219-7677
10
7500817
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers
onix@benjamins.nl
201608250403
ONIX title feed
eng
01
EUR
159007558
03
01
01
JB
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
JB code
LA 141 Eb
15
9789027289575
06
10.1075/la.141
13
2009003712
DG
002
02
01
LA
02
0166-0829
Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today
141
01
Advances in Comparative Germanic Syntax
01
la.141
01
https://benjamins.com
02
https://benjamins.com/catalog/la.141
1
B01
Artemis Alexiadou
Alexiadou, Artemis
Artemis
Alexiadou
University of Stuttgart
2
B01
Jorge Hankamer
Hankamer, Jorge
Jorge
Hankamer
UCSC
3
B01
Thomas McFadden
McFadden, Thomas
Thomas
McFadden
University of Stuttgart
4
B01
Justin Nuger
Nuger, Justin
Justin
Nuger
UCSC
5
B01
Florian Schäfer
Schäfer, Florian
Florian
Schäfer
University of Stuttgart
01
eng
416
xv
395
LAN009000
v.2006
CF
2
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.GENER
Generative linguistics
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.GERM
Germanic linguistics
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.SYNTAX
Syntax
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.THEOR
Theoretical linguistics
06
01
The present volume contains a selection of papers presented at the 21st and 22nd Comparative Germanic Syntax Workshop held at the University of California, Santa Cruz and the University of Stuttgart. The contributions provide insightful discussions of several topics of current interest for syntactic theory on the basis of comparative data from a wide range of contemporary and historical Germanic languages. The theoretical issues explored include: the left periphery, with a number of contributions touching on the pros and contras of cartographic accounts; different aspects of word order and how it arises from movement and clause structure; the interplay of thematic relations and case theory with the realization of DPs; and the treatment of finiteness and modal structures. This book is of interest to syntacticians working in a comparative perspective and to advanced undergraduates.
04
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475/la.141.png
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027255242.jpg
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027255242.tif
06
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/la.141.hb.png
07
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/125/la.141.png
25
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/la.141.hb.png
27
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/la.141.hb.png
10
01
JB code
la.141.01adv
vii
xvi
10
Article
1
01
Advances in Comparative Germanic Syntax
1
A01
Artemis Alexiadou
Alexiadou, Artemis
Artemis
Alexiadou
2
A01
Jorge Hankamer
Hankamer, Jorge
Jorge
Hankamer
3
A01
Thomas McFadden
McFadden, Thomas
Thomas
McFadden
4
A01
Justin Nuger
Nuger, Justin
Justin
Nuger
5
A01
Florian Schäfer
Schäfer, Florian
Florian
Schäfer
10
01
JB code
la.141.p1
Section header
2
01
Part I. Cartography and the left periphery
10
01
JB code
la.141.02ona
3
40
38
Article
3
01
On a (<i>wh</i>-)moved Topic in Italian, compared to Germanic
1
A01
Anna Cardinaletti
Cardinaletti, Anna
Anna
Cardinaletti
Università Ca’Foscari di Venezia
01
In this paper, I compare Romance and Germanic left periphery. I show that Italian Resumptive Preposing (RP) differs from both Clitic Left Dislocation (CLLD) and Focalization and shares many properties with fronting phenomena in English (Topicalization, Locative Inversion, Comparative Inversion). RP constituents are (<i>wh</i>-)moved to a high Topic position only available in root contexts and can co-occur with either preverbal pronominal subjects or post-verbal heavy subjects (while CLLD can target a Topic position lower than Focus – Rizzi 1997, Frascarelli and Hinterhölzl 2007 – and does not display any restriction on the subject). The analysis is based on Rizzi and Shlonsky’s (2006) account of English Locative Inversion and will lead us to the discussion of the interaction of Fin and Subj, i.e., the heads which lie at the interface of the I and C layers, and the comprehension of the different restrictions on the occurrence of preverbal subjects in Italian and English/German left-peripheral constructions, ultimately explaining the generalizations arrived at in Cardinaletti (2007).
10
01
JB code
la.141.03cag
41
58
18
Article
4
01
C-agreement or something close to it
Some thoughts on the ‘alls-construction’
1
A01
Michael T. Putnam
Putnam, Michael T.
Michael T.
