Jóhanna Barðdal, T. Eythórsson, Tonya Kim Dewey-Findell
{"title":"交替谓词难题","authors":"Jóhanna Barðdal, T. Eythórsson, Tonya Kim Dewey-Findell","doi":"10.1075/CF.00025.BAR","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n A long-standing divide between Icelandic and German in the literature takes for granted that there are\n non-nominative subjects in Icelandic, while corresponding arguments in German have been analyzed as objects (Zaenen et al. 1985; Sigurðsson 1989). This is based on two\n differences between these languages: (a) differences with regard to control and conjunction reduction and (b) apparent subject\n behavior of the nominative in dat-nom constructions in German. This article focuses on the latter, introducing into the discussion\n the concept of alternating predicates, that is, dat-nom predicates that systematically alternate between two diametrically-opposed\n argument structure constructions, dat-nom and nom-dat. A comparison between Icelandic and German shows that Icelandic dat-nom\n predicates are of two types, a non-alternating líka type and an alternating falla í geð type,\n whereas German seems to exhibit only the alternating type. On this assumption, the apparent subject behavior of the nominative in\n German is easily explained, since such occurrences in fact involve the nom-dat construction and not the dat-nom construction.\n Therefore, the subject behavior of the nominative in nom-dat constructions does not invalidate a subject analysis of the dative in\n dat-nom constructions in German. The analysis is couched in the framework of construction grammar.","PeriodicalId":42321,"journal":{"name":"Constructions and Frames","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The alternating predicate puzzle\",\"authors\":\"Jóhanna Barðdal, T. Eythórsson, Tonya Kim Dewey-Findell\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/CF.00025.BAR\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n A long-standing divide between Icelandic and German in the literature takes for granted that there are\\n non-nominative subjects in Icelandic, while corresponding arguments in German have been analyzed as objects (Zaenen et al. 1985; Sigurðsson 1989). This is based on two\\n differences between these languages: (a) differences with regard to control and conjunction reduction and (b) apparent subject\\n behavior of the nominative in dat-nom constructions in German. This article focuses on the latter, introducing into the discussion\\n the concept of alternating predicates, that is, dat-nom predicates that systematically alternate between two diametrically-opposed\\n argument structure constructions, dat-nom and nom-dat. A comparison between Icelandic and German shows that Icelandic dat-nom\\n predicates are of two types, a non-alternating líka type and an alternating falla í geð type,\\n whereas German seems to exhibit only the alternating type. On this assumption, the apparent subject behavior of the nominative in\\n German is easily explained, since such occurrences in fact involve the nom-dat construction and not the dat-nom construction.\\n Therefore, the subject behavior of the nominative in nom-dat constructions does not invalidate a subject analysis of the dative in\\n dat-nom constructions in German. The analysis is couched in the framework of construction grammar.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42321,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Constructions and Frames\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Constructions and Frames\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/CF.00025.BAR\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Constructions and Frames","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/CF.00025.BAR","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
A long-standing divide between Icelandic and German in the literature takes for granted that there are
non-nominative subjects in Icelandic, while corresponding arguments in German have been analyzed as objects (Zaenen et al. 1985; Sigurðsson 1989). This is based on two
differences between these languages: (a) differences with regard to control and conjunction reduction and (b) apparent subject
behavior of the nominative in dat-nom constructions in German. This article focuses on the latter, introducing into the discussion
the concept of alternating predicates, that is, dat-nom predicates that systematically alternate between two diametrically-opposed
argument structure constructions, dat-nom and nom-dat. A comparison between Icelandic and German shows that Icelandic dat-nom
predicates are of two types, a non-alternating líka type and an alternating falla í geð type,
whereas German seems to exhibit only the alternating type. On this assumption, the apparent subject behavior of the nominative in
German is easily explained, since such occurrences in fact involve the nom-dat construction and not the dat-nom construction.
Therefore, the subject behavior of the nominative in nom-dat constructions does not invalidate a subject analysis of the dative in
dat-nom constructions in German. The analysis is couched in the framework of construction grammar.