219-7677 10 7500817 John Benjamins Publishing Company Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers onix@benjamins.nl 201608250420 ONIX title feed eng 01 EUR
577008322 03 01 01 JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code LA 171 Eb 15 9789027287298 06 10.1075/la.171 13 2010045313 DG 002 02 01 LA 02 0166-0829 Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 171 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">The Noun Phrase in Romance and Germanic</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>The </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">Noun Phrase in Romance and Germanic</TitleWithoutPrefix> <Subtitle textformat="02">Structure, variation, and change</Subtitle> 01 la.171 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/la.171 1 B01 Petra Sleeman Sleeman, Petra Petra Sleeman University of Amsterdam 2 B01 Harry Perridon Perridon, Harry Harry Perridon University of Amsterdam 01 eng 296 vii 283 LAN009000 v.2006 CFK 2 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.GENER Generative linguistics 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.GERM Germanic linguistics 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.HL Historical linguistics 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.ROM Romance linguistics 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.SYNTAX Syntax 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.THEOR Theoretical linguistics 06 01 One of the recurrent questions in historical linguistics is to what extent languages can borrow grammar from other languages. It seems for instance hardly likely that each 'average European' language developed a definite article all by itself, without any influence from neighbouring languages. It is, on the other hand, by no means clear what exactly was borrowed, since the way in which definiteness is expressed differs greatly among the various Germanic and Romance languages and dialects. One of the main aims of this volume is to shed some light on the question of what is similar and what is different in the structure of the noun phrase of the various Romance and Germanic languages and dialects, and what causes this similarity or difference. 04 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/la.171.png 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027255549.jpg 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027255549.tif 06 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/la.171.hb.png 07 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/la.171.png 25 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/la.171.hb.png 27 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/la.171.hb.png 10 01 JB code la.171.01for vii viii 2 Miscellaneous 1 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Foreword</TitleText> 10 01 JB code la.171.02per 1 22 22 Article 2 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">The noun phrase in Germanic and Romance</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>The </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">noun phrase in Germanic and Romance</TitleWithoutPrefix> <Subtitle textformat="02">Common developments and differences</Subtitle> 1 A01 Harry Perridon Perridon, Harry Harry Perridon ACLC, University of Amsterdam 2 A01 Petra Sleeman Sleeman, Petra Petra Sleeman ACLC, University of Amsterdam 01 In this introductory chapter some of the main (dis)similarities in DP-syntax between the Germanic and Romance languages, as well as between the individual languages of each group, are explored. We take a look at the following subjects: (a) the ways in which the various languages express definiteness; (b) the position of adjectives; (c) the function of the weak declension of adjectives in Germanic; (d) the evolution of genitive equivalents; and (e) the emergence of determining possessives in Germanic. In each case we try to find out whether a given construction is inherited from the parent language or is an independent development in each of the languages or language groups. Special attention is paid to common developments after the languages split up into separate entities, since they might indicate some inherent properties of human language that restrict the way in which languages may develop. 