Putnam
Carson-Newman College
2
A01
Marjo van Koppen
Koppen, Marjo van
Marjo
van
Koppen
University of Utrecht
01
In this paper we sketch out an account for an until now undiscussed phenomenon in generative syntax, namely the so-called “alls-construction” in Midwestern American English. In this construction, an s-ending is added to <i>all</i> under certain circumstances. We compare and contrast this construction with complementizer agreement in West Germanic. The alls-construction is similar to complementizer agreement in that the s-ending on <i>all</i>, just like the inflection on the complementizer in West Germanic, is sensitive to the agreement features on the embedded subject. Contrasted with complementizer agreement, however, the alls-construction does not allow inflectional morphology to appear on any other constituent than <i>all</i>. Furthermore, inflection on <i>all</i> is only possible when <i>all</i> is introducing an <i>all</i>-pseudo-cleft. We will mainly focus on the construction internal restrictions of the inflection on <i>all</i>. Based on Van Craenenbroeck & Van Koppen (2002), we assert that the alls-construction in Midwestern American English is in structure quite similar to complementizer agreement in West Germanic. We come back to the external restriction on the alls-construction in the final section, where we briefly discuss some issues concerning the pseudo-cleft status of the alls-construction.
10
01
JB code
la.141.04unc
59
84
26
Article
5
01
Uncharted territory?
Towards a non-cartographic account of Germanic syntax
1
A01
C. Jan-Wouter Zwart
Zwart, C. Jan-Wouter
C. Jan-Wouter
Zwart
University of Groningen
01
This article discusses the consequences of a strictly derivational approach—where syntactic relations are construed dynamically as the derivation proceeds—to the analysis of key areas of Germanic syntax. It discusses the nature of syntactic positions from a non-cartographic point of view. Evidence supporting a non-cartographic approach is found in word order transitivity failures in various domains (the left periphery, the order of adverbs, the adjective-noun construction). The implications of a non-cartographic approach are discussed in four key areas of Germanic syntax (the fine structure of the left periphery, topicalization/focalization, subject placement and object placement).
10
01
JB code
la.141.05boo
85
118
34
Article
6
01
Bootstrapping verb movement and the clausal architecture of German (and other languages)
1
A01
Gisbert Fanselow
Fanselow, Gisbert
Gisbert
Fanselow
University of Potsdam
01
In the mainstream analysis of verb second clauses, the finite verb moves to Comp or one of the various heads present in the cartographic approach to CP. We show that such analyses are not satisfactory empirically, and cannot even be formulated within minimalist syntax. Verb movement – and head movement in general – should rather be analysed in terms of a ‘bootstrapping’ movement, in which the displaced head reprojects in its landing site.
10
01
JB code
la.141.06aco
119
148
30
Article
7
01
A conjunction conspiracy at the West Germanic left periphery
A
conjunction conspiracy at the West Germanic left periphery
1
A01
John R. te Velde
Velde, John R. te
John R.
te
Velde
Oklahoma State University
01
In this analysis I consider one rather common coordinate construction and two less common ones from West Germanic that have two distinguishing properties in common: (i) all consist of conjoined verb-second (V2) clauses, and (ii) there is an ellipse at the left edge of the second conjunct. I propose that the conjunction c-commands the ellipse and that it is recovered in the semantic component through matching with a semantically parallel antecedent in a parallel syntactic position. This analysis utilizes Phase Theory to provide a derivational framework: each V2 clause must, as a phase, complete derivation before the next one is assembled. In this approach the Coordinate Structure Constraint is understood purely as a description of the semantic parallelisms required, and across-the-board movement is unnecessary; it is in fact incompatible with a phase-based approach. Finally, this approach requires three V2 positions in the functional domain of West Germanic; thus, the V2 phenomenon results from feature-checking requirements only (not positions available). Furthermore, it conspires with phase-based conjunction to create a position licensable for “deletion” (non-phonetic realization), thereby economizing the spoken form.
10
01
JB code
la.141.p2
Section header
8
01
Part II. Word order and movement
10
01
JB code
la.141.07rec
151
170
20
Article
9
01
Reconsidering odd coordination in German
1
A01
Hironobu Kasai
Kasai, Hironobu
Hironobu
Kasai
University of Kitakyushu
01
This paper investigates why the Coordinate Structure Constraint (CSC) is violable in odd coordination in German. Schwartz’s (1998) analysis successfully handles nominal odd coordination but some cases of verbal odd coordination are problematic for his analysis. This paper offers an alternative analysis of verbal odd coordination, under which the CSC is subject to the Principle of Minimal Compliance, proposed by Richards (1998) on independent grounds. Verbal odd coordination involves V-to-C movement in an ATB-way, which allows the computational system to ignore a violation of the CSC. This paper has two theoretical implications. One is that head movement takes place in the narrow syntax. The other one is that the CSC is defended as a syntactic constraint on overt movement.
