Adnominal conditionals in German

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (s3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Blümel
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Recent Analysis ◽  
Short Paper ◽  
Internal Distribution ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses ◽  
Semantic Properties

AbstractIn this short paper I give a description of salient structural and semantic properties of adnominal conditional clauses in German, drawn from online corpora (cf. Lasersohn 1996 for the English counterpart). Facts from prosody tentatively indicate, and from Binding, DP-internal distribution and extraposition more distinctively suggest, the paper’s main conclusion: Syntactically, adnominal conditionals behave like restrictive relative clauses. I sketch a recent analysis by Frana (2017), which captures important semantic properties of the construction. A restrictor analysis of conditional clauses can be retained and indeed fits snugly with the fact that only intensional nouns co-occur with, e.g. can be modified by, adnominal conditionals.

Descriptive relative clauses in Austro-Bavarian German

2013 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martina Wiltschko
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clause ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
World Knowledge ◽  
Upper Austria ◽  
Definite Articles ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses ◽  
Semantic Properties

AbstractThis article discusses the syntactic and semantic properties of descriptive relative clauses, a type of relative clause discussed in the literature on Chinese. It is argued that descriptive relative clauses are found in the dialect of Upper Austria, a version of Bavarian German. In particular this dialect has a set of reduced definite articles that are used for discourse referents that are intrinsically uniquely identifiable, as a matter of world knowledge. As such, they cannot be restricted by a relative clause, where restriction is taken to exclude alternatives. Such DPs can, however, be modified by descriptive relative clauses. I propose that descriptive relative clauses attach to NP while restrictive relative clauses attach to nP. Thus, the article contributes to determining whether there are different relative clauses associated with different layers of projections in the nominal domain.

Fossilized mistakes in Spanish relative clauses learned by Chinese students

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
María Guijarro Sanz
Keyword(s):  
Teaching Methods ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Chinese Students ◽  
Construction Grammar ◽  
Cognitive Grammar ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses ◽  
The Impact

Abstract This article demonstrates how Cognitive Grammar and Construction Grammar can prevent Chinese students learning Spanish from fossilizing mistakes in restrictive relative clauses at the A2-B1 level of the European Framework of Reference for Languages. To address this issue, first, relative clauses in Spanish and Chinese were contrasted and, second, tailored solutions based on Cognitive Grammar were proposed. Among the cognitive based tailored solutions, certain geometry forms, colours and basic mathematics metaphors were compared with syntactic characteristics such as noun order, subordination hierarchy or resumption. To elucidate the impact of such teaching methods, an experiment with 74 Chinese students was performed. The results indicate that the efficacy of the proposed materials is statistically significant and as such, the Chinese students avoid fossilized mistakes while producing subject, object and locative relative clauses in Spanish.

Non-restrictive relatives are not orphans

2007 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-309 ◽  
Author(s):  
DOUG ARNOLD
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Syntactic Representation ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses ◽  
Restrictive Relatives

According to a ‘radical orphanage’ approach, non-restrictive relative clauses are not part of the syntactic representation of the sentence that contains them. It is an appealing view, and seems to capture some important properties of non-restrictive relative clauses. Focusing mainly on empirical shortcomings, this paper aims to show that the appeal of such approaches is illusory. It also outlines an empirically superior ‘syntactically integrated’ account.

scholarly journals Non-restrictive relative clauses in Arabic

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 54
Author(s):  
Abdulrahman A Alqurashi
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clause ◽  
Preliminary Analysis ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Modern Standard Arabic ◽  
Standard Arabic ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses ◽  
Restrictive Relatives ◽  
Modern Standard ◽  
Minimalist Syntax

This paper discusses the syntax of non-restrictive relative clauses in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA). It provides a thorough description of their structures and attempts to offer a preliminary analysis within the transformation framework: Minimalist syntax. Two relativization strategies are available for Arabic non-restrictive relative clauses. The first strategy is similar to that of definite restrictive relatives in which the relative clause is initiated by ʔallaðiwhich is a relative complementizer, whereas the second strategy is a unique one in which the relative clause is initiated by the special particle wa, appears to be a specifying coordinator, along with the complementizer ʔallaði. The paper also argues that De-Vries’s (2006) coordinate approach to appositive relatives can provide a straightforward account for some the facts of non-restrictive relative clauses in Arabic.

