Cover not available
Part of
Approaches to Hungarian: Volume 15: Papers from the 2015 Leiden Conference
Edited by Harry van der Hulst and Anikó Lipták
[Approaches to Hungarian 15] 2017
► pp. 65–94

Chapter 3
Two positions for verbal modifiers

Evidence from derived particle verbs

This paper brings into question recent proposals that all types of Hungarian verbal modifiers are merged in the complement zone of the verb, and argues that certain verbal particles and resultatives are merged as specifiers in the extended verb phrase. The empirical focus of the paper is inseparable particle verbs. Verbal particles and resultatives do not behave uniformly when it comes to combinability with inseparable particle verbs: some particles and resultatives can co-occur with inseparable particles verbs, while others cannot. We will argue that particles and resultatives that belong to the former group are merged in a specifier position, while those belonging to the latter group are merged in the verb’s complement. Our results also support the view that objects are merged as specifiers rather than as complements (Bowers, 1993; Arad, 1996; Hale & Keyser, 1993; and Den Dikken, 2015b).
Keywords: verbal modifier, (in)separable verbal particle, exhaustive verbal particle, resultative, verb phrase, argument structure
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Inseparable particle verbs
  • 3.Inseparable particles have some syntactic visibility
    • 3.1Co-occurrence with preverbal bare objects
    • 3.2Co-occurrence verbal particles
    • 3.3Co-occurrence with resultatives
  • 4.Accounting for the inseparability of the particle
    • 4.1Theoretical background
    • 4.2The structure of inseparable particle verbs
  • 5.Accounting for the co-occurrence restrictions
  • 6.Consequences for argument structure
  • 7.Variation
  • 8.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 24 August 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/atoh.15.03heg
References (56)
References
Ackerman, Farrell. 1987. Pronominal incorporation: The case of prefixal adverbs. In István Kenesei (ed.), Approaches to Hungarian 2: theories and analyses, 213–260. Szeged: JATE.Google Scholar
Ackerman, Farrell & Gert Webelhuth. 1998. A theory of predicates. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis. 2001. Functional structure in nominals: nominalization, and ergativity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logo.Google Scholar
. 2013. Nominal vs. verbal -ing constructions and the development of the English progressive. English Linguistics Research 2(2). 126–140. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis, Gianina Iordăchioaia & Elena Soare. 2010. Number/aspect interactions in the syntax of nominalizations: a Distributed Morphology approach. Journal of Linguistics 46. 537–573. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Arad, Maya. 1996. A minimalist view of the syntax-lexical semantics interface. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 8. 1–30.Google Scholar
Baumer, Donald. 2008. On nP: Evidence for a DP-internal phase head. University of Washington MA thesis.Google Scholar
Benkő, Loránd (ed.). 1967. A magyar nyelv történeti-etimológiai szótára, vol. 1. A-GY. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan David. 2012. Universals in comparative morphology: suppletion, superlatives, and the structure of words. Current Studies in Linguistics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bowers, John. 1993. The syntax of predication. Linguistic Inquiry 24. 591–656.Google Scholar
Caha, Pavel. 2009. The Nanosyntax of Case: University of Tromsø, CASTL dissertation.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1993. A minimalist program for linguistic theory. In Kenneth Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2013. Problems of projection. Lingua 130. 33–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cornilescu, Alexandra & Anca Dinu. 2013. Adjectives and specificity. Revue roumaine de linguistique 58(4). 455–480.Google Scholar
Cornilescu, Alexandra & Alexandru Nicolae. 2011. On the syntax of Romanian definite phrases: Changes in the patterns of definiteness checking. In Petra Sleeman & Harry Perridon (eds.), The Noun Phrase in Romance and Germanic: Structure, variation, and change, 193–222. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Dékány, Éva. 2014. Argument structure and functional projections in Old Hungarian verbal gerunds. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 61(3). 317–361. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Dékány, Éva & Veronika Hegedűs. 2015. Word order variation in Hungarian PPs. In Katalin É. Kiss, Balázs Surányi and Éva Dékány (eds.), Approaches to Hungarian 14: Papers from the 2013 Piliscsaba conference, 95–120. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Dikken, Marcel den. 2006. Relators and linkers: The syntax of predication, predicate inversion, and copulas. Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 47. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2007. Phase extension: Contours of a theory of the role of head movement in phrasal extraction. Theoretical Linguistics 33(1). 141. DOI logo.Google Scholar
. 2015a. The morphosyntax of alienable and inalienable possession: The Hungarian contribution. In Katalin É. Kiss, Balázs Surányi and Éva Dékány (eds.), Approaches to Hungarian 14: Papers from the 2013 Piliscsaba conference, 121–145. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo.Google Scholar
. 2015b. Raising the subject of the ‘object-of’ relation. In Ángel J. Gallego & Dennis Ott (eds.), MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 77. 50 years later: Reflections on Chomsky's Aspects, 85–98. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
É. Kiss, Katalin. 2006. The function and the syntax of the verbal particle. In Katalin É. Kiss (ed.), Event structure and the left periphery. Studies on Hungarian, vol. 68. Studies in natural language and linguistic theory, 17–55. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Embick, David & Rolf Noyer. 2001. Movement operations after syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 32(4). 555–595. DOI logo.Google Scholar
. 2007. Distributed morphology and the syntax-morphology interface. In Gillian Ramchand & Charles Reiss (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic interfaces, 289–324. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Eszes, Boldizsár. 2005. Experiens alanyú meg igekötős igék szemantikája. Nyelvtudományi Közlemények 102. 113–135.Google Scholar
