Case and word order in Lithuanian infinitival clauses revisited

Author(s):  
Peter M. Arkadiev
1994 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Hirschbühler ◽  
Marie Labelle

ABSTRACTSince the 15th century, negative infinitives in French have undergone a change from ne V pas to ne pas V. This change takes place at different times, depending on the nature of the verb. Lexical verbs undergo the change between 1550 and 1750, modals (pouvoir, vouloir, devoir) essentially change between 1650 and 1900, and auxiliaries have been changing at a slow pace since 1650. We explore the idea that, for main verbs, the change in word order reflects a change in the position of pas, while the change in the position of modals and auxiliaries results from the fact that these verbs start assuming a position lower in the structure. Our analysis of the historically different evolution of each type of verb is based on their lexical properties and their distinct affinities with abstract Tense.


Author(s):  
Jan Terje Faarlund

In subordinate clauses, the C position is occupied by a complementizer word, which may be null. The finite verb stays in V. SpecCP is either empty or occupied by a wh-word, or by some other element indicating its semantic function. Nominal clauses are finite or non-finite. Finite nominal clauses are declarative or interrogative. Declarative nominal clauses may under specific circumstances have main clause word order (‘embedded V2’). Infinitival clauses are marked by an infinitive marker, which is either in C (Swedish), or immediately above V (Danish). Norwegian has both options. Relative clauses comprise several different types; clauses with a relativized nominal argument are mostly introduced by a complementizer; adverbial relative clauses relativize a locative or temporal phrase, with or without a complementizer; comparative clauses relativize a degree or identity. Under hard-to-define circumstances depending on language and region, subordinate clauses allow extraction of phrases up into the matrix clause.


2016 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
Author(s):  
William O'Grady

AbstractI focus on two challenges that processing-based theories of language must confront: the need to explain why language has the particular properties that it does, and the need to explain why processing pressures are manifested in the particular way that they are. I discuss these matters with reference to two illustrative phenomena: proximity effects in word order and a constraint on contraction.


1967 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 600-605 ◽  
Author(s):  
Penelope B. Odom ◽  
Richard L. Blanton

Two groups each containing 24 deaf subjects were compared with 24 fifth graders and 24 twelfth graders with normal hearing on the learning of segments of written English. Eight subjects from each group learned phrasally defined segments such as “paid the tall lady,” eight more learned the same words in nonphrases having acceptable English word order such as “lady paid the tall,” and the remaining eight in each group learned the same words scrambled, “lady tall the paid.” The task consisted of 12 study-test trials. Analyses of the mean number of words recalled correctly and the probability of recalling the whole phrase correctly, given that one word of it was recalled, indicated that both ages of hearing subjects showed facilitation on the phrasally defined segments, interference on the scrambled segments. The deaf groups showed no differential recall as a function of phrasal structure. It was concluded that the deaf do not possess the same perceptual or memory processes with regard to English as do the hearing subjects.


Author(s):  
Jae Jung Song
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (1-4) ◽  
pp. 213-226
Author(s):  
Roland Hoffmann

SummaryThe following study will show that in the Vulgate there are far from few discontinuous orders present without any indication in the Hebrew text. These instances include the following patterns: first many examples whose intermediate area is constituted by particles connecting the sentence. They have already been partly coined in the Septuagint, but also, especially in the case of quoque, formed by Jerome to avoid the simple combination of the original and the Greek version. In cases when other words stand in the intermediate area Jerome, even in poetical texts, finds new ways to emphasize the first element of a hyperbaton. Similarly, he often resorts to this method in original texts.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document