Rethinking Verb Second and Nominative case assignment

2020 ◽  
pp. 575-593
Author(s):  
Ermenegildo Bidese ◽  
Andrea Padovan ◽  
Alessandra Tomaselli
Keyword(s):  
Heritage Language ◽  
Recent Literature ◽  
Verb Second ◽  
Nominative Case ◽  
Case Assignment ◽  
Spreading Model ◽  
Traditional Argument ◽  
Case Licensing ◽  
Finite Verb

Cimbrian is a German(ic) VO heritage language that does not display the linear V2 restriction: the DP subject can show up before the finite verb together with other constituents, while German-like verb-subject inversion only obtains with clitic pronouns. In recent literature on Cimbrian, pronominal subject inversion has been taken as a traditional argument in favour of mandatory V-to-C movement (assuming a split-C configuration). Building on this assumption, the syntax of the enclitic expletive subject, -da/-ta, (which shows up whenever the DP subject does not raise in the C-domain) makes the Cimbrian data particularly relevant, since it casts light on the correlation between V2 and Nominative case licensing. The stance in this chapter is that Nominative case in Cimbrian is assigned by C—as generally assumed for Germanic V2 languages—but in an idiosyncratic way: (i) it applies within the C domain, i.e. FinP; (ii) expletive -da/-ta absorbs Nominative case and acts as a defective goal with respect to the ‘low’ subject. On the basis of the feature-spreading model in Ouali (2008), the phasal head C in Cimbrian is taken to ‘KEEP’ its relevant ϕ‎- and T-features, to assign Nominative case in [Spec,FinP], and to triggering mandatory V-movement.

Two locations for negation

2009 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 205-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sadaf Munshi ◽  
Rajesh Bhatt
Keyword(s):  
Verb Second ◽  
High Position ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Finite Verb ◽  
Structural Positions

Kashmiri has two structural positions for negation: a high position associated with focus and a low position associated with tense. In verb second environments, the difference between these two positions is neutralized on the surface and irrespective of the location where negation is generated, it appears as a suffix on the finite verb. But in non-verb second environments such as conditionals and correlatives the two negations can be teased apart. In these environments, the high negation appears as a suffix on material such as relative phrases and the conditional marker while the low negation appears as a suffix on the finite verb. The high vs. low distinction has semantic implications: in certain environments where the negation is arguably ‘expletive’, negation can only be high.

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.

Intransitivity and the Development of Ergative Alignment

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edith Aldridge
Keyword(s):  
Common Source ◽  
External Argument ◽  
Nominative Case ◽  
Possessive Constructions ◽  
Case Licensing ◽  
Inherent Case ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Genitive Case

This chapter surveys pathways that have been proposed for how ergative alignment develops diachronically in an accusative language. The most common source cited for ergative alignment is a clausal nominalization. This is because the v (or n) in the nominalization has the same case-licensing featural composition as transitive v in an ergative language: 1) the external argument in the specifier is assigned inherent (typically genitive) case; and 2) there is no structural licensing capability for an object. After reanalysis, the external argument continues to receive inherent case, and the object values nominative case with T, resulting in an ergative pattern in transitive clauses. Other proposed sources are also typically intransitive constructions lacking accusative objects and in which the external argument is assigned inherent case or is packaged as a PP, for example possessive constructions and passives

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.

Case and word order in Lithuanian

2006 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 239-288 ◽  
Author(s):  
STEVEN FRANKS ◽  
JAMES E. LAVINE
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Unusual Case ◽  
Clause Structure ◽  
Case Assignment ◽  
General Clause ◽  
Direct Objects ◽  
Case Licensing ◽  
Do So

This paper examines the unusual case and word order behavior of objects of infinitives in Lithuanian. In addition to lexically determined case idiosyncrasy, Lithuanian exhibits syntactically determined case idiosyncrasy: with infinitives in three distinct constructions, case possibilities other than accusative obtain. These cases (dative, genitive, and nominative) depend on the general clause structure rather than on the particular infinitive. Moreover, unlike ordinary direct objects, these objects appear in a position preceding rather than following the verb. It is argued that they move to this position in order potentially to be accessible for Case assignment by some higher Case-assigning head. In this way we unify the two superficially unrelated properties of non-canonical word order and Case. This movement, however, is not feature-driven in the sense of standard minimalist Case-licensing mechanisms. We characterize it as ‘agnostic’ in that it applies to an object with unvalued Case features, if that object reaches a point in the derivation where it has no recourse but to move because failure to do so would be fatal.

Accord, Chaines Impersonnelles Et Variables

1983 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Yves Pollock
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Morphological Properties ◽  
Binding Theory ◽  
General Constraint ◽  
Nominative Case ◽  
Case Assignment ◽  
Assignment Rule ◽  
French And English ◽  
Government Binding

The present paper has two intimately connected goals; It aims at contributing to Chomsky's "Government Binding Theory" and also at providing a fairly detailed comparative analysis of French and English impersonal constructions. Its contribution comes under the guise of (a) an Agreement Theory (see section 2), (b) a general constraint on impersonal chains (see (72)) and (c) a new nominative Case assignment rule: it is suggested that in French and Italian (but not in English) "ergative verbs" (in Burzio (1981) 'sense) can assign nominative Case to their "object". Furthermore, as has become standard in recent comparative work in the GB framework, the paper attempts to isolate the parameters that are responsible for the minimally distinct properties of the constructions under investigation. It is shown here that they can be traced back to the interplay of a Case parameter, the morphological properties of expletive elements (il vs there) and the properties of Universal Grammar.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document