Search

Adverbs and Functional Heads: a Cross-Linguistic perspective (Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press)—one of the founding works of "Syntactic Cartography"—combines some of the developments in Syntactic Theory from the 1980s and 1990s with insightful contributions from Linguistic Typology. This paper has two interrelated goals. First, it aims to review the fundamental theses of Cinque's monography of 1999—which are far from controversial among scholars working in Cartography—; at the same time it provides conceptual support to them. Secondly, it aims to explore some methodological tools of Syntactic Cartography presented and discussed by Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press, namely the so-called precedence-and-transitivity tests—after a brief discussion on methodology used to recognise the functional categories, namely the criterion by Jackendoff, Ray. 1972. Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press—and the use of the hierarchies as tools to detect intra and interlinguistic variation. With regard to this latter issue, the paper gathers data from Brazilian Portuguese, Canadian English and Colombian Spanish on verb raising. The discussion of the data not only favours Cinque, Guglielmo. 2017. On the status of functional categories (heads and phrases). Language and Linguistics 18(4). 521–576 recent updates of his theoretical approach to the cartography of the clause but also shows how Cartography offers a natural scenario for a methodological approach to both micro and macro-variation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This introduction proposes to investigate mismatches and indeterminacies in languages much more than has hitherto been done. Such seemingly unruly aspects of language(s), it is argued, are interesting since they may help shed light on the internal make-up of grammatical systems. The question of the internal make-up of grammar(s), it is argued, cannot be addressed by the normal modus operandi of linguistic research, which is to find matches (rather than mismatches) between the observable (sound and meaning) interface systems, and to find how the interface representations map unto each other deterministically: It is only in the “lo-fi” aspects of mappings that the internal mechanisms of the overall grammatical architecture may reveal themselves.

This predicts that extraction from EQs under rogative verbs should yield structural island effects, typically associated with stark unacceptability, whereas extraction from EQs under responsive verbs should yield no structural island effects and should obtain acceptable ratings. Applying this logic to EQs, we make the following predictions: If EQs under rogative verbs are necessarily analyzed as structural islands, extraction from EQs under rogative verbs should be consistently judged unacceptable and we expect to see large island effects. The preponderance of acceptable ratings in both EQ-island conditions suggests that neither EQ is a syntactic island in Spanish, contrary to the analysis in [60], where it was proposed that I ask i -EQs were syntactic islands and I know i -EQs were not. In the non-island conditions (10a), (10c), the embedded structure is a declarative clause, which does not give rise to island effects, whereas in the island conditions (10b), (10d), it is an EQ, expected to yield island effects. If, on the other hand, EQs under rogative verbs are not structural islands we either expect to see (i) no island effects at all, or (ii) smaller island effects characterized by inconsistent judgment distributions. [Extracted from the article]

If there is no adjunction to X', or D' specifically, the second construction cannot involve a Doubly-filled DP. 3.3.2 Option 2: complex Spec,DP In this option, the embedded DP and the indefinite article form a constituent inside the specifier of DP. As such, we could propose that the embedded DP is in Spec,DP, and the indefinite article is in D. Spec-head constellations are often employed to explain cases of adjacency (e.g., the Verb-Second constraint in the Germanic languages). To sum up thus far, I eyner i and I epes i are similar to the possessive pronoun in the second construction: these elements can precede the indefinite article, and they can be separated from it by other words. Focusing on the possessive pronoun, the latter and the indefinite article could form a doubly-filled DP (29a) where the pronoun is in Spec,DP and the article in D. Both of these elements could also form a complex specifier in Spec,DP (29b). Keywords: definiteness; DP-structure; possessives; Yiddish EN definiteness DP-structure possessives Yiddish 347 393 47 03/11/22 20220301 NES 220301 1 Introduction The interpretation of a possessive DP ( I John's book i ) depends on the definiteness of the possessor itself ( I John i ). [Extracted from the article]

In subordinate clauses, the finite verb also belongs to the verb cluster, so that the terms "verb cluster" and "verb construction" in that syntactic context refer to the same verbs. Keywords: Dutch; functional category; selectional restriction; semantic scope; verb construction EN Dutch functional category selectional restriction semantic scope verb construction 123 176 54 01/18/22 20220101 NES 220101 1 Introduction Dutch is known for its ability to combine a wide variety of verbs into complex verb constructions. Our corpus data (Table 15) show that perception and causative verbs are overwhelmingly used as nonfinite verbs in three-verb constructions (point estimate proportion for finite perception/causative verbs 0.04; 95% CI, 5 comparisons, finite I zien: i 0 I . i 04-0.30, which means that I zien i is somewhat more commonly finite than the other perception/causative verbs, according to our data). In particular, the tendency for a particular verb or a group of verbs to appear as finite or nonfinite verbs in a three-verb construction is of interest, which is captured by the proportion of finite versus nonfinite occurrences for this verb or verb group. A last verb that requires some extra discussion is I gaan. i As an aspectual marker, it differs from other external aspect verbs, in that it is frequently used as a finite verb with scope over internal aspect verbs, causative verbs and passive auxiliaries. [Extracted from the article]