10
01
JB code
la.141.08the
171
196
26
Article
10
01
The syntax and semantics of the temporal anaphor “then” in Old and Middle English
The
syntax and semantics of the temporal anaphor “then” in Old and Middle English
1
A01
Carola Trips
Trips, Carola
Carola
Trips
Universities of Mannheim and Frankfurt
2
A01
Eric Fuß
Fuß, Eric
Eric
Fuß
Universities of Mannheim and Frankfurt
01
The fact that <i>þa/þonne</i> ‘then’ trigger V2 in OE is commonly accounted for by assuming that these adverbs are operators that trigger V-to-C movement. This paper presents an alternative analysis based on the observation that <i>þa/þonne</i> and pronouns are in complementary distribution in preverbal position. We identify this position as SpecTP, arguing that OE was a discourseconfigurational language where SpecTP was linked to the discourse anchoring of anaphoric/deictic expressions, including pronouns and temporal anaphora such as <i>þa/þonne</i>. Under these assumptions, V2 with these temporal adverbs results from a spec-head relationship in TP. The loss of V2 in the ME period is then attributed to the independent development of a (subject-oriented) EPP-feature in TP and the overall loss of discourse-configurationality.
10
01
JB code
la.141.09jes
197
218
22
Article
11
01
Jespersen’s Cycle and the issue of prosodic ‘weakness’
1
A01
Patrizia Noel Aziz Hanna
Noel Aziz Hanna, Patrizia
Patrizia
Noel Aziz Hanna
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
01
Jespersen’s Cycle (1917), according to which a negation particle is weakened and therefore later strengthened through an additional element, is a generally accepted explanation in language change. The German data, however, reveals that the weakening of the negation particle preceded the initiation of Jespersen’s Cycle by centuries. The further weakening caused the ineffi cacy of the old negation particle and thus initiated Jespersen’s Cycle. The reduction is demonstrated to result from segmental, prosodic, and syntactic factors. The progressive weakening of the negation particle (PIE *<i>ne</i> > OHG <i>ni</i> > MHG <i>ne</i> > NHG Ø) is due to the fact that its chances of attracting rhythmic stress became increasingly rare.
10
01
JB code
la.141.10hol
219
246
28
Article
12
01
Holmberg’s Generalization
Blocking and push up
1
A01
Hans Broekhuis
Broekhuis, Hans
Hans
Broekhuis
Leiden University Center for Linguistics
01
Holmberg’s (1999) formulation of Holmberg’s Generalization states that Scandinavian object shift cannot cross any phonologically realized VP-internal material. This correctly predicts that object shift may not apply in, e.g., embedded clauses in Danish: since in these languages V-to-I applies in main clauses only, the main verb occupies a VP-internal position in embedded clauses, and object shift would therefore violate HG. Generally, this is considered the end of the story, but it is not as HG can in principle be satisfied in two ways: either the verb blocks object shift, or object shift pushes the verb up into the I-position. A full explanation therefore requires an answer to the question of why the latter option is not chosen in Danish.
10
01
JB code
la.141.p3
Section header
13
01
Part III. Thematic relations and NP realization
10
01
JB code
la.141.11the
249
280
32
Article
14
01
The No Case Generalization
The
No Case Generalization
1
A01
Halldór Ármann Sigur∂sson
Sigur∂sson, Halldór Ármann
Halldór Ármann
Sigur∂sson
Lund University
01
This paper argues that syntax has no case features, case instead being an interpretative feature or features operative in the PF morphology of individual languages, where it overtly distinguishes between arguments (or NPs). The paper also argues that the non-syntactic nature of case is to be expected, given Non-Isomorphism, that is, the fundamental non-isomorphic nature of the derivation. Nonetheless, the different PF case-marking strategies in different languages operate on the basis of common syntactic matching relations, including matching of Voice and marked <i>v (v*, v**)</i>. The dependency of structural accusative upon structural nominative (the Sibling Correlation/Burzio’s Generalization) is accounted for in terms of double versus single Voice matching.
