The assertion analysis of declarative Verb Second

2020 ◽  
pp. 265-280
Author(s):  
Marit Julien
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Initial Position ◽  
Illocutionary Force ◽  
Verb Second ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Verb Movement ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Root Properties ◽  
Finite Verb

This chapter addresses the assertion analysis of Mainland Scandinavian embedded declarative V2 clauses. These clauses are identified by having the finite verb preceding all sentence adverbials and/or having a non-subject in initial position. Whereas this word order is mainly found in that-clauses embedded under certain predicates in modern Mainland Scandinavian, it was more generally allowed in Old Scandinavian. The Old Scandinavian word order arguably involved verb movement to the inflectional domain. In modern Mainland Scandinavian it necessarily involves movement to the C-domain, which means that embedded V2 clauses have root properties. On this analysis, they are asserted, and both the illocutionary force and the V2 order are consequences of the presence of a Force head. For most speakers of modern Mainland Scandinavian, direct or indirect assertions can be embedded whenever they are compatible with the semantics of the matrix clause.

A different perspective on embedded Verb Second

2020 ◽  
pp. 297-322
Author(s):  
Rebecca Woods
Keyword(s):  
Speech Act ◽  
Illocutionary Force ◽  
Verb Second ◽  
Verb Movement ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Embedded Clause ◽  
Matrix Verb

This chapter compares embedded verb movement phenomena in English with embedded Verb Second clauses in German and Swedish. Close examination of the syntactic—but more particularly the semantic and pragmatic—properties of these phenomena reveals striking similarities, and the claim is made that these phenomena exhibit independent illocutionary force in the sense that the perspective holder for the embedded proposition or question is disambiguated—a departure from the claim that embedded verb movement structures are asserted (cf. Julien 2015 and Chapter 11 of this volume). It is proposed, following recent innovations in speech act syntax (Wiltschko and Heim 2016; Woods 2016) that these structures are dependent, as the ‘embedded’ clause contains less structure than full a root clause, yet is still structurally larger than a typical embedded clause. However, they are not selected and are instead in an apposition relation with a (usually covert) nominal complement to the matrix verb.

Subordinate clauses

2019 ◽  
pp. 237-288
Author(s):  
Jan Terje Faarlund
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Main Clause ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Subordinate Clauses ◽  
Different Types ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Infinitival Clauses ◽  
Finite Verb ◽  
Nominal Clauses

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.

scholarly journals Diagnosing embedded V2 in Old English and Old French

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Meklenborg Salvesen ◽  
George Walkden
Keyword(s):  
Old English ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Old French ◽  
Left Periphery ◽  
Verb Second ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Matrix Verb ◽  
Finite Verb

Old English (OE) and Old French (OF) both display verb-second (V2) word order in main declarative clauses. Different models may account for V2: (a) the finite verb must move to a head in the CP field; (b) it must remain in the IP field; or (c) it moves to the left periphery only when the preceding XP is not a subject. While the IP-model should allow free embedded V2, the two others would either exclude completely or strongly limit the possibilty of having embedded V2. We select embedded that-clauses and analyse the word order with respect to the matrix verb: embedded V2 is possible in both OE and OF, although the availability of this structure is restricted. OE has very few occurrences of embedded V2, whereas OF seems to permit this construction more freely. We link this difference to the site of first Merge of complementizers in the two languages.

scholarly journals On the Acquisition of Word Order in WH-Questions in theTromsø Dialect

Nordlyd ◽  
10.7557/12.48 ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marit Richardsen Westergaard
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Information Structure ◽  
Verb Second ◽  
Verb Movement ◽  
Syntactic Form ◽  
Wh Questions

This article reports on a study of three children acquiring a dialect of Norwegian which allows two different word orders in certain types of WH-questions, verb second (V2) and and verb third (V3). The latter is only allowed after monosyllabic WH-words, while the former, which is the result of verb movement, is the word order found in all other main clauses in the language. It is shown that both V2 and V3 are acquired extremely early by the children in the study (before the age of two), and that subtle distinctions between the two orders with respect to information structure are attested from the beginning. However, it is argued that V3 word order, which should be ìsimplerî than the V2 structure as it does not involve verb movement, is nevertheless acquired slightly later in its full syntactic form. This is taken as an indication that the V3 structure is syntactically more complex, and possibly also more marked.

The scope of embedded Verb Second in modern Yiddish

2020 ◽  
pp. 665-681
Author(s):  
Molly Diesing ◽  
Beatrice Santorini
Keyword(s):  
Native Speaker ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Verb Second ◽  
Verb Movement ◽  
Embedded Clauses ◽  
Finite Verb

Embedded Verb Second (V2) clauses have been analysed as embedded main clauses or in terms of selection. This chapter presents data from both corpora and native speaker judgements showing that Verb Second order in embedded clauses in Yiddish goes well beyond what can be explained by either of the above approaches, with V2 possible and attested in interrogatives as well as declaratives. Adjunction of adverbials to V2 clauses is possible as well, yielding orders with the finite verb in third position (V3). But V3 resulting from lack of verb movement, as is seen in Mainland Scandinavian and (optionally) in Icelandic, is not found.

