Left Branch Extraction and Clitic Placement in Gaulish

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-124
Author(s):  
Bernard Mees

The inscriptional remains of Gaulish preserve syntactic behaviours that are not expected from the perspective of the diachronic schemes usually posited for the development of early Insular Celtic syntax from Proto-Indo-European. Widespread evidence is attested, particularly for the behaviour of clitics, that does not seem reconcilable with many of the assumptions made in previous studies regarding the nature of the syntax of Proto-Celtic. Gaulish also evidently features scrambling-type phenomena such as left branch extraction that are not usually thought to appear in other Celtic languages. An analysis which begins with an assessment of these features leads to a more empirically predicated and consistent understanding of the early development of Celtic word order than has been proffered previously.

Pragmatics ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 513-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen ◽  
Tsuyoshi Ono

This cross-linguistic study focuses on ways in which conversationalists speak beyond a point of possible turn completion in conversation, specifically on turn extensions which are grammatically dependent, backward-looking and extend the prior action. It argues that further distinctions can be made in terms of whether the extension is prosodically integrated with the prior unit, its host, (Non-add-on) or not, and in terms of whether it repairs some part of the host (Replacement) or not. Added-on, non-repairing extensions are further distinguished in terms of whether they are grammatically fitted to the end of the host (Glue-ons) or not (Insertables). A preliminary survey of TCU continuation in English, German and Japanese conversation reveals a number of significant differences with respect to frequency and range of extension type. English is at one extreme in preferring Glue-ons over Non-Add-ons and Insertables, whereas Japanese is at the other extreme in preferring Non-add-ons and Insertables over Glue-ons. German occupies an intermediary position but is on the whole more like Japanese. The preference for Glue-ons vs. Insertables appears to reflect a language’s tendency towards syntactic left- vs. right headedness. In conclusion the study argues for a classification of ‘increment’ types which goes beyond the English-based Glue-on, attributes a central role to prosodic delivery and adopts a usage-based understanding of word order.


1992 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marian Annett

Two experiments tested the hypothesis that children at the left of the distribution of right minus left (R-L) hand skill are at risk for poor phonological processing. In the first experiment, individual assessments of spoken rhyme awareness were made in 5- to 8-year-olds. In the second experiment, a group test of word order memory for spoken confusable and nonconfusable items was given to 9- to 11-year-olds. Evidence of poorer phonological processing in those at the left of the R-L distribution was found in both experiments. Rhyme judgements and word order memory were both associated with reading ability, but reading did not interact with effects for hand skill. A group test of homophone comprehension was given to the same children tested for word order memory. Homophone errors did not differ between hand skill groups, showing a dissociation between the two tasks for R-L hand difference. The findings suggest that some risks for phonological processing could be due to normal genetic variation associated with the hypothesized rs + gene (Annett, 1972, 1978).


2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANA TERESA PÉREZ-LEROUX ◽  
ALEJANDRO CUZA ◽  
DANIELLE THOMAS

Can transfer occur in child bilingual syntax when surface overlap does not involve the syntax-pragmatics interface? Twenty-three Spanish/English bilingual children participated in an elicited imitation study of clitic placement in Spanish restructuring contexts, where variable word order is not associated with pragmatic or semantic factors. Bilingual children performed poorly with preverbal clitics, the order that does not overlap with English. Distinct bilingual patterns emerged: backward repositioning, omissions (for simultaneous bilinguals) and a reduction in forward repositioning bias. We conclude that transfer should be defined in lexical terms as the result of priming effects leading to shifts in lexical items.


1984 ◽  
Vol 74 ◽  
pp. 200-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. L. F. Rivet

The decision to produce maps covering the whole of the Roman Empire at a uniform scale of 1/1,000,000 was first made at a meeting of the International Geographical Union at Cambridge in July 1928. The proponent of the idea was O. G. S. Crawford, then Archaeology Officer of the Ordnance Survey, and since he was also mainly responsible for its early development, the model adopted was that of the second edition of the O.S. Map of Roman Britain, but the physical base chosen was that of the International Map of the World, which was then in production. Considerable progress was made in the 1930s—it was in 1934 that the title Tabula Imperii Romani was adopted—but wars interrupted matters and it was not until 1957 that the work was formally taken over by the Union Académique Internationale. Professor G. Lugli became the first President of the Permanent Committee of the TIR, to be succeeded in 1968 by Professor J. B. Ward-Perkins; on his death in 1981 the Presidency was assumed by Professor E. Condurachi, with Professor G. Carettoni as Vice-President taking over most responsibility for the western half of the Empire.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evert van Emde Boas ◽  
Albert Rijksbaron ◽  
Luuk Huitink ◽  
Mathieu de Bakker

