scholarly journals The Morphosyntax of Embedded Clauses in Western Neo-Aramaic: Arabic Influence or Retention from Older Aramaic?

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-54
Author(s):  
Ivri J. Bunis
Keyword(s):  
Direct Object ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Embedded Clauses ◽  
Embedded Clause ◽  
Purpose Clauses ◽  
Aramaic Dialects

Abstract The article asks whether the morphosyntax of embedded direct object clauses and purpose clauses in Western Neo-Aramaic reflects retention from older stages of Aramaic, or innovation under the influence of contact Arabic. To this end, direct object clauses and purpose clauses are analysed in Western Neo-Aramaic, in older stages of Aramaic, namely, Old, Official, Biblical and Qumran Aramaic, as well as Syriac, the three Western Late Aramaic dialects (CPA, JPA, SA), and in contemporaneous Syrian Arabic. The analysis considers the embedded verb form, the formal means of linking the embedded clause to the matrix clause, and the co-referentiality of the matrix and embedded subjects, and relates these features to tense-aspect-mood. The article compares the constructions in the various sources of Aramaic and Syrian Arabic and finds features that Western Neo-Aramaic has retained from Late Aramaic, which differ from Syrian Arabic, despite the well documented influence of the latter.

Scope Marking at the Syntax-Semantics Interface

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veneeta Dayal ◽  
Deepak Alok
Keyword(s):  
Syntactic Structure ◽  
Semantic Interpretation ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Ongoing Research ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
Embedded Clauses ◽  
Embedded Clause ◽  
Semantic Properties

Natural language allows questioning into embedded clauses. One strategy for doing so involves structures like the following: [CP-1 whi [TP DP V [CP-2 … ti …]]], where a wh-phrase that thematically belongs to the embedded clause appears in the matrix scope position. A possible answer to such a question must specify values for the fronted wh-phrase. This is the extraction strategy seen in languages like English. An alternative strategy involves a structure in which there is a distinct wh-phrase in the matrix clause. It is manifested in two types of structures. One is a close analog of extraction, but for the extra wh-phrase: [CP-1 whi [TP DP V [CP-2 whj [TP…t­j­…]]]]. The other simply juxtaposes two questions, rather than syntactically subordinating the second one: [CP-3 [CP-1 whi [TP…]] [CP-2 whj [TP…]]]. In both versions of the second strategy, the wh-phrase in CP-1 is invariant, typically corresponding to the wh-phrase used to question propositional arguments. There is no restriction on the type or number of wh-phrases in CP-2. Possible answers must specify values for all the wh-phrases in CP-2. This strategy is variously known as scope marking, partial wh movement or expletive wh questions. Both strategies can occur in the same language. German, for example, instantiates all three possibilities: extraction, subordinated, as well as sequential scope marking. The scope marking strategy is also manifested in in-situ languages. Scope marking has been subjected to 30 years of research and much is known at this time about its syntactic and semantic properties. Its pragmatics properties, however, are relatively under-studied. The acquisition of scope marking, in relation to extraction, is another area of ongoing research. One of the reasons why scope marking has intrigued linguists is because it seems to defy central tenets about the nature of wh scope taking. For example, it presents an apparent mismatch between the number of wh expressions in the question and the number of expressions whose values are specified in the answer. It poses a challenge for our understanding of how syntactic structure feeds semantic interpretation and how alternative strategies with similar functions relate to each other.

Equidistance returns

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 413-461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Longenbaugh ◽  
Maria Polinsky
Keyword(s):  
Subject Position ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Object Shift ◽  
Case System ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Case Licensing ◽  
Embedded Clause ◽  
Text Content ◽  
Semantic Object

Abstract Modern generative linguistic theory furnishes a variety of general principles that appear to be at work in the grammar of all the world’s languages. One of the most basic and uncontroversial of these principles is that Agree/Move operates according to the constraint Attract Closest, which dictates that the closest suitable goal must be the target for the relevant operation (Rizzi 1990; Chomsky 1995, 2000; Richards 1998). The Polynesian language Niuean (Tongic subgroup, predicate initial word order, ergative-absolutive case system) presents a well known challenge to the universality of {Attract Closest}. The challenge manifests in a variety of distinct constructions in Niuean, but the best known case involves an operation first documented by Seiter (1980), which he terms “raising.” Specifically, Niuean raising appears to license an A-type dependency between the subject position of the matrix clause and the object position of an immediately embedded clause. This is illustrated in (1), where the semantic object of the embedded subjunctive clause, Sione, appears as the syntactic subject of the matrix predicate maeke. (1) To maeke a Sione$_{1}$ [ke lagomatai he ekekafo $t_{1}$]. fut possible abs Sione sbj help erg doctor ‘It’s possible the doctor can help Sione.’ (lit.: Sione is possible that the doctor help [him]) Granting that the filler-gap dependency in (1) is A-type, this is both a clear violation of {Attract closest} (Rizzi 1992; Chomsky 1995; Richards 1998) and a typological anomaly. Our aim in this paper is to argue that such apparent violations of {Attract Closest} are only that. Specifically, we show first that the challenge inherent in Seiter’s raising construction is pervasive throughout the language: in general, objects are accessible to syntactic operations even if the intervening clause-mate subject is also a licit target. In other words, Niuean clause-mate subjects and objects are equally accessible to syntactic operations. Then, we argue that this typologically uncommon equal-accessibility follows from the convergence of several otherwise independently attested operations: (i) a configurational system of case licensing, with a $v$P as the case computation domain; (ii) obligatory object shift to Spec($v$P); (iii) an EPP on T triggering V/VP-raising rather than DP externalization. The resulting basic clause structure is then as below, so that Niuean adheres to standard locality constraints. (2)

scholarly journals Featural definition of syntactic positions: Evidence from hyper-raising

