scholarly journals The re-examination of the predicate clause -focused on the distinction of the predicate clause with other embedded clause-

2017 ◽  
Vol null (43) ◽  
pp. 29-63
Author(s):  
Keon-hee Kim
Keyword(s):  
Embedded Clause

Interpretations of embedded pragmatic scalar modifiers

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Osamu Sawada
Keyword(s):  
Main Clause ◽  
Distinctive Property ◽  
Scalar Modifiers ◽  
Embedded Clause

Chapter 8 investigates the interpretation of embedded pragmatic scalar modifiers and considers the semantic mechanism behind subject- and speaker-oriented interpretations of embedded pragmatic scalar modifiers and CIs. For a subject-oriented reading, it is argued that there is a shift from a CI to a secondary at-issue entailment at the clausal level when the embedded clause combines with an attitude predicate and has a subject-oriented reading. For a speaker-oriented reading of embedded pragmatic scalar modifiers, it is claimed that the lower-level pragmatic scalar modifiers have the distinctive property of projection: unlike higher-level pragmatic scalar modifiers/typical CIs, lower-level pragmatic scalar modifiers can project out of the complement of a belief predicate only if there is a speaker-oriented modal in the main clause. This chapter shows that the interpretation of embedded pragmatic scalar modifiers is not only a matter of context and involves semantic and pragmatic mechanisms.

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 The North Samoyedic interrogative verb meaning ‘say what’

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-136
Author(s):  
Nikolett Mus
Keyword(s):  
Past Tense ◽  
The North ◽  
Embedded Clause ◽  
Object Agreement ◽  
Verb Meaning ◽  
Regular Verb

A cross-linguistically rare interrogative category (i.e., an interrogative verb with the meaning ‘say what’) is observed in the North Samoyedic (Uralic) languages. The interrogative verb in these languages is used in content questions, and functions as the predicate of the main or the embedded clause. It takes the regular verb morphemes with two exceptions: it (i) does not display object agreement, and (ii) cannot combine with the regular past tense morpheme. Furthermore, there is also an ordering restriction on multiple questions containing the interrogative verb. The morphosyntactic evidence suggests that the North Samoyedic interrogative verb is analyzed as a result of a wh-object incorporation. Kokkuvõte. Nikolett Mus: Põhjasamojeedi keelte küsiverb tähendusega ‘mida ütlema’. Põhjasamojeedi (uurali) keeltes esineb keeleüleselt haruldane küsiv kategooria (st küsiverb tähendusega ’mis asja’). Nendes keeltes kasutatakse küsiverbi sisuküsimustes ja küsiverb toimib pea- või kõrvallauses predikaadina, liitudes tavaliste verbimorfeemidega, välja arvatud kahel juhul: küsiverb (i) ei väljenda objektiühildumist, ja (ii) ei kombineeru lihtmineviku morfeemiga. Lisaks on küsiverbil teatavad järjestuspiirangud küsiverbi sisaldava kompleksküsimuse korral. Morfosüntaktilised andmed viitavad, et põhjasamojeedi küsiverb on analüüsitav kui küsisõnalise objekti inkorporatsiooni tulemus. Аннотация. Николетт Муш: Северосамодийский вопросительный глагол ‘что сказать’. В северосамодийских языках (уральская языковая семья) есть типологически редкий вопросительный глагол со значением ‘что сказать’. Этот глагол используется в частных вопросах в качестве предиката главного или подчиненного предложения. Он принимает обычные словоизменительные суффиксы за двумя исключениями: он не сочетается (i) с объектным спряжением и (ii) с показателем прошедшего времени индикатива. Кроме того, существуют ограничения на относительный порядок вопросов с вопросительным глаголом. Данные морфосинтаксиса свидетельствуют о том, что северносамодийский вопросительный глагол возник в результате инкорпорации объекта — вопросительного местоимениия.

scholarly journals Tunnekausatiivilauseen argumenttirakenne I

Virittäjä ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 123 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Saara Huhmarniemi
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Argument Structure ◽  
Contextual Factors ◽  
Generative Syntax ◽  
Embedded Clause ◽  
Open Question ◽  
Syntactic Theories