10 01 JB code la.171.03pa1 Section header 3 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Part I. Variation</TitleText> 10 01 JB code la.171.04ale 25 40 16 Article 4 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Scaling the variation in Romance and Germanic nominalizations</TitleText> 1 A01 Artemis Alexiadou Alexiadou, Artemis Artemis Alexiadou Universität Stuttgart 2 A01 Gianina Iordachioaia Iordachioaia, Gianina Gianina Iordachioaia Universität Stuttgart 3 A01 Florian Schäfer Schäfer, Florian Florian Schäfer Universität Stuttgart 01 We investigate the distribution of verbal and nominal layers in Romance and Germanic nominalizations. Specifically, we examine pairs of &#8216;verbal&#8217; vs. &#8216;nominal&#8217; nominalizations in two Romance (Spanish &#38; Romanian) and two Germanic (English &#38; German) languages. Our study proposes a large spectrum of nominal and verbal properties. While these are differently instantiated among languages, the variation we find cannot be attributed to a Germanic vs. Romance parameter; instead, we find micro-variation constrained by the compatibility between the general building blocks of verbal and nominal categories. Besides the vP-layers responsible for argument structure and Aktionsart and the DP-layer responsible for the nominal external syntax, we make a case for further functional verbal and nominal layers in nominalizations: Asp(ect)P, Class(ifier)P, and Num(ber)P. These projections are in complementary distribution in some languages and co-occur in others. 10 01 JB code la.171.05cir 41 56 16 Article 5 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02"><i>What all</i> happens when a universal quantifier combines with an interrogative DP</TitleText> 1 A01 Robert Cirillo Cirillo, Robert Robert Cirillo 01 Universal quantifiers such as <i>all</i> select a DP as their complement and can be &#8216;floated&#8217; or &#8216;stranded&#8217; by that DP, and in certain Germanic languages they can also co-occur with an interrogative DP. The purpose of this article is to investigate whether interrogative and non-interrogative DPs that co-occur with a universal quantifier in the Germanic languages have the same relationship to that quantifier and have gone through the same selection process. I begin with evidence from German that universal quantifiers can select and be stranded by interrogative as well as non-interrogative DPs, but I ultimately argue, going back to an analysis in Giusti (1990b), that a universal quantifier co-occurring with an interrogative is base-generated to the right of that interrogative, not to its left. I also propose that the formation of interrogative expressions involving universal quantifiers may take place in the syntax or in the lexicon, depending on the language. 10 01 JB code la.171.06cor 57 88 32 Article 6 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Micro-diversity in Dutch interrogative DPs</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">A case study on the (dis)continuous <i>wat</i> <i>voor</i> <i>&#8217;n</i> <i>N</i>-construction</Subtitle> 1 A01 Norbert Corver Corver, Norbert Norbert Corver UiL-OTS, Utrecht University 2 A01 Marjo van Koppen Koppen, Marjo van Marjo van Koppen UiL-OTS, Utrecht University 01 This paper presents a micro-comparative perspective on the Dutch <i>wat</i> <i>voor</i> <i>&#8217;n</i> <i>N</i>-construction (meaning: &#8220;what kind of N&#8221;). Besides a description of the various formal manifestations of this nominal construction as found intra-dialectally and cross-dialectally, an analysis is given of the dimensions of variation at the level of internal syntax and external syntax. As regards the external syntax, an analysis will be given of patterns that permit a split <i>wat</i> <i>voor</i> <i>&#8217;n</i> <i>N</i>-pattern and those that do not. An important outcome of our analysis will be that a uniform structural basis &#8216;underlies&#8217; the different manifestations of the <i>wat</i> <i>voor</i> <i>&#8217;n</i> <i>N</i>-construction: more specifically, predication, configurationally defined as a DP-internal small clause structure, and predicate displacement. 10 01 JB code la.171.07woo 89 110 22 Article 7 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Noun phrase structure and movement</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">A cross-linguistic comparison of <i>such</i>/<i>s&#229;dan</i>/<i>solch</i> and <i>so</i>/<i>s&#229;</i>/<i>so</i></Subtitle> 1 A01 Johanna L. Wood Wood, Johanna L. Johanna L. Wood University of Aarhus 2 A01 Sten Vikner Vikner, Sten Sten Vikner University of Aarhus 01 We investigate the etymologically related words <i>so</i> and <i>such</i> (English); <i>s&#229;</i> and <i>s&#229;dan</i> (Danish); and <i>so</i> and <i>solch</i> (German). Similarities and differences that have to be accounted for cross-linguistically are i. position (pre- or post- indefinite article), ii. agreement morphology (in Danish and German), and iii. semantics (whether an AdjP or a DP/NP is modified). English and Danish <i>so/s&#229;</i> may only modify an AdjP, while German <i>so</i> may also modify the DP/NP. English <i>such</i> may only modify the DP/NP (Bolinger 1972, Wood 2002) and may only precede the indefinite article. Danish and German allow inflected <i>s&#229;dan/solch</i> to follow the article. We discuss two possible syntactic derivations, predicate raising (e.g. Corver 1998, Bennis, Corver &#38; den Dikken 1998) and XP movement from an attributive adjective position within the nominal (e.g. Matushansky 2002). The analysis links up with the morphological agreement facts of predicate and of attributive adjectives in Danish and German (Vikner 2001). 