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzana Fong
Keyword(s):  
Phase Problem ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Embedded Clause ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Finite Clause

Hyper-raising consists in raising a DP from an embedded finite clause into the matrix clause. HR introduces a phase problem: the embedded clause is finite, which is supposed to be impervious to raising. This can be overcome by postulating A-features at the C of the the embedded clause. They trigger the movement of the subject to [Spec, CP]. Being at the edge of a phase, it is visible to a matrix probe. If successful, this analysis provides support for the claim that syntactic positions are not inherently A or A-bar; they can be defined featurally instead.

Regular and copular fragments in Basaá

Linguistics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 57 (5) ◽  
pp. 915-966 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Roger Bassong
Keyword(s):  
Left Periphery ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Polarity Item ◽  
Regular Source ◽  
Fragment Answers ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Embedded Clause ◽  
Crosslinguistic Variation ◽  
New Evidence ◽  
Different Sources

Abstract The aim of this Article is to propose that fragment answers in Basaá (Bantu) derive from two different sources, namely, a regular source and a copular source. Regular fragments are those that are derived by movement of a Negative Polarity Item (NPI) or a CP complement to the left periphery of the clause followed by clausal ellipsis (Merchant 2004 and related work). Conversely, copular fragments involve a biclausal structure whereby the focalized fragment, no matter the syntactic function it fulfills in clause structure, finally ends up being the subject of the null verbal copula of the main clause. The fragment is initially selected as the external argument of the null verbal copula within the matrix VP along the lines of the VP-Internal Subject Hypothesis (Koopman and Sportiche 1991). From Spec-VP it raises to Spec-TP to satisfy the EPP requirements. The internal argument of the null copula is a headless relative in which a relative operator (covert/overt) moves to Spec-CP, a position above FocP the target of ellipsis. This gives rise to a structure whereby the fragment answer in the matrix clause and the relative operator in the embedded clause resist ellipsis. The analysis also provides semantic evidence that copular fragments are not clefts. The ellipsis approach is supported by a range of grammatical properties such as connectivity effects, locality constraints and subcategorization requirements. This paper is not only a contribution to Merchant’s (2004) ellipsis approach but it also provides new evidence for our understanding of the crosslinguistic variation of ellipsis.

scholarly journals On the semantics of when-clauses

2010 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 544
Author(s):  
David Patrick Hall ◽  
Ivano Caponigro
Keyword(s):  
Main Idea ◽  
The Other ◽  
Semantic Interpretation ◽  
Semantic Mapping ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Formal Identity ◽  
Free Relative ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Embedded Clauses ◽  
Interrogative Clauses

This paper is about non-interrogative temporal embedded clauses introduced by when (temporal when-clauses), their semantic interpretation and their syntax/semantics mapping. Our goal is to provide a fully compositional account of temporal when-clauses that accounts for their formal identity with interrogative clauses and their difference in meaning. The main idea is that temporal when-clauses are syntactically and semantically free relative clauses. Previous syntactic analyses (Grimshaw 1977, Bresnan and Grimshaw 1978, a.o) have provided robust support to the syntactic side of this claim. On the other hand, the semantic proposals for temporal when-clauses that we are aware of (Bonomi 1997, Vikner 2004, Moens and Steedman 1988) have ignored these syntactic conclusions and have argued for analyses that are problematic for the syntactic/semantic mapping. These semantic analyses are also not fully adequate in handling the interpretative properties of these clauses. We provide evidence from the distributional and interpretive properties of when-clauses as well as from the temporal alignment of the matrix clause with the when-clause that supports our analysis.

scholarly journals Anaphora and subordination in Karitiana

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luciana Storto ◽  
Karin Vivanco
Keyword(s):  
Lexical Item ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Third Person ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Embedded Clause ◽  
Definition Of

Abstract This paper describes the behavior of the anaphoric element ta- in Karitiana (Arikém branch, Tupian family) showing that it is a third person anaphor which must be bound (c-commanded and coindexed) by an antecedent in the same sentence. ta- may occur as a possessor clitic attached to a nominal, or as a subject or object clitic attached to a verb. We show with elicited and spontaneous data that the Karitiana anaphor is subject oriented when occurring in embedded environments, being able to refer to the subject of the matrix clause or to the subject of an embedded clause in cases of multiple embedding. We analyze this lexical item as a medium-distance anaphor, following the definition of Reuland and Koster (1991). Logophoric uses of the ta- anaphor are also exemplified and briefly discussed.