Under the P» M model, the generalization is that the glottal stop can only be realized when the stem is monosyllabic (as well as other phonological factors, such as the presence of a lexical glottal stop in the stem and if the stem begins with a cluster or not). The prosodic word in Tlapanec can consist simply of a stem, a stem + an affix, or possibly stem + stem compounds. Recall that the alternation was between the allomorphs I gita i - and I gi - i , the former occurring with disyllabic stems, while the latter with monosyllabic stems; with the latter, the glottal stop is deleted before a stem-initial consonant cluster or when the stem contains a glottal stop. (44) HT

2 Second language acquisition, Bilingualism and Generative Grammar It was only at the very end of last century that generative linguists started asking the question of how a second language is acquired and whether it taps on the same processes as first language acquisition (see [25] for a pioneering example). Keywords: language acquisition; Bilingualism; Generative Grammar EN language acquisition Bilingualism Generative Grammar 141 148 8 03/21/22 20220101 NES 220101 1 Introduction: language acquisition and Generative Grammar The question of how languages are learned is a very late arrival in Linguistics. 3 Language variation and Bilingualism in Generative Grammar Generative linguistics (at least since Chomsky 1981 and up to [8]) conceives of language diversity as a systematic phenomenon. Language acquisition would from then on be a key question in Generative Grammar, whose main task should be to lay out what constitutes our knowledge of language and explain how (much of) it is acquired ([7]; [27]). [Extracted from the article]

The article explores optimality theory (OT) to account for the phenomenon of identity occurrence resulting from clausal recursion, which we argue is derived from syntactic embedding and syntactic adjunction. It shows that the interaction between faithfulness and economy constraints allows for the optional deletion of functional morphemes that occur repetitively.

The article argues against a uniform analysis, based on new evidence from Noun Phrase Ellipsis. Specifically, I argue that the possessor in the Construct State merges in complement position of the possessum, whereas in the Free State, the possessor is an adjunct attached to a higher functional projection above the possessum.

The article explores examines various types of bracketing paradoxes: classical "personal noun" constructions, parasynthetic compounds, agentive deverbal nouns, compound denominal adjectives, plural nouns with lexicalized modifiers, multiple auxiliary constructions, and German particle verb constructions.

This paper is an attempt to make a comparison between Lakoff and Johnson's conceptual metaphor theory and Chomsky's transformational generative grammar, and to demonstrate a Chomskyan postulation in the former. Although Lakoff and Johnson regard Chomsky's linguistics as a modern representative of traditional Western philosophies of language that tend to highlight the a priori assumptions rather than empirical findings, the cognitive theory of metaphor contains a Chomskyan metaphysical assumption as its most important notion, i.e. the assumption of conceptual metaphors. Thus, what the present paper wants to argue with ample evidence is that Lakoff and Johnson's conceptual metaphor theory resembles Chomsky's logic and that their notion of conceptual metaphors is very much a Chomskyan postulation. What the present study tries to further demonstrate is that the abovementioned two theories actually have many points in common, which also implies that Lakoff and Johnson have failed to avoid the paradigm that they believe is conflicting with their own. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I don't think that this is the only way to do linguistics, I don't think that it should have any particular priority, epistemologically or sociologically, over other ways to do linguistics, but I do think that it is an important approach and that we can learn much about FL/L by pursuing it. 3 On the "theoretical" in theoretical linguistics It will be clear from the discussion in the last section that I have a very different view of what theoretical linguistics is from that in GLU. I do have some quibbles about GLU's terminological proposal, that generative grammar is a "Natural Kinds Programme", mainly because I think the terminology is inexact. Haspelmath's 2021 target paper, I General linguistics must be based on universals (or nonconventional aspects of language) i (which I'll abbreviate here as GLU) seeks to address the question of how linguistics should deal with what he sees as a paradox at the heart of the enterprise, his General Linguistics Paradox in (1). [Extracted from the article]