10 01 JB code la.171.08loh 111 126 16 Article 8 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">A unified structure for Scandinavian DPs</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>A </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">unified structure for Scandinavian DPs</TitleWithoutPrefix> 1 A01 Susanne Lohrmann Lohrmann, Susanne Susanne Lohrmann Universität Stuttgart 01 This paper discusses doubling patterns of determiners in Scandinavian, the interaction between definite markers and adjectival inflection, and its effects on the structure of the DP. When an adjective precedes a definite noun an additional article is added preceding the adjective. This phenomenon has been referred to as &#8216;double definiteness&#8217;. Moreover, the adjective receives definite inflection so that the noun is actually defined three times. Questions arise as to the function of this multiple exponence of definiteness and the syntactic/semantic role of the morphemes involved. This article develops an account that argues for three components of definiteness in Scandinavian expressed by three distinct morphemes (the two articles and the adjectival inflection). The result is an analysis, based on the framework of Distributed Morphology, which captures the different realizations of definiteness in the Standard Scandinavian languages and which shows that multiple exponence in Scandinavian DPs evidently contributes to interpretation. 10 01 JB code la.171.09str 127 140 14 Article 9 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">A semantic approach to noun phrase structure and the definite &#8211; indefinite distinction in Germanic and Romance</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>A </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">semantic approach to noun phrase structure and the definite &#8211; indefinite distinction in Germanic and Romance</TitleWithoutPrefix> 1 A01 Ulla Stroh-Wollin Stroh-Wollin, Ulla Ulla Stroh-Wollin Department of Scandinavian Languages Uppsala University, Sweden 01 This article deals with the relation between the structure and the semantics of noun phrases. Two complexes of meaning are taken to be grammatically derived in noun phrases. One complex concerns the conceptualization of the entity denoted by the noun phrase, whereas the other concerns the restriction of the set of referents. The latter complex is related to the distinction between definite and indefinite noun phrases.The article also deals with the variation within and between Germanic and Romance noun phrases, showing how this variation may be explained on the basis of the preceding analysis. In particular, the different uses of definite and indefinite noun phrases are highlighted. 10 01 JB code la.171.10bob 141 156 16 Article 10 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Definite determiners in two English-based creoles</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Specificity or definiteness?</Subtitle> 1 A01 Ekaterina Bobyleva Bobyleva, Ekaterina Ekaterina Bobyleva University of Amsterdam 01 It has been repeatedly observed in the literature that unlike their European lexifiers, creoles do not mark definiteness categorically. The question addressed here is whether the distribution of overt definite determiners and bare definite NPs in two Atlantic English-based creoles, Jamaican and Sranan, can be accounted for in terms of the specificity constraint that underlies the determiner use in Gbe, one of their most important substrate languages. The data examined shows that definite determiners in the two creoles tend to follow the definiteness-based pattern. This suggests that English rather than Gbe played the most crucial role in the formation of the discourse-semantic and distributional properties of Jamaican and Sranan definite determiners. Bare definite NPs in the two creoles may occur when the referent is either unimportant or self-evident. Thus, determiner use in Jamaican and Sranan is sensitive not only to language-specific grammar rules but also to universally prominent pragmatic factors. 