divided into syntactic expletives, that occur to satisfy some syntactic relationship with another item in the clause, and semantic expletives, that stand in a semantic dependency with some c-commanding category, and (iii) expletive categories tend to develop additional meaning components that are computed beyond core grammar, at the level where speech act-related information is encoded. Our discussion reveals that all categories that have been traditionally considered as expletive in the linguistic literature are interpretable in grammar or beyond and, thus, do not violate Chomsky’s Full Interpretation Principle. We conclude that there are no expletive elements in natural languages and that expletiveness is not a grammatically relevant concept.","PeriodicalId":46319,"journal":{"name":"Glossa-A Journal of General Linguistics","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88014866","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We argue for a novel cross-linguistic definition of object mass nouns—e.g. furniture, equipment—that accommodates the novel observation that some can combine with numericals to count subkinds. We present novel data from Hungarian, where certain object mass nouns can combine directly with numericals to count subkinds but not objects—e.g. három sportruházat (`three sportswear’) can refer to three kinds of sportswear but not three pieces of sportswear. This is unexpected, given that the inability to count subkinds is a property of object mass nouns in English (Cowper & Hall 2012, Rothstein 2017, Grimm & Levin 2017, Sutton & Filip 2018). This requires a novel definition of object mass nouns, which has implications for how they are identified across languages.
我们主张一种新的跨语言定义的对象质量名词。家具，设备，这些都能适应新的观察，其中一些可以与数字结合来计算子种类。我们提供了来自匈牙利语的新数据，其中某些物体质量名词可以直接与数字结合来计数子种类，但不能计数物体。Három sportruházat (' three sportswear ')可以指三种运动服，而不是三件运动服。这是出乎意料的，因为无法计数子类是英语中物体质量名词的一个特性(Cowper & Hall 2012, Rothstein 2017, Grimm & Levin 2017, Sutton & Filip 2018)。这需要对物体质量名词进行新的定义，这对如何跨语言识别它们有影响。
{"title":"Object mass nouns and subkind countability","authors":"Kurt Erbach, Aviv Schoenfeld","doi":"10.16995/glossa.5788","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.5788","url":null,"abstract":"We argue for a novel cross-linguistic definition of object mass nouns—e.g. furniture, equipment—that accommodates the novel observation that some can combine with numericals to count subkinds. We present novel data from Hungarian, where certain object mass nouns can combine directly with numericals to count subkinds but not objects—e.g. három sportruházat (`three sportswear’) can refer to three kinds of sportswear but not three pieces of sportswear. This is unexpected, given that the inability to count subkinds is a property of object mass nouns in English (Cowper & Hall 2012, Rothstein 2017, Grimm & Levin 2017, Sutton & Filip 2018). This requires a novel definition of object mass nouns, which has implications for how they are identified across languages.","PeriodicalId":46319,"journal":{"name":"Glossa-A Journal of General Linguistics","volume":"222 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79720756","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Passivization in Turkish may target both internal and external argument positions, for passives of unaccusatives, unergatives and transitives are possible in the language. Interestingly, Turkish also has double passives where the passive morpheme is iterated and both argument positions are saturated. However, the language does not allow for antipassives, where only the internal argument position of a transitive predicate is saturated by passivization. Importantly, under plausible compositional analyses, antipassives are fully predicted, contrary to the fact. Hence, the unavailability of antipassives in a language that has double passives (and passives of unaccusatives) remains as a puzzle, which this paper sets out to solve. In particular, we argue that antipassives are ruled out on the grounds that the passive morpheme is visible to the case calculus in terms of Dependent Case Theory but has to remain caseless throughout the derivation. We show that this account also correctly predicts that internal argument positions that happen to be lexical case positions can never be targeted by passivization. Finally, we provide a fine-grained analysis of internal argument suppression accounting for the aspectual restrictions it has been reported to have, and compare our work to the existing proposals.
