Aspects of the syntax of ce in French copular sentences

2019 ◽  
pp. 153-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabelle Roy ◽  
Ur Shlonsky
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Syntactic Analysis ◽  
Subject Positions ◽  
Relativized Minimality ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Syntactic Constraints ◽  
Copular Sentences ◽  
Copular Sentence

This chapter offers a syntactic analysis of French ce in copular constructions. It is argued that the distribution of ce is best understood in terms of the conditions on the agree operation inside the copular sentence. The proform ce, an expletive, is inserted whenever an agreement relationship cannot be established between an element in the subject position and an element from the PredP (Bowers 1993). Two sources of agreement failure are considered. In one case, agreement failure results from syntactic constraints on movement (Relativized Minimality, criterial freezing) together with focalization. In the other case, agreement failure results from the absence of accessible phi-features on the subject, possibly as the result of a grammatical shift taking place at the interface. This chapter further highlights the relevance of two subject positions (Subj1 and Subj2) each with their own interpretational properties.

Justifications of citizens’ subject positions in public debates on welfare

2016 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janne Mikael Autto ◽  
Jukka Törrönen
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Day Care ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Social Situations ◽  
Welfare Policies ◽  
Subject Positions ◽  
Public Debates ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Welfare State

Foucault’s work has inspired studies examining how subject positions are constructed for citizens of the welfare state that encourage them to adopt the subject position of active and responsible people or consumers. Yet these studies are often criticised for analysing these subject positions as coherent constructions without considering how their construction varies from one situation to another. This paper develops the concept of subject position in relation to the theory of justification and the concept of modality in order to achieve a more sensitive and nuanced analysis of the politics of welfare in public debates. The theory of justification places greater weight on actors’ competence in social situations. It helps to reveal how justifications and critiques of welfare policies are based on the skilful contextual combination of diverse normative bases. The concept of modality, in turn, makes it possible to elaborate how subject positions in justifications and critiques of welfare policies become associated with specific kinds of values. We demonstrate the approach by using public debates on children’s day care in Finland. The analysis illustrates how subject positions are justified in relation to different kinds of worlds and made persuasive by connecting them to commonly desirable rights, responsibilities, competences or abilities.

scholarly journals Re-rigging Othering: Subversive Infantilisation in Contemporary Bosnian-Herzegovinian Prose

2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (7) ◽  
pp. 1259-1273
Author(s):  
Fedja Borčak
Keyword(s):  
Mass Media ◽  
Bosnia And Herzegovina ◽  
The Other ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Literary Texts ◽  
Western Discourse ◽  
The World ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Way

In this article I put forward the concept of subversive infantilisation to designate a phenomenon in contemporary Bosnian literature, which by using a certain kind of childish outlook on the world undermines paternalistic and balkanist Western discourse on Bosnia and Herzegovina. By analysing primarily the portrayal of the role of mass media in a few literary texts, principally books by Nenad Veličkovié and Miljenko Jergovié, I highlight the way in which these texts “re-rig” and by means of irony and exaggeration illuminate the problematic logic inherent in the subject position from which one represents the other. Textual characteristics of subversive infantilisation are contextualised further and seen as a discursive continuation of experiences of the 1990s war in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Copular Constructions in Syntax

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcel den Dikken ◽  
Teresa O’Neill
Keyword(s):  
Research Agenda ◽  
Syntactic Structure ◽  
The Other ◽  
Classical Antiquity ◽  
Linear Ordering ◽  
Theory Construction ◽  
Surface Distribution ◽  
Considerable Controversy ◽  
Copular Sentences ◽  
Copular Sentence

Copular sentences (sentences of the form A is B) have been prominent on the research agenda for linguists and philosophers of language since classical antiquity, and continue to be shrouded in considerable controversy. Central questions in the linguistic literature on copulas and copular sentences are (a) whether predicational, specificational, identificational, and equative copular sentences have a common underlying source; and, if so, (b) how the various surface types of copular sentences are derived from that underlier; (c) whether there is a typology of copulas; and (d) whether copulas are meaningful or meaningless. The debate surrounding the postulation of multiple copular sentence types relies on criteria related to both meaning and form. Analyses based on meaning tend to focus on the question of whether or not one of the terms is a predicate of the other, whether or not the copula contributes meaning, and the information-structural properties of the construction. Analyses based on form focus on the flexibility of the linear ordering of the two terms of the construction, the surface distribution of the copular element, the restrictions imposed on the extraction of the two terms, the case and agreement properties of the construction, the omissibility of the copula or one of the two terms, and the connectivity effects exhibited by the construction. Morphosyntactic variation in the domain of copular elements is an area of research with fruitful intersections between typological and generative approaches. A variety of criteria are presented in the literature to justify the postulation of multiple copulas or underlying representations for copular sentences. Another prolific body of research concerns the semantics of copular sentences. In the assessment of scholarship on copulas and copular sentences, the article critiques the ‘multiple copulas’ approach and examines ways in which the surface variety of copular sentence types can be accounted for in a ‘single copula’ analysis. The analysis of copular constructions continues to have far-reaching consequences in the context of linguistic theory construction, particularly the question of how a predicate combines with its subject in syntactic structure.