10 01 JB code la.171.11pa2 Section header 11 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Part II. Change</TitleText> 10 01 JB code la.171.12luc 159 174 16 Article 12 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Form-function mismatches in (formally) definite English noun phrases</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Towards a diachronic account</Subtitle> 1 A01 Christopher Lucas Lucas, Christopher Christopher Lucas School of Oriental and African Studies 01 This article discusses two classes of so-called &#8216;weak definites&#8217;, arguing that their (definite) form is misleading as to their (non-definite) semantics, and outlining a diachronic explanation for why each of these classes (observable in sentences such as <i>Let&#8217;s go to the pub</i> and <i>He came to the bank of a river</i>) should exhibit this particular form-function mismatch. For examples such as <i>the pub</i> the loss of an obligatorily definite interpretation is argued to be the result of a semantic reanalysis such that reference is no longer to a specific entity but to the activity conventionally associated with that entity. For examples such as <i>the bank of a river</i> the mismatch is argued to be a consequence of an incompatibility between the semantics of indefiniteness marking and the semantics of relational nouns, which arises when definiteness marking becomes obligatory in a language. 10 01 JB code la.171.13cri 175 192 18 Article 13 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">The emergence of the definite article in English</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>The </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">emergence of the definite article in English</TitleWithoutPrefix> <Subtitle textformat="02">A contact-induced change?</Subtitle> 1 A01 Paola Crisma Crisma, Paola Paola Crisma Università di Trieste 01 In this paper, based on quantitative evidence collected on the YCOE, I argue that the establishment of the definite article in English is no later than the last quarter of the 9th century, being regularly used in Old English prose of the &#8216;Alfredian&#8217; period. This dating enables one to exclude the possibility that the levelling of inflections, the Norman invasion or the contact with the Danes might have played a role in introducing the definite article as an innovation, and leaves as the sole possible &#8216;external&#8217; influence the Celtic substratum/adstratum. 10 01 JB code la.171.14cor 193 222 30 Article 14 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">On the syntax of Romanian definite phrases</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Changes in the patterns of definiteness checking</Subtitle> 1 A01 Alexandra Cornilescu Cornilescu, Alexandra Alexandra Cornilescu University of Bucharest 2 A01 Alexandru Nicolae Nicolae, Alexandru Alexandru Nicolae “Iorgu Iordan - Al. Rosetti” Institute of Linguistics, Bucharest 01 We discuss a type of variation in the pattern of definiteness valuation in Old Romanian (XVIth to XVIIIth century), which has never been noticed before, and examine its significance for the evolution of the DP. In Old Romanian, the suffixed definite article variably occurs <i>either on the first or on a lower [+N] constituent</i> (noun or adjective), so that an indefinite adjective may precede the definite noun. In contrast, in Modern Romanian, it is always the first noun which bears the definite article, while, in case an adjective precedes the noun, the definite article occurs on the adjective. The existence of this lower (definite) article raises several questions (the contexts where it occurs, its significance for the emergence of the enclitic definite article, etc.), to which this paper provides tentative answers. We propose that the existence of a lower definite article combined with a tendency for economy made possible the extension of the use of the article to (pre&#8209;nominal) adjectives, gradually leading to stricter conditions in the valuation of definiteness in Modern Romanian (Local Agree). At the same time, the lower article is evidence that the Romanian enclitic definite article originates in a post-posed demonstrative. 10 01 JB code la.171.15mag 223 240 18 Article 15 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Coexisting structures and competing functions in genitive word order</TitleText> 1 A01 Elisabetta Magni Magni, Elisabetta Elisabetta Magni University of Bologna 01 This paper examines the correlations between word order at the clause level and word order at the noun phrase level in languages with no dominant genitive order. In this perspective, the comparison between Latin and English is a revealing domain for investigating both synchronic variation and diachronic evolution. The analysis uses a functional-typological approach; the assumption is that coexisting and competing patterns, as well as regularities and irregularities in word order, can be analyzed through diachrony. Results show that (1) in both languages, structures developing from different sources are assigned different functions according to multiple processing factors; (2) the mechanisms of word order flexibility observed in Latin, <i>mutatis mutandis</i>, can provide some useful insights for English as well. 10 01 JB code la.171.16vel 241 256 16 Article 16 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Anaphoric adjectives becoming determiners</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">A corpus-based account</Subtitle> 1 A01 Freek Van de Velde Van de Velde, Freek Freek Van de Velde Research Foundation FWO/University of Leuven 01 Standard accounts of determiners typically deal with the few well-known elements that fall under this category: articles, demonstratives, possessives and (some) quantifiers. It can be shown, however, that the determiner slot in Dutch can also be occupied by certain elements that do not regularly feature in reference grammars, namely the anaphoric adjectives like <i>voornoemd</i> (&#8220;aforementioned&#8221;). Their syntax is subject to variation in Present-day Dutch, and possibly to change as well: a corpus study reveals that they are increasingly used as unequivocal determiners, irrespective of their token frequency. 