Control and Thematic Agreement

2001 ◽  
Vol 46 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 9-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jila Ghomeshi
Keyword(s):  
Strong Phase ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Main Verb ◽  
Subject Agreement ◽  
Embedded Clauses ◽  
Embedded Clause ◽  
Matrix Verb ◽  
Empty Subject

AbstractIn this article it is shown that Persian has core control constructions in which the obligatorily empty subject of an embedded clause takes its reference from an antecedent in the next higher clause. Evidence is provided that these embedded clauses are relatively transparent for scrambling and lack independent tense. It is therefore argued that core control verbs in Persian take complements that lack CP, TP, and a Case position for their subjects. Control complements do manifest subject agreement, however, suggesting that agreement checking takes place within vP. The implications of this view are explored with respect to the periphrastic progressive construction, in which both the auxiliary and the main verb bear subject agreement, and raising constructions, in which preposed subjects do not trigger agreement on the matrix verb. The relevant contrast is presented in minimalist terms as the idea that agreement in Persian is checked within a strong phase (CP or vP).

Differential grammaticalization of copulas in Tsúùt’ínà and Tłı̨chǫ Yatıì

Diachronica ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-293
Author(s):  
Nicholas Welch
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
The Other ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Embedded Clause

Abstract The languages of the Dene (aka Athapaskan) family in North America almost universally employ two copular verbs. In several languages of this family, copular forms are also employed as verbal auxiliaries: forms of one copula mark clausal focus while forms of the other mark TAM (tense/aspect/mode) categories. With reference to two Dene languages in particular, Tłı̨chǫ Yatıì and Tsúùt’ínà, I explain this difference by positing distinct grammaticalization paths and motivations for each copula: both focus and TAM markers originate in a uniclausal reanalysis of biclausal constructions, the former from constructions where the matrix clause asserts the truth of the embedded clause, and the latter from those where the matrix clause supplies extra TAM information to the embedded clause. Both grammaticalizations involve an upward reanalysis of copulas as functional heads.

Microvariation in thehave yet toconstruction

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 232-279
Author(s):  
Matthew Tyler ◽  
Jim Wood
Keyword(s):  
Matrix Clause ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Face ◽  
Main Verb ◽  
Wide Scale ◽  
Embedded Clause ◽  
Treat All ◽  
Syntactic Properties ◽  
Lexical Content

AbstractThehave yet toconstruction, exemplified by sentences such asJohn has yet to visit his grandmother,is widespread across dialects of English. However, recent studies have revealed that behind this apparent unity, there is significant variation in the syntactic properties of thehave yet toconstruction. Speakers vary with respect to (i) the status ofhaveas an auxiliary or main verb, (ii) the status of negation tests, and (iii) the status of a variety of relatedyet toconstructions. The goal of this paper is to sort out the microsyntax ofhave yet toacross speakers, in the face of contradictory empirical claims and mutually incompatible proposals in the existing literature. We develop an analysis based in part on two wide-scale surveys we have conducted. With respect tohave,we show that speakers who can treat it as a main verb can also treat it as an auxiliary, but not necessarily vice-versa. We propose that the variation in this case has to do with where theperfect features are introduced in the clause. With respect to negation, we find that speakers do not treat all the negation tests the same, forcing us to contend with the question of how these tests work. We propose that for most speakers, only the embedded clause is syntactically negative. Negation tests split according to whether they must target the matrix clause, or whether they can target an embedded clause as well. In some cases, the tests reveal the same sentence to be both affirmative and negative, as we expect: the matrix clause is syntactically affirmative, but the embedded clause, which hosts the lexical content, is syntactically negative.

Langeafstandsverplaatsing in het Nederlands, Engels en Duits* : De sandwich ontleed

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-78
Author(s):  
Ankelien Schippers ◽  
Jack Hoeksema
Keyword(s):  
Generative Grammar ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Long Distance ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Corpus Data ◽  
Embedded Clause ◽  
Diachronic Development ◽  
Long Distance Movement ◽  
Dependent Clause

Abstract In this article, we present corpus data from Dutch and English on long-distance movement and discuss its diachronic development in Dutch, English and German. Long-distance movement is the displacement phenomenon characterized by the appearance of a part of a dependent clause in a higher clause (e.g. What crimes did the FBI discover he had committed?). It has played a central role within generative grammar over the past few decades. The picture that emerges is that long-distance movement appears to be currently most productive in English and least productive in German, whereas Dutch occupies an in-between position. As we will argue, the productivity of long-distance movement is strongly tied to the availability of functional alternatives. German has at least three of such alternatives that are fully productive, whereas Dutch has one particularly productive one. The alternative constructions do not involve long-distance movement: the dependency between the constituent in the matrix clause and the position in the embedded clause where it is interpreted is formed indirectly, in the semantics, and not via syntactic movement. In English, long-distance movement is most productive when the complementizer is deleted. This is not just the case for subject movement but also for non-subject movement. Special attention is paid to the so-called that-trace effect and its alleged absence in German and Dutch. The general conclusion is that long-distance movement is possible in all languages under consideration, but more restricted than commonly assumed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document