15,174 research outputs found
PP-over-V meets Universal 20
No full textIt has proven hard to force a decision between rival analyses of Universal 20. This is because new typological data are scarce, and the number of syntactic tests applicable in the noun phrase is relatively small. I therefore consider a related set of facts that involve language-internal word order variation in the verb phrase. I first show that the pattern of grammatical and ungrammatical orders in Dutch verb phrases containing three PPs closely matches the pattern of attested and unattested orders in the noun phrase. I then use the distribution of the particle pas ‘only’ to argue that PP extraposition results from variation in the linearization of sister nodes. This means that the symmetric account of Universal 20 in Abels and Neeleman (Syntax 15:25–74, 2012) extends to the Dutch data, but the antisymmetric account in Cinque (Linguist Inquiry 36:315–332, 2005) does not
Agreement Weakening at PF: A Reply to Benmamoun and Lorimor
No full textBenmamoun and Lorimor (2006) dispute the claim made in Ackema and Neeleman 2003 that certain agreement alternations in Standard Arabic, and various related phenomena, can successfully be analyzed in terms of postsyntactic spell-out rules that are sensitive to prosodic structure. In this reply, we argue that the data discussed by Benmamoun and Lorimor do not warrant their conclusion, and in fact provide further evidence in favor of our original analysis
Default person versus default number in agreement
No full textIn this paper, we compare the behaviour of the default in the person system (third person) withthe default in the number system (singular). We argue, following Nevins (2007; 2011), thatthird person pronouns have person features, while singular DPs lack number features. Theevidence for these claims comes from situations in which a single head agrees with multiple DPs that have contrasting person and number specifications. In case the number of morphological slots in which agreement can be realized is lower than the number of agreement relations established in syntax, such contrasting specification may prove problematic. As it turns out, conflicts between singular and plural do not result in ungrammaticality, but conflicts between third person and first or second person do. Such person clashes can be avoided if the morphological realization of the relevant person features is syncretic. Alternatively, languages may make use of a person hierarchy that regulates the morphological realization of conflicting specifications for person. The argument we present is rooted in, and supports, the theory of person developed in Ackema & Neeleman (2013; to appear)
AP Adjacency as a Precedence Constraint
No full textAttributive APs precede certain other categories (PPs, genitive DPs, etc.), when the noun precedes both ( Giurgea 2009 , Adger 2012 ). This observation may suggest an analysis in terms of X-bar-style “structural layering.” However, such an account faces several problems: (a) in languages with PP-AP-N order, scrambling of the AP is permitted; (b) in languages with AP-N-PP or PP-N-AP order, there is evidence that the AP can c-command the PP, as well as the other way around; and (c) in languages with N-AP-PP order, the AP can take scope over the PP, as well as the other way around, arguably as a consequence of a structural ambiguity. We therefore develop an alternative analysis based on a striking parallel between the syntax of attributive APs and that of objects: while OV languages systematically allow adverbs to intervene between object and verb, VO languages tend to require verb-object-adverb order. This aspect of verbal syntax is familiar and can be captured in terms of a well-known linear constraint: Case Adjacency ( Stowell 1981 , Janke and Neeleman 2012 ). We propose that this constraint has a nominal counterpart that ensures N-AP adjacency in noun-initial structures. Thus, this instance of NP/VP parallelism has its source in parallel constraints, rather than parallel structural layers.</jats:p
Left peripheral arguments and discourse interface strategies in Yucatec Maya
No full textSkopeteas S, Verhoeven E. Left peripheral arguments and discourse interface strategies in Yucatec Maya. In: Neeleman A, Kucerova I, eds. Contrasts and positions in information structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012: 296-321.Constituents in the left periphery are often assumed to bear information structural functions such as topic and focus. Yucatec Maya provides the empirical basis for a challenging case study in this respect, since it provides a distinction between a sentence-initial position that is characterized by a series of enclitics and is labeled ‘topic position’, and an immediately preverbal position that is labeled ‘focus position’. This paper addresses the issue where do the interpretational properties of the left peripheral constituents come from and considers two alternative hypotheses: (a) the left peripheral constituents occupy the Specifier positions of functional projections that bear information structural features such as ‘topic’ and ‘focus’ and (b) the syntactic positions in the left periphery are underspecified with respect to information structure. The data presented in this paper support the view of hypothesis (b) and show that the interpretational properties of the left peripheral positions can be accounted for through the interaction of discourse principles that are independent from syntax with the properties of prosodic phrasing, that indirectly refer to constituent structure
Link stability estimation based on link connectivity changes in mobile ad-hoc networks
No full textDear Wang,
Re: Link Stability Estimation Based on Link Connectivity Changes in Mobile Ad-hoc Networks
I have not been able to assess if this is an author version peer-reviewed or is it an author version non peer reviewed. Could you please clarify this so I can proceed to add your paper to Spiral. Spiral digital repository only accept peer-reviewed papers.
30/11/12 author has confirmed peer reviewe
- …