This is the first full-scale reference grammar of Classical Greek in English in a century. The first work of its kind to reflect significant advances in linguistics made in recent decades, it provides students, teachers and academics with a comprehensive yet user-friendly treatment. The chapters on phonology and morphology make full use of insights from comparative and historical linguistics to elucidate complex systems of roots, stems and endings. The syntax offers linguistically up-to-date descriptions of such topics as case usage, tense and aspect, voice, subordinate clauses, infinitives and participles. An innovative section on textual coherence treats particles and word order and discusses several sample passages in detail, demonstrating new ways of approaching Greek texts. Throughout the book numerous original examples are provided, all with translations and often with clarifying notes. Clearly laid-out tables, helpful cross-references and full indexes make this essential resource accessible to users of all levels.


2006 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 143-148
Author(s):  
Anna Muradova ◽  

The first mention of the Breton language in the Russian linguistical literature was made in the XVIII century when the Empress Catherine II decided to make a wide research in order to compose a dictionary where all the languages in the world would be represented. This work was carried out by a German scientist Peter Simon Pallas (1741–1811). He was the head of the Russian Academy of Sciences in the years 1768–1774, and he also took part in several expeditions in which he studied many regions of Russia, including Southern Siberia. The languages of the peoples living in different parts of Russia were largely represented in his study, and the European languages were also collected, assembled into different groups. The first edition of the dictionary, Vocabularia Linguarum Totius Orbis (“Сравнительные словари всех языков и наречий, собранные десницею Всевысочайшей Особы”) was published in 1787–1789. This edition contained 185 entries from 142 Asiatic and 51 European languages. The second edition was published in 1790–1791, and it contained the information on 272 languages and dialects, and 273 entries were represented in this edition. The Celtic languages were well represented in both editions as follows: Celtic (it is not clear what were the specifically Celtic languages), Breton, Irish, Scottish Gaelic, Welsh and Cornish. The information for the Breton language was made available by several intermediaries: some Russian words were translated into Latin, after that – into French and transmitted to the ambassador of France, Le Compte de Segur. He sent the French words list to Baron de Breteuil, who employed the Intendant of Brittany Antoine-François Bertrand de Moleville. De Mollevile was not a Breton speaker and his task was to find someone who could do this job. Even in the XVIII century it seemed difficult to find anyone who was capable of providing a translation. This was a paradox: the Breton language was largely spoken by that time in the Western part of the peninsula (Lower Brittany). One of the difficulties was the absence of a “standard” Breton, and of a “standard” Breton spelling, the four dialects being too different from one another (therefore each author who was writing in Breton used his own variant of spelling). De Mollevile seemed to have had some difficulties to find out which of the dialects was the “correct” one. So he sent the list to Le Goazre in Qimper (where the Cornouaille dialect was spoken) and to Le Bricquir Dumezir in Lannoin (the Tregor dialect). Meanwhile, in order to find out the “correct” forms, the translators seemed to use Gregor Rostrenen’s dictionary (1732). The two versions (from Lannion or from Qimper) were sent to Pallas, and the differences between them made it possible to indicate two Breton forms for one Russian word. It is impossible to use Vocabularia Linguarum Totius Orbis for modern Celtic studies as all the foreign words used in the dictionary were transcribed into Cyrillic. Therefore we cannot make any conclusions with regard to the authentic spelling of these words. Meanwhile, this document is precious as it provides the first mention of Breton in Russia.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-49
Author(s):  
Denis V. Melnik

The paper provides an interpretation of Lenin’s earliest contributions (made in 1893–1899) to the study of economic development. In the 1890s, Lenin joined young Marxist intellectuals in their fight against the Narodnik economists, who represented the approach prevalent among the Russian radical intelligentsia in the 1870s–1880s. That was the fight over the right to control the Marxist narrative in Russia. Lenin elaborated his theoretical interpretation of Marxism as applied to the contentious issues of Russia’s economic development. The paper outlines the context of Lenin’s activity in the 1890s. It suggests that the main theoretical challenge to “orthodox Marxist” intellectuals in applying Marx’s theory to Russia stemmed not from their designated opponents, but from Marx himself, who presented two divergent scenarios — the dynamic and the breakdown — for capitalist development. Lenin provided an analytical substantiation for the dynamic one but eventually allowed for consideration of structural heterogeneity in the development process. This resulted in the notion of unevenness, on which he would rely upon later, in his studies of imperialism. The paper also briefly considers the place of Lenin’s early development studies in his legacy.