Predicational and specificational copular sentences in Logoori

2019 ◽  
pp. 243-260
Author(s):  
Nicoletta Loccioni
Keyword(s):  
Inverse Analysis ◽  
The Other ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Crucial Difference ◽  
Copular Sentences

This chapter presents data from Logoori (Bantu) which shows morphosyntactic evidence for two different strategies in place in copular sentences. Unlike English, Logoori predicational and specificational copular sentences do not (have to) have a similar surface syntax. It is claimed that the crucial difference does not rest on two distinct types of underlying predicational structures, rather it is the result of two different derivations. In Logoori, when the referential phrase is in a precopular position, it can either occupy the canonical subject position or (in some cases) it can be dislocated. On the other hand, when the predicative phrase is in precopular position it can only occupy a dislocated position, supporting an inverse analysis for specificational (and identificational) copular sentences in which the predicate must be dislocated outside the TP, much in the spirit of Moro (1997).

Relative inversion and non-verb-initial imperatives in Early Modern Swedish

2013 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Magnusson Petzell
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Additional Assumption ◽  
Structural Difference ◽  
Initial Position ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Subject Positions ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Syntactic Differences

This article deals with two syntactic differences between Present-Day Swedish (PDSw) and Early Modern Swedish (EMSw): first, only EMSw allows VS and XVS word order to occur in relative clauses; second, only EMSw permits non-verb-initial imperatives. One structural difference between the varieties is assumed to be a prerequisite for all these word order differences: the subject position was spec-TP in EMSw but is spec-FinP in PDSw. Only the lower position (spec-TP) is compatible with inversion (VS) and fronting of non-subjects (XVS) in relative clauses as well as with imperative clauses having elements other than the imperative verb in the initial position. To be able to account for the latter phenomenon, however, an additional assumption is needed: the imperative type-feature, [imp], always accompanies the verb in PDSw but is tied to an operator in EMSw. The first assumption about differing subject positions is independently motivated by findings already in the previous literature. The second assumption about the differing behaviour of [imp] in the two varieties is supported by the distribution of imperative verbs over a wider range of syntactic contexts in EMSw than in PDSw.

Patients as `Safeguard' and Nurses as `Substitute' in Home Health Care

2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 219-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stina Öresland ◽  
Sylvia Määttä ◽  
Astrid Norberg ◽  
Kim Lützén
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Home Health Care ◽  
Analytical Method ◽  
Home Health ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Subject Positions ◽  
The Subject ◽  
To Receive

One aim of this study was to explore the role, or subject position, patients take in the care they receive from nurses in their own home. Another was to examine the subject position that patients say the nurses take when giving care to them in their own home. Ten interviews were analysed and interpreted according to a discourse analytical method. The findings show that patients constructed their subject position as `safeguard', and the nurses' subject position as `substitute' for themselves. These subject positions provided the opportunities, and the obstacles, for the patients' possibilities to receive care in their home. The subject positions described have ethical repercussions and illuminate that the patients put great demands on tailored care.

scholarly journals Specificational Copular Sentences in Russian and English

2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara H Partee
Keyword(s):  
Recent Work ◽  
Information Structure ◽  
Initial Position ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Left Periphery ◽  
Budget Cuts ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Copular Sentences ◽  
Specificational Sentences ◽  
Predicate Type

The Russian sentence (1), from Padučeva and Uspensky (1979), and English (2) are examples of specificational copular sentences: NP2 provides the ‘specification’, or ‘value’ of the description given by NP1. (1) Vladelec ètogo osobnjaka – juvelir Fužere. owner-NOM this-GEN mansion-GEN jeweler-NOM Fuzhere ‘The owner of this mansion is the jeweler Fuzhere.’ (2) The biggest problem is the recent budget cuts. Williams (1983) and Partee (1986) argued that specificational sentences like (2) result from “inversion around the copula”: that NP1 is a predicate (type ) and NP2 is the subject, a referential expression of type e. Partee (1999) argued that such an analysis is right for Russian, citing arguments from Padučeva and Uspensky (1979) that NP2 is the subject of sentence (1). But in that paper I argued that differences between Russian and English suggest that in English there is no such inversion, contra Williams (1983) and Partee (1986): the subject of (2) is NP1, and both NPs are of type e, but with NP1 less referential than NP2, perhaps “attributive”. Now, based on classic work by Roger Higgins on English and by Paducheva and Uspensky on Russian, and on a wealth of recent work by Mikkelsen, Geist, Romero, Schlenker, and others, a reexamination the semantics and structure of specificational copular sentences in Russian and English in a typological perspective supports a partly different set of conclusions: (i) NP1 is of type and NP2 is of type e in both English and Russian; (ii) but NP1 is subject in English, while NP2 is subject in Russian; and (iii) NP1 in specificational sentences is universally topical (discourse-old), but only in some languages (like English) is that accomplished by putting NP1 into canonical subject position. In other words, both English (2) and Russian (1) move the -type NP1 into some sentence-initial position for information-structure reasons, but in English NP1 ends up as syntactic subject, whereas in Russian, it’s inverted into some other left-periphery position.

