1,721,288 research outputs found
The head of Verb+Noun compounds in the Romance languages
No full textVerb+Noun compounds in Spanish and the other Romance languages have well-known curious properties: (i) lack of nominalizing affix on the Verb; (ii) obligatory presence of the Noun, interpreted as the direct object of the Verb; (iii) interpretation as referring to persons or instruments able to perform the action expressed by the transitive verb. Compounds are uncommon in the Romance languages, whereas they are common and very productive in the Germanic languages. Verb+Noun compounds, however, are hardly found in the Germanic languages. The "Minimalist" model adopted in the analysis will provide the basic explanation: Verb+Noun compounds reflect the most "basic" syntactic structure, which can be used by default as a lexical process in the Romance languages, where "real compounding", namely, the incorporation of the noun into the verb, does not occur. The basic syntactic-lexical process is completed by another default process: the Verb+Noun is a lexical predicate in need of a subject, which is, again, provided "by default": [+HUMAN] or, by extension, [+INSTRUMENT] interpretation
Reference points in linguistic construal: Scalar adjectives revisited
No full textThis paper addresses one of the central assumptions in the analysis of scalar adjectives that their positive form is obligatorily interpreted vis-à-vis an average value. By this view, tall and taller than average are equivalent expressions. Counter to this well-established view, I argue that the two constructions are not equivalent; there are important semantic and functional differences between them. First, not all uses of the positive form are interpreted vis-à-vis an average value. Second, even in contexts where the average is relevant, it is not sufficient by itself: several standards of comparison are involved in the interpretation of scalar adjectives. Third, bare scalars and the Aer-than-average construction select different scale parts as their profile and are in this sense different construals of the gradual scale
Obviation properties of the Dutch d-pronoun
No full textThe paper discusses a decisive difference in Dutch between the d(emonstrative)-pronoun and the p(ersonal)-pronoun. The d-pronoun is a grammatical device for focus-to-topic-shift. Van Kampen (2010) derived this from two properties of the d-pronoun, neither of them present in the p-pronoun. (i) The d-pronoun obviates as antecedent all arguments except the first preceding focus. (ii) The d-pronoun introduces the new topic of its sentence. The present paper derives three other properties of the d-pronoun. The d-pronoun allows a bound variable reading in certain complex CPs (section 2). A d-pronoun in a temporal adjunct CP can bind a quantifier in the matrix CP, but it does not do so in non-temporal adjunct CPs (section 3), nor in complement CPs (section 4). Since the d-pronoun is not only an anaphor locally bound by the first preceding focus, but also a discourse anaphor, it invites a reconsideration of the notion ‘bound anaphor’ in the Binding Theory
Anaforische middelen voor topicverschuiving
Full text linkThird person pronouns that require an antecedent beyond their immediate clause build discourse coherence. There are two kinds of such pronouns in Dutch, p(ersonal)-pronouns and d(emonstrative)-pronouns. They make different contributions to the discourse coherence and the present paper deals with that difference. The d-pronouns have an obviative effect. That is, they have an antecedent restriction. They require a non-topic from the preceding sentence as its antecedent in order to introduce it as the topic of the new sentence. The result is that d-pronouns function as a topic-shifting device. The p-pronouns, by contrast, do not impose such a restriction on their antecedent, nor do they have the ensuing topic-shifting function. The topic-stating function of d-pronouns finds its origin in early child language, where the d-pronoun indicates a referent that is salient in the speech situation: “see pointing gesture or gaze of me speaker”. In later child language the topic-stating function is extended to the linguistic discourse: “or listen to the preceding focus constituent”. A comparison of the topic-stating devices in German, French and Italian leads me to reject Ariel’s (1990) accessibility hierarchy for anaphoric pronouns
Jürgen Jaspers: De klank van de stad. Stedelijke meertaligheid en interculturele communicatie (red.). Leuven, ACCO, 2009. 219 blz.
No full textDe klank van de stad is geschreven naar aanleiding van een congres over hetzelfde thema, stedelijke meertaligheid (maart 2008, Antwerpen). De auteurs waren in meerderheid sprekers bij het congres die hun presentaties in soms wat gewijzigde vorm hebben opgeschreven. Iedereen die wel eens te maken heeft gehad met conference proceedings weet dat het een enorme prestatie is wanneer het boek binnen een jaar na het congres al beschikbaar is. Dat het bovendien ook nog eens een zeer leesbaar en actueel boek is geworden mag gerust worden gezien als een groot compliment aan het adres van de auteurs en vooral de redacteur, Jürgen Jaspers
CP-celection is not (only) a lexical property: evidence from Russian
No full textThe paper discusses the problem of selection for a that-clause among verbs that take DP/PPs with propositional meaning. It is largely assumed that whether a given verb selects for a that-clause is a lexical property of the verb (or, equivalently, property of the unique theta-role that would be assigned to the clause). I challenge this view providing examples from Russian where the verb’s ability to take a that-clause seems to be affected by such processes as passivization or perfectivization of the verb
- …