Author(s):  
Verawati R. Simbolon ◽  
Viator Lumbanraja ◽  
Anna Stasya Prima

The purpose of this research was to find out the errors made by the eleventh grade students of SMA Swasta Santu Petrus Sidikalang in writing composition in the academic year of 2020/2021. Errors were analyzed based on linguistic category taxonomy. Linguistic category taxonomy consists of morphology and syntax. The population of this research is 262 students and 56 is randomly taken as a sample. Based on the result of the data analysis, there are 169 errors made by the students on their writing compositions. Morphological errors is 85 (50,29%) and syntactical errors is 84 (49,69%). Morphological errors that students made in morphology of linguistic category are definite aricle incorrect 14 (8,29%), possessive case incorrect 17 (10,05%), third person singular verb incorrect 25 (14,79%), simple past tense incorrect 28 (16,57%) and comparative adjective/adverb incorrect 1 (0,59%). In syntax there are noun phrase 40 (23,67%), verb phrase 28 (16,57%), verb-and-verb construction 5 (2,95%), word order 9 (5,32) and some trafnsformation 2 (1,18%). In conlusion the dominant errors made by the students is in morphology error.


Author(s):  
Julio Villa-García

This chapter investigates a novel syntactic contrast regarding the placement of clitics in negative root infinitival sentences with imperative illocutionary force in two varieties of Iberian Spanish, (Lower) Andalusian and (Central) Asturian Spanish. Data reveals a stark difference in clitic directionality in second person plural imperatives with infinitives: whereas positive imperatives involve postverbal clitics in both dialects, negative imperatives involve enclisis in AndSp but proclisis in AsturSp, a phenomenon reminiscent of Italian negative singular imperatives. Under a PF-merger+copy-and-delete approach, imperatives involve an affixal null F head that must merge with a PF-adjacent host. This analysis allows for a uniform syntactic treatment of the relevant construction in the two dialects, the difference between the two varieties reducing to PF considerations. This approach also makes use of the same machinery employed to account for the infamous ban on negative imperatives operative in languages like Greek and Spanish, which provides novel crosslinguistic support for the analysis The evidence adduced here also has consequences for verb height and word order as well as for the architecture of the clausal left edge.


Author(s):  
Markku Filppula ◽  
Juhani Klemola

Few European languages have in the course of their histories undergone as radical changes as English did in the medieval period. The earliest documented variety of the language, Old English (c. 450 to 1100 ce), was a synthetic language, typologically similar to modern German, with its three genders, relatively free word order, rich case system, and verbal morphology. By the beginning of the Middle English period (c. 1100 to 1500), changes that had begun a few centuries earlier in the Old English period had resulted in a remarkable typological shift from a synthetic language to an analytic language with fixed word order, very few inflections, and a heavy reliance on function words. System-internal pressures had a role to play in these changes, but arguably they were primarily due to intensive contacts with other languages, including Celtic languages, (British) Latin, Scandinavian languages, and a little later, French. As a result, English came to diverge from its Germanic sister languages, losing or reducing such Proto-Germanic features as grammatical gender; most inflections on nouns, adjectives, pronouns, and verbs; verb-second syntax; and certain types of reflexive marking. Among the external influences, long contacts with speakers of especially Brittonic Celtic languages (i.e., Welsh, Cornish, and Cumbrian) can be considered to have been of particular importance. Following the arrival of the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes from around 450 ce onward, there began an intensive and large-scale process of language shift on the part of the indigenous Celtic and British Latin speaking population in Britain. A general wisdom in contact linguistics is that in such circumstances—when the contact is intensive and the shifting population large enough—the acquired language (in this case English) undergoes moderate to heavy restructuring of its grammatical system, leading generally to simplification of its morphosyntax. In the history of English, this process was also greatly reinforced by the Viking invasions, which started in the late 8th century ce, and brought a large Scandinavian-speaking population to Britain. The resulting contacts between the Anglo-Saxons and the Vikings also contributed to the decrease of complexity of the Old English morphosyntax. In addition, the Scandinavian settlements of the Danelaw area left their permanent mark in place-names and dialect vocabulary in especially the eastern and northern parts of the country. In contrast to syntactic influences, which are typical of conditions of language shift, contacts that are less intensive and involve extensive bilingualism generally lead to lexical borrowing. This was the situation following the Norman Conquest of Britain in 1066 ce. It led to an influx of French loanwords into English, most of which have persisted in use up to the present day. It has been estimated that almost one third of the present-day English vocabulary is of French origin. By comparison, there is far less evidence of French influence on “core” English syntax. The earliest loanwords were superimposed by the French-speaking new nobility and pertained to administration, law, military terminology, and religion. Cultural prestige was the prime motivation for the later medieval borrowings.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document