scholarly journals Using institutional entrepreneurship to understand the role of innovation teams in healthcare: a longitudinal qualitative study

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. e046750
Author(s):  
Angela Melder ◽  
Ian Mcloughlin ◽  
Tracy Robinson ◽  
Rick Iedema ◽  
Helena J Teede
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Hospital Setting ◽  
Transformational Change ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
The Other ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Institutional Entrepreneurship ◽  
Subject Positions ◽  
Service Redesign ◽  
Innovation Teams

ObjectivesWe draw on institutional theory to explore the roles and actions of innovation teams and how this influences their behaviour and capabilities as ‘institutional entrepreneurs (IEs)’, in particular the extent to which they are both ‘willing’ and ‘able’ to facilitate transformational change in healthcare through service redesign.DesignA longitudinal qualitative study that applied a ‘researcher in residence’ as an ethnographic approach.SettingThe development and implementation of two innovation projects within a single public hospital setting in an Australian state jurisdiction.ParticipantsTwo innovation teams, with members including senior research fellows, PhD scholars and front-line clinicians (19 participants and 47 interviews).ResultsDespite being from the same hospital, the two innovation teams occupied contrasting subject positions with one facilitating transformational improvements in service delivery, while the other sought more conservative improvements. Cast as ‘IEs’ we show how one team took steps to build legitimacy for their interventions enabling spread and scale in improvements and how, in the other case, failure to build legitimacy resulted in unintended consequences which undermined the sustainability of the improvements achieved.ConclusionsAdopting an institutional approach provided insight into the ‘willingness’ and ‘ability’ to facilitate transformational change in healthcare through service redesign. The manner in which innovation teams operate from different subject positions influences the structural and normative legitimacy afforded to their activities. Specifically, we observed that those with the most power (organisational or professional) to bring about transformational change can be the least willing to do so in ways which challenge current practice. Those most willing to challenge the status quo (more peripheral organisation members or professionals) can be least able to deliver transformation. Better understanding of these insights can inform healthcare leaders in supporting innovation team efforts, considering their subject position.

scholarly journals Involuntary Syntactic Error of Interlingual Word Order When English Rigid Word Order Momentarily Deforms Arabic Clauses

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Saleh Jarallah AlQahtani
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
English Word ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Determiner Phrases ◽  
Subject Positions ◽  
Standard Arabic ◽  
Guided Writing ◽  
Improper Use ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Writing Task

This paper intends to explore the potential momentary influence of English rigid word order on the placement of Arabic preverbal subjects. The idea is that English as a Subject-Verb-Object language has one subject position; thus, it poses no the distribution of determiner phrases in this position. By contrast, Standard Arabic (henceforth, Arabic) uses two different word orders (Subject-Verb/Verb-Subject-(Object), SVO/VSO). As a result, indefinite determiner phrases are not freely distributed in the subject position; that is, they can appear in the postverbal subject position -VSO but not in the preverbal subject position -SVO. Because the two languages use different syntactic word orders and different subject positions, two experimental tasks (an Arabic guided writing task and an English-to-Arabic translation written task) were administered to find out whether the English word order momentarily causes Arabic learners of English to violate their language subject distributions. Analysis of the performance of Arabic native participants in the two tasks revealed two important outcomes: a) when participants were asked to reorder scrambled words into full clauses, they significantly preferred VSO order; in contrast, b) when participants were asked to translate full English clauses into Arabic, they strikingly preferred SVO order violating syntactic parametric (distributional) restrictions on the placement of indefinite determiner phrases. In other words, they used indefinite determiner phrases in the preverbal subject position. Based on the results, the study argues that the improper use of indefinite determiner phrases in the preverbal subject position is not due to the implicit knowledge of Arabic grammar; it is due to the momentary influence of English syntactic word order involuntarily exerted by participants.

scholarly journals Subject Relatives and Expletives in Early New High German

2010 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caitlin Light
Keyword(s):  
Subject Position ◽  
Clause Structure ◽  
Subject Positions ◽  
Base Position ◽  
Logical Subject ◽  
Traditional Sense ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Early New High German

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt:The status of the subject position in German has been the source of some debate.1 For example, some studies (Biberauer 2004; Richards and Biberauer 2005) have argued that German does not have an EPP requirement in the traditional sense. The absence of an expletive that occurs specifically in the subject position (as opposed to the topic position in Spec,CP) seems to support the argument that Spec,TP has no special status in German. This paper will argue against such analyses, and show that in historical stages of German, we see evidence of a subject expletive licensed specifically to fill Spec,TP. This expletive, da in Early New High German (ENHG), is merged specifically when the logical subject does not move to Spec,TP, leaving the position empty. This supports a traditional analysis of the EPP in German. Furthermore, I will show that the existence of expletive da lends support to the argument that two (non-topic) subject positions are available in the German clause structure (cf. Haeberli 1999, 2000, 2005), which I take to be Spec,TP and Spec,vP (the base position of the subject).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document