10
01
JB code
la.141.12the
281
306
26
Article
15
01
The new impersonal as a true passive
The
new impersonal as a true passive
1
A01
Jóhannes Gísli Jónsson
Jónsson, Jóhannes Gísli
Jóhannes Gísli
Jónsson
University of Iceland
01
This paper discusses a new impersonal construction in Icelandic. This construction has passive morphology but differs from canonical passives of transitive verbs in that the DP complement of the passive participle stays in situ and displays object properties. Contra Maling & Sigurjónsdóttir (2002), I argue that this is a true passive, not an active construction with a thematic null subject. As illustrated in the paper, there are some clear similarities between canonical passives and new impersonals that support a passive analysis of the latter construction but no clear differences to justify an active analysis.
10
01
JB code
la.141.13ana
307
324
18
Article
16
01
Anaphoric distribution in the prepositional phrase
Similarities between Norwegian and English
1
A01
Jenny Lederer
Lederer, Jenny
Jenny
Lederer
01
The distribution of anaphoric pronouns in prepositional phrases has garnered much attention in the literature on antecedent binding since, contrary to fundamental binding principles, this syntactic environment appears to allow either reflexive or coreferential nonreflexive pronouns (c.f. Safir 2004; Reinhart & Reuland 1993; Pollard and Sag 1992). This paper takes a closer look at two prepositional phrase contexts in English and Norwegian, which seem to allow the reflexive pronoun when the PP superficially denotes directionality. With careful examination of the semantics of these constructions, it is shown that a vague notion of directionality evoked in the formal syntax notion of the functional projection PATH is insuffi cient to capture the data’s distribution pattern. The grammar must make reference to more detailed spatial configurations in order to model the real-world examples.
10
01
JB code
la.141.p4
Section header
17
01
Part IV. Finiteness and modality
10
01
JB code
la.141.14exp
327
356
30
Article
18
01
Experiencers with (un)willingness
A raising analysis of German ‘Wollen’
1
A01
Remus Gergel
Gergel, Remus
Remus
Gergel
2
A01
Jutta M. Hartmann
Hartmann, Jutta M.
Jutta M.
Hartmann
01
The paper contributes to the raising vs. control debate with respect to modals through (A) novel data; (B) the investigation of a domain in which it has proven particularly problematic: volitional modality. We analyze oblique arguments of experiencer verbs embedded under German <i>wollen</i> ‘want’ and propose that they support both generalized raising and the abandonment of the classical version of the Theta Criterion. Byproducts of the analysis include a syntactic account involved in a class of datives in the language together with the initial characterization of a related modal in German which is expressed through the same item as volition and which we term weak.
10
01
JB code
la.141.15fin
357
390
34
Article
19
01
Finiteness
The <i>haves</i> and the <i>have-nots</i>
1
A01
Kristin Melum Eide
Eide, Kristin Melum
Kristin Melum
Eide
01
The lack of overt inflectional markings encoding finiteness is a crucial difference between Present Day English (PDE) and modern Mainland Scandinavian languages (MSc). In contrast to previous analyses, our approach considers finiteness a primitive distinction explicitly expressed in verbal forms and, crucially, cutting across tense, mood, and agreement markings. Middle English (ME), like MSc, encoded finiteness. MSc languages have retained the encoding of the finiteness distinction in spite of the loss of mood and agreement markings, but PDE main verbs have lost this distinction (although they have tense and agreement markings). This loss leads to a range of syntactic differences between MSc and PDE, such as <i>do</i>-support, different auxiliary-main verb splits, and the lack of V2 in PDE.
