Cover not available
Article published In:
Approaches to Hungarian 17: Special issue of the Journal on Uralic Linguistics 1:2 (2022)
Edited by Tamás Halm, Elizabeth Coppock and Balázs Surányi
[Journal of Uralic Linguistics 1:2] 2022
► pp. 215–238

Ordinals, reflexives and unaccusatives

Unification by predication

ORCID logo | Eötvös Loránd University , Hungary | Hungarian Research Centre for Linguistics
This paper presents a unified outlook on the syntax of constructions featuring the reflexive clitic se, with particular emphasis on the uniform morphosyntax of the Hungarian element -ik, treated as an exponent of se both in the verbal domain and in the nominal domain (in ordinal numeral constructions). The analysis is couched in the syntax of predication proposed in Den Dikken (2006), with se represented as the subject of a reverse predication.
Keywords: ordinals, reflexives, unaccusatives, predication, reflexive clitic se , -ik
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2. se in the nominal domain: Ordinals
    • 2.1Dutch
    • 2.2Hungarian
  • 3. se in the verbal domain (i): Reflexive and unaccusative verbs
    • 3.1 -ik and person
    • 3.2 -ik and tense, mood
    • 3.3 -ik and -gAt, -hAt
    • 3.4 -ik and -Ód, -ul
  • 4. se in the verbal domain (ii): Transitive and unergative verbs
    • 4.1 -ik and transitive verbs of ingestion
    • 4.2 -ik and unergative activity verbs
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 17 November 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jul.00010.dik
References (36)
References
Abaffy, Erzsébet. 1991. Az ikes ragozás kialakulása. A határozott és az általános ragozás elkülönülése [The emergence of the ik-conjugation: The separation of the definite and the general conjugations]. In Loránd Benkő, Erzsébet E. Abaffy & Endre Rácz (eds.), A magyar nyelv történeti nyelvtana. A korai ómagyar kor és előzményei [A historical grammar of Hungarian: Early Old Hungarian and its antecedents], 125–139. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
. 1992. Az igei személyragozás [Verbal conjugation]. In Loránd Benkő (ed.), A magyar nyelv történeti nyelvtana. A kései ómagyar kor: Morfematika [A historical grammar of Hungarian: The morphology of Late Old Hungarian], 184–238. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis, Elena Anagnostopoulou & Florian Schäfer. 2015. External arguments in transitivity alternations: A layering approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baker, Mark. 1988. Incorporation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Balázs, Géza. 2001. Magyar nyelvhelyességi lexikon [A lexicon of correct Hungarian]. Budapest: Corvina.Google Scholar
Bouchard, Denis. 1984. On the content of empty categories. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
De la Mora, Juliana. 2011. A quantitative approach to variable se-marking in Spanish ingestive verbs. PhD dissertation, The Ohio State University.
Dikken, Marcel den. 2006. Relators and linkers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. Raising the subject of the ‘object-of’ relation. In Ángel J. Gallego & Dennis Ott (eds.), 50 years later: Reflections on Chomsky’s Aspects. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 771. 85–98.Google Scholar
. 2018. An integrated perspective on Hungarian nominal and verbal inflection. In Huba Bartos, Marcel den Dikken, Zoltán Bánréti & Tamás Váradi (eds.), Boundaries crossed, at the crossroads of morphosyntax, phonology, pragmatics and semantics, 147–162. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. Canonical and reverse predication in the syntax of the active/passive diathesis alternation. In Adriana Belletti & Christopher Collins (eds.), Smuggling in syntax, 147–187. Oxford/ New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dikken, Marcel den & Éva Dékány. 2019. Passives that look like causatives – Causatives that read like passives: caus+se=pass . Paper presented at the 12th SinFonIJA conference, Masaryk University, Brno, 14 September 2019. Ms., RIL.
Doron, Edit & Malka Rappaport Hovav. 2007. Towards a uniform theory of valence-changing operations. Proceedings of IATL 23 1. 2–20.Google Scholar
É. Kiss, Katalin. 1998. The syntax of Hungarian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2018. Possessive agreement turned into a derivational suffix. In Huba Bartos, Marcel den Dikken, Zoltán Bánréti & Tamás Váradi (eds.), Boundaries crossed, at the interfaces of morphosyntax, phonology, pragmatics and semantics, 87–105. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fodor, Janet Dean. 2017. Ambiguity, parsing, and the evaluation measure. Language Acquisition 241. 85–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hale, Kenneth & S. Jay Keyser. 1993. Argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In Kenneth Hale & S. Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from Building 20 1, 53–109. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Havas, Ferenc. 2004. Objective conjugation and medialisation. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 511. 95–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Horn, Laurence. 2008. ‘I love me some him’: The landscape of non-argument datives. In Olivier Bonami & Patricia Cabredo Hofherr (eds.), Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 71. 169–192. [URL]
Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kayne, Richard. 1975. French syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 1994. The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Krejci, Bonnie. 2012. Causativization as antireflexivization: A study of middle and ingestive verbs. MA thesis, University of Texas at Austin.
Márkus, Andrea. 2015. Taming the Hungarian (in)transitivity zoo. PhD dissertation, University of Tromsø.
Mészöly, Gedeon. 1941. Az ikes ragozás -ik ragjának eredete [The origin of the -ik suffix in the ik-conjugation]. Nyelvtudományi Közlemények 511. 1–13.Google Scholar
Nedjalkov, Vladimir. 2007. Polysemy of reciprocal markers. In Vladimir Nedjalkov (ed.), Reciprocal constructions, 231–334. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newman, John (ed.). 2009. The linguistics of eating and drinking. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, Malka. 2014. Lexical content and context: The causative alternation in English revisited. Lingua 1411. 8–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya & Eric Reuland. 1993. Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry 241. 657–720.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya & Tal Siloni. 2005. The lexicon–syntax parameter: Reflexivization and other arity operations. Linguistic Inquiry 361. 389–436. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Resenes, Mariana & Marcel den Dikken. 2012. Semi-clefts as a window on the syntax of predication and the ‘object of’ relation. In Proceedings of CLS 48 1. 519–33. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Sárosi, Zsófia. 2003. Morfématörténet [Historical morphology]. In Jenő Kiss & Ferenc Pusztai (eds.), Magyar nyelvtörténet [The history of Hungarian], 129–172. Budapest: Osiris.Google Scholar
Schäfer, Florian. 2017. Romance and Greek medio-passives and the typology of Voice. In Roberta D’Alessandro, Irene Franco & Ángel Gallego (eds.), The verbal domain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sleeman, Ruby. 2017. Ordinal numerals in dialects of Dutch. MA thesis, University of Leiden.
Sportiche, Dominique. 2014. Assessing unaccusativity and reflexivity: Using focus alternatives to decide what gets which θ-role. Linguistic Inquiry 451. 305–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Coppock, Elizabeth
2022. Object agreement in Hungarian. Journal of Uralic Linguistics 1:1 ► pp. 121 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 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.