Tunnekausatiivilauseet luokitellaan usein omaksi lausetyypikseen, johon kuuluu tunnetta tai tuntemusta ilmaiseva verbi (tunnekausatiivi), partitiivisijainen kokija ja nominatiivimuotoinen aiheuttaja. Tunnekausatiivilauseen aiheuttaja- ja kokija-argumenttien asemaa syntaktisessa rakenteessa on pidetty avoimena kysymyksenä ja rakenteen on arvioitu jopa olevan muutoksessa. Tässä artikkelissa käydään generatiivisen kieliopin kehyksessä läpi argumentti-rakenteeseen liittyviä kieliopillisia testejä, jotka koskevat esimerkiksi kongruenssia, anaforien sidontaa ja sanajärjestystä. Testien perusteella voidaan havaita, että kun tunnekausatiivilauseen aiheuttaja on NP, se sijaitsee tyypillisesti argumenttirakenteessa ylempänä kuin partitiivimuotoinen kokija. Tätä tulosta verrataan Suomi24-korpusaineistosta tehtyihin havaintoihin, joiden perusteella kokija esiintyy useammin verbin edellä kuin aiheuttaja. Tunnekausatiivilauseen sanajärjestyksen vaihtelun katsotaan olevan sidoksissa puhetilanteeseen ja argumenttien ominaisuuksiin.  Tämä artikkeli on osa kahden artikkelin sarjaa. Sarjan toisessa osassa tarkastellaan lausemaisten aiheuttajien asemaa tunnekausatiivilauseen argumenttirakenteessa.   The argument structure of the Finnish experiencer construction I: An NP causer This article investigates the Finnish experiencer construction, which involves a psychological predicate and two optional arguments: the nominative causer and the partitive experiencer. The argument structure of the Finnish experiencer construction has ­remained an open question in syntactic theories. In this paper, several grammatical tests concerning congruence, binding and word order are applied in the framework of generative syntax. They suggest that when the nominative causer is an NP, it typically occupies a higher position in the argument structure than the partitive experiencer. This result is evaluated against data from the Suomi24 corpus, which reveals that the partitive experiencer occurs preverbally more frequently than the nominative causer. The article asserts that the word order of the Finnish experiencer construction reflects contextual factors and discourse features of the arguments. This article is the first in a series of two. The second article investigates experiencer constructions with an embedded clause as a causer argument.

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.

Between commitment and certainty

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Iksoo Kwon
Keyword(s):  
Main Clause ◽  
Epistemic Modal ◽  
Conceptual Structures ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Mental Spaces ◽  
Embedded Clause

Abstract In accord with Verhagen’s (1996) insights regarding epistemic uses of the predicator promise (e.g., Tomorrow promises to be a fine day), this paper identifies another type of these epistemic uses. It focuses on constructional cues in complex-clause utterances of the form I promise X: whether or not the subject of the embedded clause X is congruent with ‘I’ in the main clause and whether the tense of X is past or non-past. It investigates how it is used epistemically, especially in its colloquial uses; how the constructional cues (the kind of subject and the tense information) influence its construal; and how the different conceptual structures underlying the construals of the commissive and the epistemic modal senses of the construction can be modeled within Mental-spaces theory. It also discusses that the conceptual structures may be differently reified cross-linguistically briefing on the Korean constructs yaksokha- ‘(I) promise’ and cangtamha- ‘(I) assure’.

Wh-Scope Marking in Japanese: Evidence for the Indirect-Dependency Approach

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Yoshiki Fujiwara
Keyword(s):  
Morphological Evidence ◽  
Embedded Clause ◽  
Direct Dependency ◽  
Dependency Approach

The goal of this squib is to tease apart two competing approaches to wh-scope marking, the direct-dependency approach and the indirect-dependency approach, by introducing Japanese wh-scope marking. The two approaches make different predictions regarding the type of the embedded clause in wh-scope-marking constructions. The embedded clause is regarded as declarative under the direct-dependency approach but as interrogative under the indirect-dependency approach. What is especially interesting in this respect is that Japanese wh-scope marking requires the embedded clause to be marked by the interrogative complementizer ka. Japanese wh-scope marking thus provides clear morphological evidence for the indirect-dependency approach.

Apparent raising in Tongan and its implications for multiple case valuation

2021 ◽  
pp. 192-215
Author(s):  
Yuko Otsuka
Keyword(s):  
Subject Position ◽  
Long Distance ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Multiple Case ◽  
Embedded Clause ◽  
Parametric Adjustment ◽  
Matrix Subject ◽  
Case Feature ◽  
Activity Condition

Apparent raising (AR) constructions in Tongan resemble raising constructions in that the thematic subject of the embedded clause seems to occur in the matrix subject position. Unlike regular raising, however, Tongan AR shows characteristics of A-bar movement such as long-distance dependency, sensitivity to islands, and syntactic ergativity. This chapter argues that Tongan AR involves three operations: (a) topic movement of a DP to the embedded [Spec, C], (b) cancelation of the previous valuation of the case feature on the DP in [Spec, C], and (c) subsequent case valuation under Agree with the matrix v. The proposed analysis calls for a parametric adjustment to the activity condition to allow for multiple case valuation: in languages like Tongan, a DP located at the edge of a phase not only remains active, but the valuation of its case feature gets undone upon completion of the CP phase.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document