10
01
JB code
la.141.20ind
391
395
5
Miscellaneous
20
01
Index of subjects & languages
02
JBENJAMINS
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Amsterdam/Philadelphia
NL
04
20090514
2009
John Benjamins
02
WORLD
13
15
9789027255242
01
JB
3
John Benjamins e-Platform
03
jbe-platform.com
09
WORLD
21
01
00
105.00
EUR
R
01
00
88.00
GBP
Z
01
gen
00
158.00
USD
S
123007557
03
01
01
JB
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
JB code
LA 141 Hb
15
9789027255242
13
2009003712
BB
01
LA
02
0166-0829
Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today
141
01
Advances in Comparative Germanic Syntax
01
la.141
01
https://benjamins.com
02
https://benjamins.com/catalog/la.141
1
B01
Artemis Alexiadou
Alexiadou, Artemis
Artemis
Alexiadou
University of Stuttgart
2
B01
Jorge Hankamer
Hankamer, Jorge
Jorge
Hankamer
UCSC
3
B01
Thomas McFadden
McFadden, Thomas
Thomas
McFadden
University of Stuttgart
4
B01
Justin Nuger
Nuger, Justin
Justin
Nuger
UCSC
5
B01
Florian Schäfer
Schäfer, Florian
Florian
Schäfer
University of Stuttgart
01
eng
416
xv
395
LAN009000
v.2006
CF
2
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.GENER
Generative linguistics
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.GERM
Germanic linguistics
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.SYNTAX
Syntax
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.THEOR
Theoretical linguistics
06
01
The present volume contains a selection of papers presented at the 21st and 22nd Comparative Germanic Syntax Workshop held at the University of California, Santa Cruz and the University of Stuttgart. The contributions provide insightful discussions of several topics of current interest for syntactic theory on the basis of comparative data from a wide range of contemporary and historical Germanic languages. The theoretical issues explored include: the left periphery, with a number of contributions touching on the pros and contras of cartographic accounts; different aspects of word order and how it arises from movement and clause structure; the interplay of thematic relations and case theory with the realization of DPs; and the treatment of finiteness and modal structures. This book is of interest to syntacticians working in a comparative perspective and to advanced undergraduates.
04
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475/la.141.png
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027255242.jpg
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027255242.tif
06
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/la.141.hb.png
07
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/125/la.141.png
25
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/la.141.hb.png
27
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/la.141.hb.png
10
01
JB code
la.141.01adv
vii
xvi
10
Article
1
01
Advances in Comparative Germanic Syntax
1
A01
Artemis Alexiadou
Alexiadou, Artemis
Artemis
Alexiadou
2
A01
Jorge Hankamer
Hankamer, Jorge
Jorge
Hankamer
3
A01
Thomas McFadden
McFadden, Thomas
Thomas
McFadden
4
A01
Justin Nuger
Nuger, Justin
Justin
Nuger
5
A01
Florian Schäfer
Schäfer, Florian
Florian
Schäfer
10
01
JB code
la.141.p1
Section header
2
01
Part I. Cartography and the left periphery
10
01
JB code
la.141.02ona
3
40
38
Article
3
01
On a (<i>wh</i>-)moved Topic in Italian, compared to Germanic
1
A01
Anna Cardinaletti
Cardinaletti, Anna
Anna
Cardinaletti
Università Ca’Foscari di Venezia
01
In this paper, I compare Romance and Germanic left periphery. I show that Italian Resumptive Preposing (RP) differs from both Clitic Left Dislocation (CLLD) and Focalization and shares many properties with fronting phenomena in English (Topicalization, Locative Inversion, Comparative Inversion). RP constituents are (<i>wh</i>-)moved to a high Topic position only available in root contexts and can co-occur with either preverbal pronominal subjects or post-verbal heavy subjects (while CLLD can target a Topic position lower than Focus – Rizzi 1997, Frascarelli and Hinterhölzl 2007 – and does not display any restriction on the subject). The analysis is based on Rizzi and Shlonsky’s (2006) account of English Locative Inversion and will lead us to the discussion of the interaction of Fin and Subj, i.e., the heads which lie at the interface of the I and C layers, and the comprehension of the different restrictions on the occurrence of preverbal subjects in Italian and English/German left-peripheral constructions, ultimately explaining the generalizations arrived at in Cardinaletti (2007).
10
01
JB code
la.141.03cag
41
58
18
Article
4
01
C-agreement or something close to it
Some thoughts on the ‘alls-construction’
1
A01
Michael T. Putnam
Putnam, Michael T.
Michael T.
