Search

Abstract This paper investigates subject extraction from embedded clauses in Jordanian Arabic (JA). Firstly, it shows that JA maintains the division between factive vs. non-factive verbs with respect to (subject) extraction. We argue that non-factive clausal complements are not islands for extraction, and, hence, their subject can undergo movement to the left periphery of the main clause. We use Starke's (2001) proposal of Relativized Minimality to account for the ensuing restriction that bans the object and/or locative adjuncts of the factive clausal complement to appear pre-verbally (while the subject is extracted). We propose that this restriction is due to the richly-featured content of the subject wh-word that acts as a barrier against the movement of elements that fall under its c-command domain. As for factive clausal complements (i.e., embedded under factive verbs), we prove that such complements are strong islands for extraction. We follow Kiparsky and Kiparsky (1970) and related works, that factive complements are, with updated terminology, DPs which are absolute islands in Arabic. With this being the case, this paper challenges several recent approaches to factive complements that have argued either for a reduced left periphery for factive complements (e.g., Haegeman, 2006; de Cuba, 2007) or for the presence of an operator that has the effect to block movement out of these clauses (e.g., Zubizaretta, 2001; Haegeman, 2012). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Similarity demonstratives are a particular class of demonstratives found across languages, e.g., German so , English such , Polish tak and Turkish böyle . These demonstratives occur as modifiers of nominal and/or verbal and adjectival phrases posing the problem of how to reconcile their demonstrative characteristics with their modifying capacity. It is hypothesized in this paper that they express similarity to – instead of identity with – the target of the demonstration gesture thereby generating ad-hoc kinds. The paper focuses on the interpretation of ad-nominal and ad-adjectival occurrences of German so . An analysis is presented combining truth-conditional semantics with multi-dimensional attribute spaces with the help of a generalization of adjectival measure functions. Similarity is defined in such spaces as indistinguishability with respect to a given set of relevant dimensions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Focuses on scalar pseudo-clefts (PCCs) in micro-contexts in Mandarin conversation. • Shows how multiple resources co-occur in PCCs to accomplish interactional actions. • Advocates for multimodal approach to pseudo-clefts and grammar-in/for-interaction. Scalar pseudo-cleft constructions (PCCs) in Mandarin involve degree adverbs, adjectives, etc., in the first part of the PCC where a scale is either implied or explicated (e.g., Wǒ zuì xǐhuān chī de shì ...'What I like to eat most is ...'). This paper finds that scalar PCCs in Mandarin conversation serve a range of interactional functions depending on the type of micro-context in which they are deployed: from introducing an alternative topical item to contesting an opposing point of view. Structurally speaking, prosodic breaks can take place after the [Nominalization + Copula] chunk in casual contexts, whereas in more contentious exchanges, the entire PCC complex tends to form a unity. Moreover, all of the scalar PCCs analyzed are found to trigger some type of salient multimodal (visual/bodily and/or prosodic) features, depending on the kind of interactional actions they help construct. Finally, this paper discusses the implications of the multimodal approach to PCCs on a wide range of issues in PCCs and grammar-in/for-interaction in general. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The paper focuses on the categorial status of present participles in English and Hebrew, and on their formation. Using a large number of diagnostics, I show that while all present participles are verbal, only a subset of them are ambiguous, and have an adjectival reading in addition to their verbal one. I further claim that this subset is constrained aspectually: only stative verbs have adjectival present participle correlates. This constraint stems from the impoverished nature of the adjectival present participle morpheme, which is incapable of manipulating the aspectual properties of verbs. Having established a categorial split between two types of present participles, I argue that adjectival present participles are derived in the lexicon, and verbal ones—in the syntax, and outline the lexical operation deriving adjectival present participles from verbs. Finally, I discuss the prenominal position in English, showing that it must be analyzed as being able to host reduced relative clauses, and not only APs. The analysis offered in the paper sheds light on the nature of participles, reinforcing the view that ambiguous participles do not belong to a “mixed” or “neutralized” category, but rather correspond to two homophonous forms—one verbal and one adjectival. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The aim of this paper is to investigate whether topic and focus movement operations exist DP-internally. The answer that I will reach is by and large negative. First, I will show that the DP, being argumental and not propositional, is ill-suited for topic/comment or focus/background partitioning. Second, I adopt Neeleman and van de Koot''s (2008) proposal for clause-level focus and topic movement. The fundamental idea in this proposal is that topic and focus movement is driven by the need to create a syntactically continuous comment or background constituent. As I explain below, it follows from this that topic and focus movement cannot take place DP-internally. In the remainder of the paper I provide an analysis for two sets of data where DP-internal FocusP has been proposed in the literature: adjective reordering and Greek polydefinites. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This paper examines the distribution of focus in Italian DPs, revealing its strict parallelism with the distribution of focus in Italian clauses. As in clauses, focus occurs rightmost in DPs, as claimed by Bernstein and as predicted by Zubizarreta''s prosody-driven analysis of rightmost focus at clause level. Furthermore, instances of non-final focus in the DP are shown to involve DP-final focus followed by the dislocation of post-focus constituents in DP-external position, closely paralleling analyses of non-final focus suggested by Vallduví, Cardinaletti, and Brunetti and further developed by Samek-Lodovici. The paper also uncovers an interesting asymmetry concerning the availability of non-final focus within DPs involving multiple adjectives. Non-final focus appears restricted to the higher adjective alone due to constraints on the right-dislocation of adjectival phrases. A similar asymmetry is shown to affect focused adverbs in clauses. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Since the seminal work by Cinque [Paths Towards Universal Grammar, Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC, 85], it has been widely assumed that nouns in the Romance languages, as opposed to nouns in English, raise to an intermediate projection between DP and NP thus deriving the word order difference between the English construction the illegal occupation(of Iraq) and the Spanish equivalent la ocupación ilegal(de Irak). In this paper, I compare two Balkan Romance languages: Romanian and Arvantovlaxika, a dialect of Aromanian spoken in Thessaly, Greece. Arvantovlaxika, probably because of its contact with Greek, seems to have lost its ability to move the noun. The purpose of this paper is to study the consequences of such a loss with regards to modification by different types of adjectives and to the different realizations of the definite article in both languages. Because of the syntactic similarity that exists between Arvantovlaxika and Romanian, these two languages offer fertile ground for the study of microvariation. Different types of adjectives will be considered: descriptive adjectives, cardinal adjectives, demonstratives, ordinal adjectives and, finally, superlative adjectives. Following Giusti [Functional Structure in DP and IP, Oxford University Press, New York, 54] and the minimalist framework of Chomsky [Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 89; Ken Hale: A Life in Language, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1], it will be argued that the realization of the enclitic definite article both in Arvantovlaxika and in Romanian as well as the realization of cel in Romanian are last resort operations, necessary to carry out the checking of φ-features and an EPP feature on D. Some further consequences regarding the generation of ordinal adjectives and the hierarchy of adjectives proposed by Cinque [Paths Towards Universal Grammar, Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC, 85] and Brugè [Categone Funzionali del Nome Nelle Lingue Romanze, Cisalpino, Milano] will be explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous work on adjectival intensification (e.g. very good , so glad , really great ) has mostly focussed on the adverbs in question, showing that different (native) varieties of English display distinctive preferences concerning intensifier choice. However, little is known so far about the role that intensifier-adjective units (bigrams) play. The present paper offers a first contribution to fill this research gap by focussing on a data-driven approach to (mostly) high-frequency bigrams and their collocational behaviour in the Corpus of Global Web-based English (GloWbE). Asymmetric and symmetric measures are employed to establish attraction and repulsion between adverb and adjective, while highlighting regional similarities and differences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Paragon and Antonomasia are analyzed in detail as independent figures. • Both figures share identical constructional devices, i.e., (proper) names. • The two figures differ in the quality and function of their respective conceptual frames. • Both figures are frequently occurring mechanisms as opposed to marginal rhetorical devices. Paragon and antonomasia share identical constructional devices, namely, proper names that participate in an exchange relation with other entities, or proper names that are modified by various constructional devices, such as definite or indefinite articles, of -phrases, determining adjectives, or epithets. The present paper focuses on two main objectives. The first of these is to unveil the conceptual tools required for the expression of paragon and antonomasia, and determine whether or not these two figures are explained exclusively by means of metaphoric and/or metonymic processes, as has been suggested in previous studies. The second objective is to explore the role of constructional devices that account for instances of paragon and antonomasia. In the present study, it is claimed that proper names modified and enriched by constructional devices activate frames which allow for the emergence of intensified and even hyperbolic interpretations. The difference between the two mechanisms lies in the quality and the function of conceptual frames. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• An adjective predicate sentence may be unable to stand alone. • Incompleteness is from the lack of a comparison standard to anchor the comparison by. • Incompleteness also occurs due to syntactic invisibility of a comparison standard. • A gradable adjective maps a degree argument from its lexical semantics into syntax. • The degree argument must be subject to operator/contextual binding and referential. A Chinese sentence with a gradable adjective predicate may exhibit an incompleteness effect. It is proposed in this paper that the effect is caused due to a violation of the comparison standard anchoring condition on a semantic/interpretational level, and/or a violation of the comparison standard visibility condition on a morpho-syntactic level. The possible emergence of such an effect indicates that the predicative use of a gradable adjective in Chinese is a restricted use. It is revealed in this paper that for a gradable adjective in Chinese to be allowed a predicative use, it needs type-shifting by a covert (positive vs. comparative) morpheme whose type can be determined either indirectly by lexical means or implicitly by context-involvement; moreover, the degree argument discharged from the lexical semantics of the gradable adjective into syntax must not be non-referential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Traditional grammar conflates a variety of categories that are distinguished in modern syntactic theory. Items now classified as degree elements ( very, extremely, mostly, completely ) are assimilated by traditional grammar into the broad class of adverbs. Likewise items now classified as determiners ( the, that, a, every, both ) are assimilated into the class of adjectives. The distinction between A and D assumes particular importance within recent debates about whether languages might lack the D category – the Parameterized DP-Hypothesis of Fukui (1986) , Corver (1992) , Zlatić (1997) , Baker (2003) , Bošković (2005) , Despić (2011) , among others. This view holds that languages lacking a definite article do not project DP at all, and realize typical determiner elements uniformly within the category of adjective. In this paper I examine data from Serbian, a much discussed candidate for “DP-less” status, looking at the behavior of the relevant elements both with respect to proposed universal diagnostics for adjectivehood and in comparison with neighboring, uncontroversial DP languages (Macedonian, Bulgarian). I show there is no evidence from either source for assuming adjectival status of the relevant items in Serbian. This finding opposes the crucial prediction of the Parameterized DP-Hypothesis. This work is intended to contribute to the existing cross-linguistic discussion on the issues of determiner parameterization ( Bašić, 2004; Pereltsvaig, 2007; Caruso, 2011; Bailyn, 2012; Pereltsvaig, 2013 , i.a.). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we argue that adjectival passives across languages do not seem to differ in terms of the presence/absence of verbal layers (v, Voice), and we provide morphological evidence for this claim from German, English, and Greek. Particular restrictions observed with adjectival passives compared to verbal passives, such as a more limited availability of event-related modification, are best accounted for under a semantic explanation. In particular, we propose that it follows from an account according to which the underlying event of adjectival passive remains in the kind domain, due to the category change from verb to adjective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Evaluative adjectives have often been claimed to manifest a strong, and even exclusive, preference for the nonrestrictive reading (henceforth the ‘nonrestrictive bias’ of evaluative adjectives). For those languages like French that allow both the post and pre-head positions for at least a subset of their adjectives, a frequent observation reported in support of this claim is that evaluative adjectives are often odd in post-nominal position. The argument relies on what has been called the complementarity hypothesis, namely the hypothesis that pre-head modifiers receive a nonrestrictive interpretation in Romance, while post-head modifiers receive a restrictive interpretation. An immediate problem for this argument is that evaluatives do appear in postnominal positions in corpora. One of the goals of this paper is to reconcile these data with the nonrestrictive bias and the complementarity hypothesis. The idea pursued is that a modifier can either be (non)restrictive according to the standard definitions, which are purely extensional, or be (non)restrictive with respect to a particular modal base α (thus, α -restrictive vs. α -nonrestrictive). Being restrictive or α - restrictive (respectively nonrestrictive or α -nonrestrictive) allows the modifier to appear in the post-head (respectively pre-head) position. In section 2 , we recall the standard (purely extensional) definitions of (non)restrictivity. We then show that these definitions cannot distinguish between restrictive and nonrestrictive modifiers in a number of contexts, e.g. in non-partitive indefinites. In section 2.3 , we introduce modal definitions of (non)restrictivity that solve the problem. Section 3 identifies the contexts in which evaluative adjectives can appear in post-nominal position and explains why, on the basis of the definitions of ( α )-(non)restrictivity built in previous sections. The analysis proposed is compared with two previous accounts of the nonrestrictive bias of evaluative predicates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While we can name examples of modifiers (e.g. adjectives, adverbs, PPs, relative clauses), it is not uncontroversial to what extent “modifier” is a syntactic term and how we should represent modification as part of a semantic model. This being true, modification is not only interesting because it challenges a simple composition system that proceeds through application of functions to arguments. In this introduction we present four papers that show that research on modification proves to be relevant for current investigations on the syntax–semantics interface as well as the language–cognition interface. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: In this paper an analysis is presented of prenominal and postnominal passive participles in English and Dutch. Besides the three types of participles commonly distinguished in the literature (statives, resultatives, and postnominal eventive participles), a fourth type is distinguished: prenominal eventive participles. It is claimed that the four types of participles have a different interpretation, which is related to a different internal syntactic structure. The analysis of passive participles is also extended to other types of deverbal modifiers. It is argued that the internal syntactic structure of the four types of participles forces their merging to the left or the right of the noun. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This paper explores a set of surprising contrasts between two major classes of adjectives in Tagalog. It is concerned, in particular, with the discovery that adjectival passives in Tagalog cannot occur as the main predicate of various types of impersonal clauses—i.e., clause types in which the adjectives sole argument cannot be promoted to subject. I argue that this fact follows ultimately from the claim that adjectival passives are unaccusative. This claim is compared with the observation that, in many other languages (e.g., Hebrew), adjectival passives apparently pattern as unergative. I explore the hypothesis that differences relating to the argument structure of adjectival passives can be related to larger architectural differences among languages, relating specifically to the structure of VP. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: In this paper formal accounts of nominal ellipsis are compared with information-structural approaches in the light of Spanish data. It is first shown that empty nominals in this language are not subject to formal conditions, such as proper government by a functional category and/or identification by strong agreement. It is then proposed that nominal ellipsis obeys a focus condition, whereby the remnant of ellipsis selects a relevant alternative or subset in a contextually given set of equivalent alternatives. This condition will allow us to explain, in particular, why certain determiners and kinds of adjectives are excluded in Spanish elliptical DPs. Finally, a technical implementation of this idea is offered combining feature assignment at the stage of lexical insertion with PF and LF interpretation of the features involved. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Welsh noun–adjective and noun–possessor orders are widely analysed as involving movement of the noun to the head of a functional projection above the adjective or possessor. This account is consistent with the claim that Welsh adjectives appear in a universally prescribed order similar to that laid down for English. This paper considers the order and interpretation of adjectives in Welsh in more detail, arguing that the ordering data for Welsh adjectives is more complex than this, with both ‘universal’ and ‘mirror-image’ orders appearing under certain circumstances. A straightforward implementation of an N-raising approach is therefore not possible. Possible amendments, supplementing or replacing N-movement with phrasal movement within the DP are also considered, but are shown to run into severe problems of implementation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

In this paper we distinguish between the two instances of word-final -s characterizing English possessive forms: (i) the pronominal final -s of his and (ii) the full-DP final -s of Mary's. We argue that the pronouns are morphologically complex, consisting of a nominative pronoun (he, you) and the endings -s or -r, which correspond to the copular forms is and are (he's, you're). As such, they are not real possessive markers, but rather, sg./pl, copulas, which together with the nominative pronoun yield a possessive pronominal form (his, your). We adopt the idea that the agreement between pronoun and copula is triggered in a spec-head configuration in a DP-internal agreement projection [E. Ritter, Nat. Lang. Linguist. Theory 13 (1995) 405; R.-M. Déchaine, M. Wiltschko, Linguist. Inq. 33.3 (2002) 409]. We further argue, in line with Kayne [Stud. Linguist. 47.1 (1993) 3] (and in contrast with den Dikken [M. den Dikken, (Anti-)agreement in DP, in: R. van Bezooijen, R. Kager (Eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands, John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 1998, p. 95; On the structural representation of possession and agreement: the case of (anti-)agreement in Hungarian possessed nominal phrases, in: I. Kenesi (Ed.), Crossing Boundaries: Advances in the Theory of Central and Eastern European Languages, John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 1999, p. 137], that the -s of Mary's book and a book of Mary's is not a copula, but rather a (singular) number marker akin to that found in the verbal domain (she eats). Plural possessive DPs (the kids' mother), according to our analysis, are plural DPs (the kids) further marked with a null plural number morpheme ‘ø’ (the kids'ø mother). We claim that this is the same as the (null) plural morpheme found in the verbal domain (she eats vs. they eatø). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• The paper flesh outs various flavors of phah 4 in Taiwanese Southern Min. • I focus on its role in anticausatives and antipassives beyond causatives. • The findings have a cross-linguistic implication. 拍 phah 4 comes in various flavors in Taiwanese Southern Min. It is taken as a manifestation of various types of little v above the verb. It may be the functional head of causatives in alternation with unaccusatives. However, when coupled with some negative phrases it yields anti-causatives expressing adversity meaning. 