{"title":"How can a language have double-passives but lack antipassives?","authors":"Furkan Dikmen, Ömer Demirok, Balkız Öztürk","doi":"10.16995/glossa.6553","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.6553","url":null,"abstract":"Passivization in Turkish may target both internal and external argument positions, for passives of unaccusatives, unergatives and transitives are possible in the language. Interestingly, Turkish also has double passives where the passive morpheme is iterated and both argument positions are saturated. However, the language does not allow for antipassives, where only the internal argument position of a transitive predicate is saturated by passivization. Importantly, under plausible compositional analyses, antipassives are fully predicted, contrary to the fact. Hence, the unavailability of antipassives in a language that has double passives (and passives of unaccusatives) remains as a puzzle, which this paper sets out to solve. In particular, we argue that antipassives are ruled out on the grounds that the passive morpheme is visible to the case calculus in terms of Dependent Case Theory but has to remain caseless throughout the derivation. We show that this account also correctly predicts that internal argument positions that happen to be lexical case positions can never be targeted by passivization. Finally, we provide a fine-grained analysis of internal argument suppression accounting for the aspectual restrictions it has been reported to have, and compare our work to the existing proposals.","PeriodicalId":46319,"journal":{"name":"Glossa-A Journal of General Linguistics","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72850696","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Based on the lexicalization patterns of manner and result meaning in the main predicate, two resultative constructions can be distinguished, namely resultative secondary predication that lexicalizes the manner component, and means construction that lexicalize the result component. Notably, both constructions are unevenly distributed across languages (Talmy 2000, 1991). However, this typology is primarily based on non-serializing languages, such as English and Romance, in which the secondary manner or result predicate is necessarily non-verbal. This constrasts with resultatives in serializing languages, in which both the manner and result component are realized by verbal predicates, making it difficult to determine the underlying morphosyntactic status of the respective predicates. By investigating the morphosyntactic and semantic properties of resultative serial verb constructions (RSVCs) in two serializing languages, Mandarin and Samoan, I demonstrate that RSVCs are neither a unified or special phenomenon (contra Slobin 2004, Larson 1991), but show the same split observed in non-serializing languages. Further, these observations have broader implications on a unified configurational analysis of manner and result meaning within a syntactic account of event and argument structure building (cf. Folli & Harley 2020).
{"title":"Talmy’s typology in serializing languages: Variations on a VP","authors":"Jens Hopperdietzel","doi":"10.16995/glossa.7686","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.7686","url":null,"abstract":"Based on the lexicalization patterns of manner and result meaning in the main predicate, two resultative constructions can be distinguished, namely resultative secondary predication that lexicalizes the manner component, and means construction that lexicalize the result component. Notably, both constructions are unevenly distributed across languages (Talmy 2000, 1991). However, this typology is primarily based on non-serializing languages, such as English and Romance, in which the secondary manner or result predicate is necessarily non-verbal. This constrasts with resultatives in serializing languages, in which both the manner and result component are realized by verbal predicates, making it difficult to determine the underlying morphosyntactic status of the respective predicates. By investigating the morphosyntactic and semantic properties of resultative serial verb constructions (RSVCs) in two serializing languages, Mandarin and Samoan, I demonstrate that RSVCs are neither a unified or special phenomenon (contra Slobin 2004, Larson 1991), but show the same split observed in non-serializing languages. Further, these observations have broader implications on a unified configurational analysis of manner and result meaning within a syntactic account of event and argument structure building (cf. Folli & Harley 2020).","PeriodicalId":46319,"journal":{"name":"Glossa-A Journal of General Linguistics","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89673669","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Demonstratives such as this and that are among the most frequently used words in texts. But what are the factors that determine whether a writer uses one demonstrative form (proximal this) or another (distal that)? Here we report a large-scale corpus analysis in three written genres to empirically contrast theories based on differences in referent activation and prominence with a recent proposal suggesting that genre is the main driver of written demonstrative variance. We consistently observe that discourse genre is indeed the main predictor of writers’ demonstrative variation in English text. More specifically, a clear preference for distal demonstratives is found when the addressee is considered more prominent in the given discourse setting (as in news reports), whereas an overall preference for proximal demonstratives is observed when the knowledgeable writer feels more responsibility for the produced discourse themselves, as in an expository context (e.g. wikipedia texts). In such expository contexts, proximal demonstratives hence indicate that the referent is psychologically situated near the writer, whereas in interactional and narrative discourse the writer uses distal demonstratives to reach out to the addressee. These findings shed new theoretical light on some of the most frequently used and studied words in human language.
