‘Fact type’ complementizer in Guadeloupean Creole

This paper aims to give account of the distribution in Guadeloupean Creole of the form of the complementizer kè. It claims that it has a specific distribution, as it seems to appear in opposition to the zero form. Besides a sociolinguistic component, the presence of kè is associable with the fact type semantics of the completive event (Dixon 2006), and so do other grammatical functions and markers that are featured in the completive clauses when kè is present, such as independent TAM markers on the verb and the obligatory featuring of a subject form in case of subject coreference.

The role of grammar in spelling homophonous regular verbs

Can a lack of grammatical knowledge alone be held accountable for the spelling errors that are made for homophonous verb forms and do these errors occur because spellers do not apply their grammatical knowledge? Three experiments with secondary school pupils were conducted on Dutch weak prefix verbs. The results confirmed that pupils made many spelling errors and also have great problems identifying the verb forms’ functions. Moreover, a direct correlation was revealed between a pupil’s identification of the form’s grammatical function and its spelling. These results indicate that many errors result from pupils’ inability to determine the grammatical functions of the forms. If pupils know the form’s function, they are more likely to also spell the form correctly. If they do not, they often choose the form’s homophone, especially if the homophone is more frequent than the target form. Spelling education thus needs a strong grammatical basis.

Subjects in Austronesian

In LFG, grammatical functions are primitives of the theory and treated as both fundamental and universal. However, there is a long standing debate in the wider literature as to whether grammatical functions should be considered universal or language specific/construction-specific notions. Western Austronesian languages have played a large role in this debate on account of their unusual verbal morphology and the split in typical subject properties between the actor semantic role and the argument privileged by the verbal morphology. In this chapter, Hemmings addresses the debate in relation to empirical data from the Kelabit language of Northern Sarawak. She argues that the Kelabit data provides a number of arguments for treating the privileged argument as subject, and the actor as an object in non-actor voice constructions. This has important implications for the treatment of subjects crosslinguistically, Western Austronesian verbal morphology and linking theories.

Polyadic quantification in hybrid coordination

The aim of this paper is to provide a syntactico-semantic analysis of hybrid coordination, in which what is coordinated are phrases bearing different grammatical functions and different semantic roles. The proposed account improves on previous HPSG analyses by giving up the assumption that all conjuncts are dependents of the same head and, more importantly, by taking into account the syntax–semantics interface and providing semantic representations. This aspect of the analysis builds on and generalizes previous HPSG work on polyadic quantification.

Turbulent periods and the development of the scientific research article, 1735–1835

The results of a previous study (Banks 2018) suggest that the development of scientific writing is more conservative in times of great turbulence. In an attempt to verify this, samples were taken from the Mémoires de l’Académie des Sciences and the Philosophical Transactions for the years 1735, 1785 and 1835. The development over the years 1735 to 1785 was compared to that between 1785 and 1835. Analysis of the grammatical functions and semantic categories of themes and of process types indicates that there is some evidence in favour of the conjecture that scientific writers are more conservative in times of turbulence. Whilst this is not conclusive, it suggests that further research would be fruitful.

Language Change, Variation, and Universals

This volume is about how human languages get to be the way they are, why they are different from one another in some ways and not others, and why they change in the ways that they do. Given that language is a universal creation of the human mind, the puzzle is why there are different languages at all, why we don’t all speak the same language. And while there is considerable variation, there are ways in which grammars show consistent patterns. The solution to these puzzles, the author proposes, is a constructional one. Grammars consist of constructions that carry out the function of expressing universal conceptual structure. While there are in principle many different ways of accomplishing this task, the constructions that languages actually use are under pressure to reduce complexity. The result is that there is constructional change in the direction of less complexity, and grammatical patterns emerge that reflect conceptual universals. The volume consists of three parts. Part I establishes the theoretical foundations: situating universals in conceptual structure, formally defining constructions, and characterizing constructional complexity. Part II explores variation in argument structure, grammatical functions, and A′ constructions, drawing on data from a variety of languages, including English and Plains Cree. Part III looks at constructional change, focusing primarily on English and German. The study ends with some observations and speculations on parameter theory, analogy, the origins of typological patterns, and Greenbergian ‘universals’.

Grammatical functions

This chapter addresses the question of the source of grammatical functions (GFs). It reviews evidence that not all languages require GFs, and shows how to capture the correspondences between form and meaning in constructional terms.

Main Challenges of Teaching the Chinese Particle了 to Russian-speaking Students at Elementary Level

The particle 了 is a commonly used word in the Chinese language. Since the particle 了 is a structure word, it does not carry any semantic meaning, but it has many grammatical meanings and is used in a variety of ways. Due to the large number of its grammatical meanings and complexity of its grammatical functions, it poses certain challenges for both teachers when explaining the material and students when using it. This especially concerns Russian-speaking students due to significant differences in the grammar of Russian and Chinese. This article examines several classifications of the particle 了, described in Chinese and Russian textbooks and focuses on grammatical features of the particle 了 depending on its position in the middle and at the end of the sentence, as well as its simultaneous use of both in the middle and at the end of the sentence. The article also describes the particle’s main grammatical meanings, such as: completeness of an action, change of an action or a situation, emphasis on something, duration of an action, a way of expressing tact, and a few others. The authors analyze the most common mistakes made by Russian-speaking elementary level students when using the particle, basing their analysis on many years of their teaching experience. Among the mistakes, they highlight such as excessive use, insufficient use, and use of the particle 了 in the wrong place. Excessive use includes mistakes such using the particle 了 in negative sentences with the adverb 没, in an objective description of past events, facts, or in characteristic judgments and descriptions; with verbs followed by a predicative object; after the first verb in a sequential sentence; with verbs showing an action of a constant or repetitive nature, as well as in various constructions which exclude its use. Insufficient use includes mistakes when learners construct incomplete sentences without the 了 particle in cases where its use is required for correct meaning or for a grammatically correct construction. Mistakes where the particle 了 is used in the wrong place occur if students do not understand the specifics of verb connections in the sentence.