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.

scholarly journals English Raising Predicates and (Non-)Finite Clauses

Fluminensia ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-59
Author(s):  
Jakob Lenardič ◽  
Gašper Ilc
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clause ◽  
Structural Factors ◽  
Finite Variation ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Similar Frequency ◽  
Modal Verbs ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Negative Marker ◽  
Corpus Data ◽  
Embedded Clause

In this paper, we present a diachronic and synchronic analysis of raising and extraposition constructions in the historical Brown Corpus and the more contemporary English Web Corpus 2015. We begin by establishing two diachronic facts: first, raising constructions are used much more frequently than their semantically equivalent extraposition variants, and second, the distribution of raising and extraposition remains – rather exceptionally in comparison to other structures allowing for finite/non-finite variation – diachronically consistent from the beginning of the 20th century to 2015. We then supplement this unique diachronic distribution with an analysis of the most recent corpus data, which shows that the choice between the two semantically equivalent constructions is governed by distinct structural factors unique to each construction. Concretely, we show that the raising construction is frequently used as a relative clause, whereas the extraposition variant generally resists such a syntactic role. By contrast, we show that a prominent factor in favour of extraposition relates to the negative marker, which is placed with similar frequency both in the matrix and in the embedded clause of the extraposition construction in contrast to the raising variant, which uses the negative marker almost exclusively in the matrix clause. Lastly, we show that extraposition constructions contain modal verbs in the matrix clause more frequently than the raising variants and we tie this observation to the idea that the clausal composition of the extraposition construction is structurally more suited for expressing tentativeness.

L1 transfer in the interpretation of L2 reflexive pronouns by child learners of Korean

2021 ◽  
pp. 136700692110289
Author(s):  
Kitaek Kim ◽  
Kum-Jeong Joo
Keyword(s):  
First Language ◽  
Chinese Children ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Long Distance ◽  
Value Judgment ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Reflexive Pronouns ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Embedded Clause

Aim: The current study explores first language (L1) transfer in child second language (L2) acquisition, testing whether L1-Chinese children learning L2 Korean show an advantage over L1-Russian children in the acquisition of Korean reflexives. Methodology: L1-Chinese and L1-Russian children with L2 Korean completed truth-value judgment tasks designed to explore their interpretation of the Korean reflexives caki and caki-casin in bi-clausal sentences. Chinese, like Korean, has a monomorphemic reflexive that takes a long-distance (LD) antecedent, and a polymorphemic reflexive that prefers a local antecedent; Russian, in contrast, has only a monomorphemic reflexive, which requires a local interpretation in finite clauses. Data and analysis: The proportion of preferences for each condition in the tasks was statistically compared using a logistic mixed-effects regression. Findings: The study resulted in two main findings. First, L1-Chinese children, regardless of L2 proficiency, preferred the LD antecedent (i.e., the matrix clause subject) for caki and the local antecedent (i.e., the embedded clause subject) for caki-casin, which is target-like for Korean and consistent with the interpretation of the Chinese reflexives ziji and taziji. Second, high-proficiency (but not low-proficiency) L1-Russian children showed target-like behavior in rejecting an LD interpretation for caki-casin, but a non-target-like acceptance of the local interpretation for caki, which may be due to L1 transfer based on Russian’s locally bound reflexive. Originality: L1 transfer in the interpretation of L2 reflexive pronouns has been reported with adults, but not with children. The current study fills this research gap. Implications: This study provides evidence that supports L1 transfer in the context of child L2 reflexive interpretation, countering arguments claiming for a limited role of L1 transfer in child L2 acquisition.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

scholarly journals Subjunctive and subject pronoun realization: a study of "no creo que"

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Harrington ◽  
Ana Teresa Pérez-Leroux
Keyword(s):  
First Person ◽  
Subject Pronouns ◽  
Subjunctive Mood ◽  
Oral Speech ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Complement Clauses ◽  
Subject Pronoun ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Embedded Clause ◽  
Dependent Clause

Subjunctive mood in complement clauses is licensed under selection from certain predicates or under the scope of a modal or negation. In contexts where mood choice varies, such as the complement of a negated epistemic verb no creer, it introduces a contrast in interpretation. The subjunctive is thought to contribute to a shift in the modal anchoring of the embedded clause, and is consequently interpreted as indicative of a dissociation between the epistemic models of the speaker and the subject. We provide evidence that these uses also interact with pragmatic context. Given independent claims that 1) the overt realization of first person subject pronouns is contrastive and 2) it generally serves to anchor discourse to the speaker’s perspective and 3) overt use is particularly frequent with epistemic verbs, we examined the interaction between negation, first person subject pronoun realization, and mood of the dependent clause for the verb creer.  An analysis of oral speech from the Proyecto de Habla Culta revealed that for negative sentences (no creo que), yo is overtly realized more frequently for cases with exceptional indicative dependents than for those with canonical subjunctive dependents; there was no association with mood for affirmative uses of creer. These results support analyses where negation has specific scope over the contrastive subject, rather than over the epistemic clause. As a consequence, the matrix proposition remains an assertion and use of indicative complements is licensed.

scholarly journals Obligatory and Non-Obligatory Control in Irish and Polish

2006 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 99-118
Author(s):  
Anna Bondaruk ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Long Distance ◽  
Partial Control ◽  
Obligatory Control ◽  
De Se ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Complement Clauses ◽  
The One ◽  
Aspectual Verbs ◽  
Strict Reading

This paper aims at establishing a typology of control in Irish and Polish non-finite clauses. First, seven classes of predicates taking non-finite complements in Irish and Polish are specified. They include: modal (e.g. must), aspectual (e.g. start), implicative (e.g. manage), factive (e.g. like), prepositional (e.g. say), desiderative (e.g. want) and interrogative verbs (e.g. ask). Whereas modals and aspectuals typically take raising complements, the remaining predicate classes require control complements. Control clauses in Polish always have a covert PRO subject, while in Irish their subject may be either the covert PRO or an overt DP. The PRO subject may be either obligatorily controlled or is controlled optionally. The criteria adopted in distinguishing obligatory control (OC) from non-obligatory control (NOC) are based on Landau (2000) and comprise the following: (1) a. Arbitrary Control is impossible in OC, possible in NOC; b. Long-distance control is impossible in OC, possible in NOC; c. Strict reading of PRO is impossible in OC, possible in NOC; d. De re reading of PRO is impossible in OC (only de se), possible in NOC. The validity of these criteria for establishing the OC/NOC contrast in Irish and Polish is scrutinised. Various contexts are examined where both these control types obtain in the two languages studied. Most notably, OC tends to occur in complement clauses, while NOC is often found in subject and adjunct clauses both in Irish and Polish. Within the class of OC, two subgroups are recognised, namely exhaustive control (EC) and partial control (PC). The former control type holds when the reference of PRO and its antecedent are identical, whereas the latter type of control is attested when the reference of PRO covers the reference of its antecedent, but is not entirely co-extensive with it, e.g.: (2) a. Maryᵢ managed [PROᵢ to win] = EC; b. Maryᵢ wanted [PRO + to meet at 6] = PC. EC and PC are found in analogous contexts in Irish and Polish. EC occurs in complements to modal, implicative and aspectual verbs, while PC is limited to complements to factive, desiderative, prepositional and interrogative predicates. It is argued that EC-complements lack independent tense specification, while PC-complements are marked for tense independent from the one expressed in the matrix clause. PC-complements both in Irish and Polish must contain a semantically plural predicate (cf. meet in (2b)), but they can never exhibit a syntactically plural element.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document