. 2006. Verbal particles telicizing stative psych verbs. In Katalin É. Kiss (ed.), Event structure and the left periphery. Studies on Hungarian, vol. 68. Studies in natural language and linguistic theory, 57–74. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Farkas, Judit. 2013. Az ige analógiájára működő -hAtÓ és -AndÓ konstrukciók. In Szilágyi N. Sándor & Edit Kádár (eds.), Analógia és modern nyelvtudomány, 51–62. Kolozsvár: Erdélyi Múzeum Egyesület.Google Scholar
Filip, Hana. 2003. Prefixes and the delimitation of events. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 11(1). 55–101.Google Scholar
Hale, Ken & Samuel Jay Keyser. 1993. On the argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In Ken Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 53–109. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2002. Prolegomenon to a theory of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Halle, Moris & Alec Marantz. 1993. Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In Ken Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 111–176. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 1994. Some key features of Distributed Morphology. MIT working papers in linguistics 21. 275–288.Google Scholar
Haugen, Jason D. 2009. Hyponymous objects and late insertion. Lingua 119(2). 242–262. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Hegedűs, Veronika. 2013. Non-verbal predicates and predicate movement in Hungarian: LOT Dissertation Series. Utrecht: LOT Publications.Google Scholar
. 2014. A névutós kifejezések grammatikalizációja és belső szerkezeti változásai. In Katalin É. Kiss (ed.), Magyar generatív történeti mondattan, 154–176. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Kenesei, István. 1998. Adjuncts and arguments in VP-focus in Hungarian. Acta Linguistica Hungariaca 4. 61–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. On a multifunctional derivational affix: Its use in relational adjectives or nominal modification and phrasal affixation in Hungarian. Word Structure 7(2). 214–239. DOI logo).Google Scholar
Komlósy, Andás. 1992. Régensek és vonzatok. In Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), Strukturális magyar nyelvtan 1. Mondattan. [Hungarian structural grammar 1. Syntax], 299–529. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Koster, Jan. 1994. Predicate incorporation and the word order of Dutch. In Guglielmo Cinque, Jan Koster, Jean-Yves Pollock, Luigi Rizzi, & Rafaella Zanuttini (eds.), Paths towards Universal Grammar. Studies in honor of Richard S. Kayne, 255–276. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Laczkó, Tibor. 2009. On the -ás suffix: word formation in the syntax? Acta Linguistica Hungarica 56(1). 23–114. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Lipták, Anikó. 2012. Verb-stranding ellipsis and verbal identity: The role of polarity focus. In Marion Elenbaas & Suzanne Aalberse (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 29, 82–96. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo.Google Scholar
. 2013. The syntax of emphatic positive polarity in Hungarian: Evidence from ellipsis. Lingua 128. 72–94. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Lipták, Anikó & István Kenesei. 2017. Passive potential affixation: syntax or lexicon? Acta Linguistica Academica 64(1). 45–77.Google Scholar
Mateu, Jeume. 2012. Conflation and incorporation processes in resultative constructions. In Violeta Demonte & Louise McNally (eds.), Telicity, change, and state: A cross-categorial view of event structure, 252–278. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matushansky, Ora & Alec Marantz (eds.). 2013. Distributed Morphology today: Morphemes for Morris Halle. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Punske, Jeffrey. 2011. Escape hatches and the derivation of the DP. Poster presented at WCCFL 29, April 22–24, 2011, University of Arizona.Google Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian. 2008. Verb Meaning and the Lexicon: A First Phase Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siddiqi, Daniel. 2009. Syntax within the word. Economy, allomorphy and argument selection in Distributed Morphology. Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 138. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Starke, Michal. 2009. Nanosyntax: a short primer to a new approach to language. Nordlyd: Tromsø University Working Papers in Linguistics 36(1). 1–6.Google Scholar
. 2014. Towards elegant parameters: Language variation reduces to the size of lexicaly-stored trees. In Carme M. Picallo (ed.), Linguistic variation in the Minimalist Framework Oxford linguistics, 140–152. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Surányi, Balázs. 2009a. Locative particle and adverbial incorporation at the interfaces. In Katalin É. Kiss (ed.), Adverbs and adverbial adjuncts at the interfaces Interface explorations 20, 39–74. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009b. Verbal particles inside and outside vP. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 56(2–3). 201–249. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Svenonius, Peter. 2012. Spanning. Ms., University of Tromsø, draft of April 25, 2012. [URL].
Szabolcsi, Anna & Tibor Laczkó. 1992. A főnévi csoport szerkezete. [The structure of the noun phrase]. In Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), Strukturális magyar nyelvtan 1. Mondattan. [Hungarian structural grammar 1. Syntax], 181–298. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Taraldsen, Knut Tarald. 2010. The nanosyntax of Nguni noun class prefixes and concords. Lingua 120(6). 1522–1548. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Zwart, Jan-Wouter. 1993. Dutch syntax: A minimalist approach: University of Groningen dissertation.Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Halm, Tamás
2021. Radically Truncated Clauses in Hungarian and Beyond: Evidence for the Fine Structure of the Minimal VP. Syntax 24:3 ► pp. 376 ff. DOI logo
Hegedűs, Veronika
2020. Back to restitutives (again): A syntactic account of restitutive and counterdirectional verbal particles in Hungarian. Acta Linguistica Academica 67:3 ► pp. 319 ff. DOI logo
Lipták, Anikó & Andrés Saab
2019. Hungarian particle reduplication as local doubling. Acta Linguistica Academica 66:4 ► pp. 527 ff. DOI logo
Lipták, Anikó
2018. Dissecting Adpositional Particle Constructions: Remarks from Ellipsis. In Boundaries Crossed, at the Interfaces of Morphosyntax, Phonology, Pragmatics and Semantics [Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 94], ► pp. 327 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.