Putnam
Carson-Newman College
2
A01
Marjo van Koppen
Koppen, Marjo van
Marjo
van
Koppen
University of Utrecht
01
In this paper we sketch out an account for an until now undiscussed phenomenon in generative syntax, namely the so-called “alls-construction” in Midwestern American English. In this construction, an s-ending is added to <i>all</i> under certain circumstances. We compare and contrast this construction with complementizer agreement in West Germanic. The alls-construction is similar to complementizer agreement in that the s-ending on <i>all</i>, just like the inflection on the complementizer in West Germanic, is sensitive to the agreement features on the embedded subject. Contrasted with complementizer agreement, however, the alls-construction does not allow inflectional morphology to appear on any other constituent than <i>all</i>. Furthermore, inflection on <i>all</i> is only possible when <i>all</i> is introducing an <i>all</i>-pseudo-cleft. We will mainly focus on the construction internal restrictions of the inflection on <i>all</i>. Based on Van Craenenbroeck & Van Koppen (2002), we assert that the alls-construction in Midwestern American English is in structure quite similar to complementizer agreement in West Germanic. We come back to the external restriction on the alls-construction in the final section, where we briefly discuss some issues concerning the pseudo-cleft status of the alls-construction.
10
01
JB code
la.141.04unc
59
84
26
Article
5
01
Uncharted territory?
Towards a non-cartographic account of Germanic syntax
1
A01
C. Jan-Wouter Zwart
Zwart, C. Jan-Wouter
C. Jan-Wouter
Zwart
University of Groningen
01
This article discusses the consequences of a strictly derivational approach—where syntactic relations are construed dynamically as the derivation proceeds—to the analysis of key areas of Germanic syntax. It discusses the nature of syntactic positions from a non-cartographic point of view. Evidence supporting a non-cartographic approach is found in word order transitivity failures in various domains (the left periphery, the order of adverbs, the adjective-noun construction). The implications of a non-cartographic approach are discussed in four key areas of Germanic syntax (the fine structure of the left periphery, topicalization/focalization, subject placement and object placement).
10
01
JB code
la.141.05boo
85
118
34
Article
6
01
Bootstrapping verb movement and the clausal architecture of German (and other languages)
1
A01
Gisbert Fanselow
Fanselow, Gisbert
Gisbert
Fanselow
University of Potsdam
01
In the mainstream analysis of verb second clauses, the finite verb moves to Comp or one of the various heads present in the cartographic approach to CP. We show that such analyses are not satisfactory empirically, and cannot even be formulated within minimalist syntax. Verb movement – and head movement in general – should rather be analysed in terms of a ‘bootstrapping’ movement, in which the displaced head reprojects in its landing site.
10
01
JB code
la.141.06aco
119
148
30
Article
7
01
A conjunction conspiracy at the West Germanic left periphery
A
conjunction conspiracy at the West Germanic left periphery
1
A01
John R. te Velde
Velde, John R. te
John R.
te
Velde
Oklahoma State University
01
In this analysis I consider one rather common coordinate construction and two less common ones from West Germanic that have two distinguishing properties in common: (i) all consist of conjoined verb-second (V2) clauses, and (ii) there is an ellipse at the left edge of the second conjunct. I propose that the conjunction c-commands the ellipse and that it is recovered in the semantic component through matching with a semantically parallel antecedent in a parallel syntactic position. This analysis utilizes Phase Theory to provide a derivational framework: each V2 clause must, as a phase, complete derivation before the next one is assembled. In this approach the Coordinate Structure Constraint is understood purely as a description of the semantic parallelisms required, and across-the-board movement is unnecessary; it is in fact incompatible with a phase-based approach. Finally, this approach requires three V2 positions in the functional domain of West Germanic; thus, the V2 phenomenon results from feature-checking requirements only (not positions available). Furthermore, it conspires with phase-based conjunction to create a position licensable for “deletion” (non-phonetic realization), thereby economizing the spoken form.
10
01
JB code
la.141.p2
Section header
8
01
Part II. Word order and movement
10
01
JB code
la.141.07rec
151
170
20
Article
9
01
Reconsidering odd coordination in German
1
A01
Hironobu Kasai
Kasai, Hironobu
Hironobu
Kasai
University of Kitakyushu
01
This paper investigates why the Coordinate Structure Constraint (CSC) is violable in odd coordination in German. Schwartz’s (1998) analysis successfully handles nominal odd coordination but some cases of verbal odd coordination are problematic for his analysis. This paper offers an alternative analysis of verbal odd coordination, under which the CSC is subject to the Principle of Minimal Compliance, proposed by Richards (1998) on independent grounds. Verbal odd coordination involves V-to-C movement in an ATB-way, which allows the computational system to ignore a violation of the CSC. This paper has two theoretical implications. One is that head movement takes place in the narrow syntax. The other one is that the CSC is defended as a syntactic constraint on overt movement.