{"title":"Explaining variance in writers’ use of demonstratives: A corpus study demonstrating the importance of discourse genre","authors":"A. Maes, E. Krahmer, David Peeters","doi":"10.16995/glossa.5826","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.5826","url":null,"abstract":"Demonstratives such as this and that are among the most frequently used words in texts. But what are the factors that determine whether a writer uses one demonstrative form (proximal this) or another (distal that)? Here we report a large-scale corpus analysis in three written genres to empirically contrast theories based on differences in referent activation and prominence with a recent proposal suggesting that genre is the main driver of written demonstrative variance. We consistently observe that discourse genre is indeed the main predictor of writers’ demonstrative variation in English text. More specifically, a clear preference for distal demonstratives is found when the addressee is considered more prominent in the given discourse setting (as in news reports), whereas an overall preference for proximal demonstratives is observed when the knowledgeable writer feels more responsibility for the produced discourse themselves, as in an expository context (e.g. wikipedia texts). In such expository contexts, proximal demonstratives hence indicate that the referent is psychologically situated near the writer, whereas in interactional and narrative discourse the writer uses distal demonstratives to reach out to the addressee. These findings shed new theoretical light on some of the most frequently used and studied words in human language.","PeriodicalId":46319,"journal":{"name":"Glossa-A Journal of General Linguistics","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85218129","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The distinction between projective and non-projective locative prepositions that has been proposed in the semantic literature (Zwarts & Winter 2000) is reflected in the syntax and morphology of Greek spatial expressions. Projective PPs in Greek are always complex, formed by a spatial “adverb” and the “light” preposition apo marking the ground DP. In non-projective PPs, which can be either simple or complex, the light preposition alternates between se (in locative and goal environments) and apo (in source and route environments). This is attributed to the different syn- tactic status of the “adverb”, which is shown to be a head in projectives, and an adjunct in non-projectives (cf. Theophanopoulou-Kontou 2000). The Greek data support an extended P projection analysis along the lines of Svenonius (2008; 2010) for projectives, which relates to their vector space ontology (Zwarts & Winter 2000). Non-projective expressions, on the other hand, are syntactically reduced.
{"title":"Projective and other locative PPs in Greek","authors":"Athanasios Michael Ramadanidis","doi":"10.16995/glossa.6153","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.6153","url":null,"abstract":"The distinction between projective and non-projective locative prepositions that has been proposed in the semantic literature (Zwarts & Winter 2000) is reflected in the syntax and morphology of Greek spatial expressions. Projective PPs in Greek are always complex, formed by a spatial “adverb” and the “light” preposition apo marking the ground DP. In non-projective PPs, which can be either simple or complex, the light preposition alternates between se (in locative and goal environments) and apo (in source and route environments). This is attributed to the different syn- tactic status of the “adverb”, which is shown to be a head in projectives, and an adjunct in non-projectives (cf. Theophanopoulou-Kontou 2000). The Greek data support an extended P projection analysis along the lines of Svenonius (2008; 2010) for projectives, which relates to their vector space ontology (Zwarts & Winter 2000). Non-projective expressions, on the other hand, are syntactically reduced.","PeriodicalId":46319,"journal":{"name":"Glossa-A Journal of General Linguistics","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75745991","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：