拍 phah 4 is also instrumental in forming antipassives and even developing scalar adjectives modifiable by degree adverbs. The teasing out of the chameleon 拍 phah 4 construed as three kinds of little v in bringing causatives, anti-causatives and antipassives in Taiwanese Southern Min aims to deepen our understanding of its syntactic behavior and semantic interpretation from a cross-linguistic perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• We investigate attachment of the English suffix - ish to verbs. • Historical and contemporary data are presented. • Cases where the suffix attaches to longer phrases are presented. • Morphosyntactically, - ish is best described as a phrasal affix or 'cliticoid'. This paper considers the evidence that the English suffix - ish (e.g. yellowish , baldish , ticklish , fivish , childish) can be attached to verbs, making it more clitic-like than a true affix. We discuss competing hypotheses in this light and present new evidence from historical and contemporary sources. In morphological theory, this can be interpreted as regarding -ish as a 'cliticoid', one step away from a true clitic on the affix-clitic continuum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Mandarin adjectives are category-less roots under an extended projection of AP. • Degree morphemes is needed if a language has many roots but no adjective markers. • Some "nouns" have adjectival use, since roots fit into positions of any kind. • No degree morphemes required in prenominal adjectives as de can be categoriser. This paper revisits a well-known puzzle that adjectives in Mandarin generally require overt degree morphology to extend a positive interpretation. Based on the framework of Borer's Contextual Categorisation, I argue that this is because most Mandarin adjectives are category-less roots which need to merge in a position required to be A-equivalent by a functional node within the extended projections of AP. When degree morphemes are unavailable, roots can rely upon higher nodes in the extended projection line of AP as the head of CP. The analysis predicts that a language needs degree morphology for adjective predicates only when it has a large collection of category-less roots but no adjective markers, which rules English and Japanese out. Two observations support the root-categorisation assumption. One is the adjectival use of some words which are more typically interpreted as nouns. It's expected because roots naturally fit into positions of any kind. The other one is the lack of obligatory degree morphemes when adjectives are used as prenominal modifiers, since the modification marker de is an equally qualified categoriser for roots. The proposal indicates that Mandarin is not particularly special in the predicate domain, but just influenced by settings of universal modules. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• RP pragmatic marker bushi developed from RP rhetorical question tag bushi. • LP pragmatic marker bushi developed from LP negative response marker bushi. • Developments of RP/LP pragmatic markers bushi involved negative adjectival bushi. Contrary to the claims of previous studies, the development of Modern Chinese right-periphery (RP) pragmatic marker bushi does not involve the shi X bushi X construction, and the development of Modern Chinese left-periphery (LP) pragmatic marker bushi does not involve the negative copula use of bushi in a clause-medial position. Rather, the RP pragmatic marker bushi originates from the use of the negative adjective bushi in a clause-final position as a rhetorical question tag, while the LP pragmatic marker bushi originates from the negative adjective bushi used as a negative response to the previous speaker's question or statement. Our accounts are supported by cross-linguistic data on the grammaticalization pathway from a negative response marker or a negative rhetorical question tag to a pragmatic/discourse marker. Expanding beyond earlier works, this paper proposes two diachronic trajectories for the formation of phrases or structures involving shi in Chinese: one develops from shi as a demonstrative and later a copula; the other originates from shi as an adjective meaning 'correct, true'. These two trajectories account for the synchronic and diachronic issues of almost all the constructions involving shi in Chinese. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Deverbal nominals possess no internal syntactic VP structure. • Simple nominals can manifest the same properties as deverbal nominals. • Argument structure of nominals is not assigned syntax-internally. • Postnominal adverbs are not internal to NPs/DPs. • The complementarity claim of adjectives and adverbs is upheld. Deverbal nominals with verbal morphology and PROCESS as their semantic character have been claimed to possess syntactic VP structure (Bruening, 2018a; Borer, 2013; Alexiadou, 2009; Roeper, 2005; Fu et al., 2001 , etc.). The paper shows that this claim is incorrect. Specifically, properties such as adverbial postmodification and coreference with ' do so ', so far admitted only of deverbal nominals and argued to be evidence of VP in them, are shown to be possible also with simple nominals. I argue that some of the proposed evidence of VP in deverbal nominals, namely adverbial postmodification, is in itself flawed since postnominal adverbs are not syntactically internal to nominal phrases (NPs/DPs). The two acceptability surveys conducted affirm the corpus data, offering at the same time new insights into an understudied area, that is, coreference between nominals and ' do so '. I propose that simple and inanimate role nominals are likely to be coreferential with this anaphor if the former denote a semantic event and the latter are perceived as performing an intransitive action. I further argue for a distinction between internal and external syntactic structures, showing that Payne et al.'s (2010) rejection of the complementarity claim of adjectives and adverbs lacks syntactic support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]