Relativization strategies in SLA

2012 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 443-476
Author(s):  
Eleonora Luzi
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
First Language ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Functional Difference ◽  
Proficiency Levels ◽  
Linguistic Research ◽  
L1 Influence ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses

This article examines the process of acquisition of relative clauses in second language (L2) Italian. Despite the fact that linguistic research clearly evidences a distinction between restrictive relative clauses and non-restrictive relative clauses, second language acquisition studies have so far investigated the acquisition of relative clauses disregarding this fundamental and functional difference. Based on the analysis of oral data of 96 L2 Italian students of two different Common European Framework of Reference proficiency levels (B1 and C2), this study examines occurrences of target language relative clauses and of other strategies of relativization (i.e. coordinated sentences), analysing proficiency and first language (L1) influence on distribution. The significant differences in the distribution of alternative relativization strategies between the two groups and the non-restrictive function of coordinated sentences lead to the hypothesis that there are two distinct patterns of acquisition: one for restrictive and another for non-restrictive relative clauses.

Do second language learners acquire restrictive relative clauses on the basis of relational or configurational information? The acquisition of French subject, direct object and genitive restrictive relative clauses by second language learners

1989 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 156-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger Hawkins
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Second Language Learners ◽  
Linguistic Knowledge ◽  
Linear Ordering ◽  
Restrictive Relative Clauses ◽  
The Way

Much of the work on the second language acquisition of restrictive relative clauses has made reference to the similarities between learners' order of diffi culty and Keenan and Comrie's (1977) typologically determined noun phrase accessibility hierarchy for relativisation (AH). There has been little considera tion, however, of whether this 'theory of markedness' (for that is the implica tion of citing the AH in the context of second language learning) actually determines the way that second language learners develop rules for restrictive relative clauses. The present study examines the way that learners of L2 French construct rules for French relativiser morphology from this perspective. It is found that there is no evidence to support the view that learners make use of a theory of markedness like the AH in constructing such rules. Rather, learners appear to construct rules on the basis of the linear ordering of the constituents of restrictive relative clauses in surface configurations. From the evidence it is suggested that 'markedness' in the development of L2 restrictive relative clauses is not a feature of the grammatical component of learners' linguistic knowledge, but is a feature of their L2 processing capacity.

Resumptivity and two types of A′‑dependencies in the Minimalist Program

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-78
Author(s):  
Victor Junnan Pan
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clause ◽  
Diagnostic Tests ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Minimalist Program ◽  
Locality Condition ◽  
Sharp Distinction ◽  
Crossover Effects ◽  
Locality Constraint ◽  
Left Dislocation ◽  
Semantic Properties

This paper examines the derivation of two types of A′-dependencies — relative clauses and Left-Dislocation structures — in the framework of Minimalist Program based on Mandarin data. Relatives and LD structures demonstrate many distinct syntactic and semantic properties when they contain a gap and a resumptive pronoun respectively. A thorough study of the relevant data reveals that when a gap strategy is adopted, island effects and crossover effects are always observed, irrespective of whether the relevant gap is embedded within a relative clause or within an LD structure; on the contrary, when the resumptive strategy is adopted, a sharp distinction is observed between these two structures. A resumptive relative clause gives rise to island effects and crossover effects systematically; by contrast, a resumptive LD structure never gives rise to these effects. In the Minimalist Program, island effects and crossover effects are not exclusively used as diagnostic tests for movement since the operation Agree is also subject to locality constraints. I will argue that a relative clause containing either a gap or an RP and an LD structure with gap are derived by Agree and they are subject to the locality condition whereas a resumptive LD structure is derived by Match that is an island free operation and it is not subject to the locality constraint. Multiple Transfer and multiple Spell-Out are possible in an Agree chain, but not in a Matching chain. The choice of the derivational mechanism depends on the interpretability of the formal features attached to the Probe and to the Goal in the relevant A′-dependencies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document