This introduction proposes to investigate mismatches and indeterminacies in languages much more than has hitherto been done. Such seemingly unruly aspects of language(s), it is argued, are interesting since they may help shed light on the internal make-up of grammatical systems. The question of the internal make-up of grammar(s), it is argued, cannot be addressed by the normal modus operandi of linguistic research, which is to find matches (rather than mismatches) between the observable (sound and meaning) interface systems, and to find how the interface representations map unto each other deterministically: It is only in the "lo-fi" aspects of mappings that the internal mechanisms of the overall grammatical architecture may reveal themselves. The introduction also points out that our concern is independent of the various theoretical orientations linguists may choose for their work, since the problem presents itself in all approaches to language research currently available, it seems – if in slightly different ways. We propose, in sum, that mismatches and indeterminacies are an extremely worthwhile field for future linguistic research, and one that should be on the agenda (or minimally, within the field of view) for linguists of all theoretical convictions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Her general preference is for simplex items over complex representations: truthmakers over clauses specifying truth conditions, attitudinal and modal objects over possible-world predicates, attitudinal-and-modal-object predicates over orderings and divisions among possible worlds as attitudinal and modal bases. The clause in the complement of this head is a predicate over situations, in line with the standard view of clauses and propositional meanings. If the noun emerging through raising refers in the domain of special types of objects, then already the item in the specifier of the respective functional projection, the one that derives a complement clause by moving out of it, may be of this type: a predicate over attitudinal or modal objects. These data indicate that the complement clause effects maximization: there cannot be two beliefs that disinfectants cure from viruses, there cannot be two claims that the earth is concave - unless the noun is interpreted to refer to an event of claiming rather than to the content expressed by a clause, where only the latter is relevant for our discussion. [Extracted from the article]

Chomsky is an evolutionary figure in linguistics. His greatest contribution lies in transformational generative grammar, which put an end to the leading position structuralism had held in language for more than 30 years. His naturalistic methodology has greatly influenced the research of both linguistics and psychology, and he is also considered to be the first to study language from the cognitive perspective. He insists on a naturalistic methodology; therefore, he was even considered by some to be a physicalist. However, this is not the case. On the contrary, TGG, as a critique of the behaviorist view of language, is intertwined with a critique of physicalism. On the one hand, he thinks the mind, like chemical elements and electrons, can be approached from a third-person perspective; on the other hand, he again admits there exists consciousness, which can be merely approached in terms of a firstperson authority, which, therefore, is a fatal challenge to his core theory. Now there remains a new solution to this dilemma, that is, to admit that the mind is a special natural phenomenon with two means of existence: one is involved in physical aspects with the brain, and the other is concerned with something mental, with the former approached by a third-person perspective and the latter better researched via a first-person authority.

Berlin: De Gruyter 2017 (Sprache und Wissen 30). Berlin: De Gruyter 2017 (Sprache und Wissen 27). Berlin: De Gruyter 2017 (Sprache und Wissen 26). Berlin: De Gruyter 2017 (Sprache und Wissen 31) Lazarescu, Ioan/Sava, Doris (Hg.): Berlin: De Gruyter 2017 (Sprache und Wissen 28). [Extracted from the article]

This article argues that there is no narrow syntax, and that the language faculty merely consists of the semantic and phonological components, and linking between these and other systems. It follows as a logical consequence from the latest works of Chomsky (2007 et seq.) and Hauser et al. (2002) who argue that narrow syntax consists of as few features as possible, ideally only recursive embedding and mapping to the interfaces, and Nordström (2014) who shows that the language faculty cannot involve recursive embedding if one wants it to be able to handle discrete infinity, but must merely be a discrete combinatorial system. As such, it shares features with many other mental processes, such as tool making, and, this paper argues, should not be seen as a separate module. The discrete combinatorial processes, as argued here, take place in the semantic and phonological components, which are linked by an axonal pathway. The paper further shows that other potential features of narrow syntax, namely word order, agreement and case (Pinker and Jackendoff 2005; Chomsky 2000 et seq.) can also perfectly well be located within the semantic and phonological components, dispensing with so-called uninterpretable features and leading to the ultimate conclusion that there is no narrow syntax. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research on bilingual grammars from a formal perspective has often come under the guise of mainstream generative grammar. Since the inception of Chomsky's (1995 et seq.) Minimalist Program (MP), many scholars have adopted the notion of formal features representing abstract grammatical information that can be associated with lexical items. To model changes in bilingual grammars due to the acquisition of particular forms, the attrition of information by means of incomplete acquisition or the lack of usage throughout the course of the lifespan, or due to intense contact with another grammar, the mechanism known as feature reassembly (e.g. Lardiere 1998) - whereby abstract grammatical information in the form of formal features can be detached and reassigned to other lexical items - has enjoyed a great deal of success in the literature. In this article we argue that in spite of this success, the analysis of aspects of bilingual grammars can be improved upon by replacing the notion of feature reassembly with the satisfaction of constraints. Here we provide conceptual and empirical evidence arguing for the adoption of constraint satisfaction in place of the feature reassembly mechanism. Finally, in addition to constraint satisfaction we also make the case for adopting a parallel model of cognition and language for the bilingual mind, which is strongly supported by recent psycholinguistic and neurolinguistic studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]