10
01
JB code
la.141.08the
171
196
26
Article
10
01
The syntax and semantics of the temporal anaphor “then” in Old and Middle English
The
syntax and semantics of the temporal anaphor “then” in Old and Middle English
1
A01
Carola Trips
Trips, Carola
Carola
Trips
Universities of Mannheim and Frankfurt
2
A01
Eric Fuß
Fuß, Eric
Eric
Fuß
Universities of Mannheim and Frankfurt
01
The fact that <i>þa/þonne</i> ‘then’ trigger V2 in OE is commonly accounted for by assuming that these adverbs are operators that trigger V-to-C movement. This paper presents an alternative analysis based on the observation that <i>þa/þonne</i> and pronouns are in complementary distribution in preverbal position. We identify this position as SpecTP, arguing that OE was a discourseconfigurational language where SpecTP was linked to the discourse anchoring of anaphoric/deictic expressions, including pronouns and temporal anaphora such as <i>þa/þonne</i>. Under these assumptions, V2 with these temporal adverbs results from a spec-head relationship in TP. The loss of V2 in the ME period is then attributed to the independent development of a (subject-oriented) EPP-feature in TP and the overall loss of discourse-configurationality.
10
01
JB code
la.141.09jes
197
218
22
Article
11
01
Jespersen’s Cycle and the issue of prosodic ‘weakness’
1
A01
Patrizia Noel Aziz Hanna
Noel Aziz Hanna, Patrizia
Patrizia
Noel Aziz Hanna
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
01
Jespersen’s Cycle (1917), according to which a negation particle is weakened and therefore later strengthened through an additional element, is a generally accepted explanation in language change. The German data, however, reveals that the weakening of the negation particle preceded the initiation of Jespersen’s Cycle by centuries. The further weakening caused the ineffi cacy of the old negation particle and thus initiated Jespersen’s Cycle. The reduction is demonstrated to result from segmental, prosodic, and syntactic factors. The progressive weakening of the negation particle (PIE *<i>ne</i> > OHG <i>ni</i> > MHG <i>ne</i> > NHG Ø) is due to the fact that its chances of attracting rhythmic stress became increasingly rare.
10
01
JB code
la.141.10hol
219
246
28
Article
12
01
Holmberg’s Generalization
Blocking and push up
1
A01
Hans Broekhuis
Broekhuis, Hans
Hans
Broekhuis
Leiden University Center for Linguistics
01
Holmberg’s (1999) formulation of Holmberg’s Generalization states that Scandinavian object shift cannot cross any phonologically realized VP-internal material. This correctly predicts that object shift may not apply in, e.g., embedded clauses in Danish: since in these languages V-to-I applies in main clauses only, the main verb occupies a VP-internal position in embedded clauses, and object shift would therefore violate HG. Generally, this is considered the end of the story, but it is not as HG can in principle be satisfied in two ways: either the verb blocks object shift, or object shift pushes the verb up into the I-position. A full explanation therefore requires an answer to the question of why the latter option is not chosen in Danish.
10
01
JB code
la.141.p3
Section header
13
01
Part III. Thematic relations and NP realization
10
01
JB code
la.141.11the
249
280
32
Article
14
01
The No Case Generalization
The
No Case Generalization
1
A01
Halldór Ármann Sigur∂sson
Sigur∂sson, Halldór Ármann
Halldór Ármann
Sigur∂sson
Lund University
01
This paper argues that syntax has no case features, case instead being an interpretative feature or features operative in the PF morphology of individual languages, where it overtly distinguishes between arguments (or NPs). The paper also argues that the non-syntactic nature of case is to be expected, given Non-Isomorphism, that is, the fundamental non-isomorphic nature of the derivation. Nonetheless, the different PF case-marking strategies in different languages operate on the basis of common syntactic matching relations, including matching of Voice and marked <i>v (v*, v**)</i>. The dependency of structural accusative upon structural nominative (the Sibling Correlation/Burzio’s Generalization) is accounted for in terms of double versus single Voice matching.