Verb-third in Otfrid’s Evangelienbuch

2018 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-98
Author(s):  
Katerina Somers
Keyword(s):  
Old High German ◽  
Verb Second ◽  
Verb Movement ◽  
The Status ◽  
Finite Verb

Abstract This article investigates the status of so-called verb-final declaratives in Otfrid’s Evangelienbuch, with a focus on whether clauses in which there is no apparent subordinator and the finite verb occurs later than the expected verb-first or verb-second position can be treated as verb-third (V3) clauses, as they are defined for Old High German in works such as Axel (2007) and Tomaselli (1995). Drawing on a set of 746 clauses, I argue that there is no evidence that the finite verbs in these clauses have undergone verb movement, as is claimed in the aforementioned works, nor are the asyndetic verb-late clauses with a verb in surface third position consistent with the patterns identified in the generative literature for the V3 type.

Adverbial clauses and V3

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (s3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva Csipak
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Speech Act ◽  
The Other ◽  
Order Effects ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Pragmatic Analysis ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Adverbial Clauses ◽  
Biscuit Conditionals

AbstractThis paper discusses word order effects in German adverbial clauses: often, the matrix clause can exhibit either V2 or V3 word order. I argue that adverbial clauses with V3 word order have an obligatory ‘biscuit’ interpretation and receive a speech act modifying interpretation, as has previously only been argued for ‘biscuit conditionals’. I show that this phenomenon holds more generally. On the other hand, a pragmatic analysis for V2 biscuit conditionals remains necessary.

Norwegian (non-V2) declaratives, resumptive elements, and the Wackernagel position

2011 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristin Melum Eide
Keyword(s):  
Illocutionary Force ◽  
Light Particle ◽  
Light Elements ◽  
Verb Second ◽  
European Languages ◽  
Left Dislocation ◽  
Topic Shift ◽  
Finite Verb

Most Norwegian declaratives are subject-initial verb second (V2) clauses. This paper discusses declaratives that can be construed as non-V2, two constructions that have traditionally been analyzed as left dislocation phenomena: the (adjunctive)så-construction and the Copy Left Dislocation (CLD) construction, where the ‘copy’ is a weak pronoun. Both constructions share an affinity to root clauses, have particular scope effects, and employ a prosodically light particle between the topicalized phrase and the finite verb in V2 (såand a weak pronoun, respectively). The paper attributes these properties to the fact that the relevant particles are topic markers of a particular kind; they mark A-topics. A-Topics signal a topic-shift in the conversation and are confined to clauses with illocutionary force (Bianchi & Frascarelli 2010). The aforementioned particles are much more frequent in spoken contexts than in written prose, and I propose that this is because they depend on prosody. They are obligatorily light, and they occur in the part of the clause that has traditionally been described as ‘the Wackernagel position’. Wackernagel (1892) proposed that certain prosodically light elements (clitics in particular) tend to occur in the second position in Indo-European languages. Although the resumptive elements of theså-construction and especially of CLDs may not be fully-fledged clitics, like clitics, they appear in the second position of declaratives.

Syntactic and Prosodic Reflexes of Information Structure in Germanic

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gisbert Fanselow
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Information Structure ◽  
Acoustic Properties ◽  
Verb Second ◽  
Left Edge ◽  
Word Order Variation ◽  
Order Variation ◽  
Germanic Languages ◽  
Finite Verb

This chapter deals with syntactic and prosodic reflexes of information structure in the Germanic languages. It begins with an overview of givenness and word order variation in the TP, along with aboutness topics and the prosodic prominence of topics and foci. It then considers the postulation of a focus head in Germanic and how contrast seems to intensify the acoustic properties of topics and foci. It shows how the left edge of verb second clauses acts as a slot for placing contrastive elements in all Germanic languages, but that the position is also filled on purely formal grounds. The article also describes the conditions of information structure that decide whether an XP can go to the position preceding the finite verb/auxiliary in the verb second (V2) constructions. Finally, it discusses two types of V2 constructions: unrestricted V2 constructions and pragmatically restricted V2 constructions.

Variable V2 in Norwegian heritage language

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marit Westergaard ◽  
Terje Lohndal ◽  
Björn Lundquist
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Spontaneous Speech ◽  
The Other ◽  
Verb Second ◽  
Verb Movement ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Dominant Language ◽  
Crosslinguistic Influence

Abstract This paper discusses possible attrition of verb second (V2) word order in Norwegian heritage language by investigating a corpus of spontaneous speech produced by 50 2nd–4th generation heritage speakers in North America. The study confirms previous findings that V2 word order is generally stable in heritage situations, but nevertheless finds approximately 10% V2 violations. The cases of non-V2 word order are argued to be due to lack of activation of the heritage language grammar, making it vulnerable to crosslinguistic influence from the speakers’ dominant language. This crosslinguistic influence does not simply replace V2 by non-V2, but is argued to operate more indirectly, affecting (a) the distribution of contexts for V2 word order, and (b) introducing two new distinctions into the heritage language, one (indirectly) based on a similar distinction in the dominant language (a difference between adverbs and negation with respect to verb movement), the other based on frequency of initial elements triggering V2 in non-subject-initial declaratives. Together, these findings also indicate that crosslinguistic influence affects different contexts of V2 differently, providing support for analyses that treat V2 word order as the result of many smaller rules.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document