10
01
JB code
la.141.12the
281
306
26
Article
15
01
The new impersonal as a true passive
The
new impersonal as a true passive
1
A01
Jóhannes Gísli Jónsson
Jónsson, Jóhannes Gísli
Jóhannes Gísli
Jónsson
University of Iceland
01
This paper discusses a new impersonal construction in Icelandic. This construction has passive morphology but differs from canonical passives of transitive verbs in that the DP complement of the passive participle stays in situ and displays object properties. Contra Maling & Sigurjónsdóttir (2002), I argue that this is a true passive, not an active construction with a thematic null subject. As illustrated in the paper, there are some clear similarities between canonical passives and new impersonals that support a passive analysis of the latter construction but no clear differences to justify an active analysis.
10
01
JB code
la.141.13ana
307
324
18
Article
16
01
Anaphoric distribution in the prepositional phrase
Similarities between Norwegian and English
1
A01
Jenny Lederer
Lederer, Jenny
Jenny
Lederer
01
The distribution of anaphoric pronouns in prepositional phrases has garnered much attention in the literature on antecedent binding since, contrary to fundamental binding principles, this syntactic environment appears to allow either reflexive or coreferential nonreflexive pronouns (c.f. Safir 2004; Reinhart & Reuland 1993; Pollard and Sag 1992). This paper takes a closer look at two prepositional phrase contexts in English and Norwegian, which seem to allow the reflexive pronoun when the PP superficially denotes directionality. With careful examination of the semantics of these constructions, it is shown that a vague notion of directionality evoked in the formal syntax notion of the functional projection PATH is insuffi cient to capture the data’s distribution pattern. The grammar must make reference to more detailed spatial configurations in order to model the real-world examples.
10
01
JB code
la.141.p4
Section header
17
01
Part IV. Finiteness and modality
10
01
JB code
la.141.14exp
327
356
30
Article
18
01
Experiencers with (un)willingness
A raising analysis of German ‘Wollen’
1
A01
Remus Gergel
Gergel, Remus
Remus
Gergel
2
A01
Jutta M. Hartmann
Hartmann, Jutta M.
Jutta M.
Hartmann
01
The paper contributes to the raising vs. control debate with respect to modals through (A) novel data; (B) the investigation of a domain in which it has proven particularly problematic: volitional modality. We analyze oblique arguments of experiencer verbs embedded under German <i>wollen</i> ‘want’ and propose that they support both generalized raising and the abandonment of the classical version of the Theta Criterion. Byproducts of the analysis include a syntactic account involved in a class of datives in the language together with the initial characterization of a related modal in German which is expressed through the same item as volition and which we term weak.
10
01
JB code
la.141.15fin
357
390
34
Article
19
01
Finiteness
The <i>haves</i> and the <i>have-nots</i>
1
A01
Kristin Melum Eide
Eide, Kristin Melum
Kristin Melum
Eide
01
The lack of overt inflectional markings encoding finiteness is a crucial difference between Present Day English (PDE) and modern Mainland Scandinavian languages (MSc). In contrast to previous analyses, our approach considers finiteness a primitive distinction explicitly expressed in verbal forms and, crucially, cutting across tense, mood, and agreement markings. Middle English (ME), like MSc, encoded finiteness. MSc languages have retained the encoding of the finiteness distinction in spite of the loss of mood and agreement markings, but PDE main verbs have lost this distinction (although they have tense and agreement markings). This loss leads to a range of syntactic differences between MSc and PDE, such as <i>do</i>-support, different auxiliary-main verb splits, and the lack of V2 in PDE.
10
01
JB code
la.141.20ind
391
395
5
Miscellaneous
20
01
Index of subjects & languages
02
JBENJAMINS
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Amsterdam/Philadelphia
NL
04
20090514
2009
John Benjamins
02
WORLD
01
245
mm
02
164
mm
08
900
gr
01
JB
1
John Benjamins Publishing Company
+31 20 6304747
+31 20 6739773
bookorder@benjamins.nl
01
https://benjamins.com
01
WORLD
US CA MX
21
15
16
01
02
JB
1
00
105.00
EUR
R
02
02
JB
1
00
111.30
EUR
R
01
JB
10
bebc
+44 1202 712 934
+44 1202 712 913
sales@bebc.co.uk
03
GB
21
16
02
02
JB
1
00
88.00
GBP
Z
01
JB
2
John Benjamins North America
+1 800 562-5666
+1 703 661-1501
benjamins@presswarehouse.com
01
https://benjamins.com
01
US CA MX
21
16
01
gen
02
JB
1
00
158.00
USD