10 01 JB code la.171.17dp 257 280 24 Article 17 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">From N to D</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Charting the time course of the internal rise of French n-words</Subtitle> 1 A01 Viviane Déprez Déprez, Viviane Viviane Déprez Rutgers University, L2C2, CNRS 01 Based on a thorough review of their feature make up and on novel diachronic data on their modification properties, this paper maps out the internal syntactic structure of French n-words and the historical time course of their internal rise within a nominal projection. It charts out precise steps that directly relate internal structural changes to corresponding changes in concord properties. Indirect modification with <i>autre</i> as in <i>rien d&#8217;autre</i> is shown to be an innovation of modern French that serves to provide a distinctive signature of the final morphosyntactic change of n-words into negative quantificational expressions. The evidence offered supports the hypothesis (D&#233;prez 2000; Condoravdi &#38; Kiparsky 2006) that it was change in the internal structure of n-words that determined the current properties of negative concord, not changes in the sentential negation marker, contra Zeijlstra (2004 and following work). 10 01 JB code la.171.18ind 281 284 4 Miscellaneous 18 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Index</TitleText> 02 JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia NL 04 20110216 2011 John Benjamins 02 WORLD 13 15 9789027255549 01 JB 3 John Benjamins e-Platform 03 jbe-platform.com 09 WORLD 21 01 00 99.00 EUR R 01 00 83.00 GBP Z 01 gen 00 149.00 USD S 789008321 03 01 01 JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code LA 171 Hb 15 9789027255549 13 2010045313 BB 01 LA 02 0166-0829 Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 171 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">The Noun Phrase in Romance and Germanic</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>The </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">Noun Phrase in Romance and Germanic</TitleWithoutPrefix> <Subtitle textformat="02">Structure, variation, and change</Subtitle> 01 la.171 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/la.171 1 B01 Petra Sleeman Sleeman, Petra Petra Sleeman University of Amsterdam 2 B01 Harry Perridon Perridon, Harry Harry Perridon University of Amsterdam 01 eng 296 vii 283 LAN009000 v.2006 CFK 2 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.GENER Generative linguistics 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.GERM Germanic linguistics 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.HL Historical linguistics 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.ROM Romance linguistics 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.SYNTAX Syntax 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.THEOR Theoretical linguistics 06 01 One of the recurrent questions in historical linguistics is to what extent languages can borrow grammar from other languages. It seems for instance hardly likely that each 'average European' language developed a definite article all by itself, without any influence from neighbouring languages. It is, on the other hand, by no means clear what exactly was borrowed, since the way in which definiteness is expressed differs greatly among the various Germanic and Romance languages and dialects. One of the main aims of this volume is to shed some light on the question of what is similar and what is different in the structure of the noun phrase of the various Romance and Germanic languages and dialects, and what causes this similarity or difference. 04 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/la.171.png 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027255549.jpg 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027255549.tif 06 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/la.171.hb.png 07 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/la.171.png 25 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/la.171.hb.png 27 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/la.171.hb.png 10 01 JB code la.171.01for vii viii 2 Miscellaneous 1 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Foreword</TitleText> 10 01 JB code la.171.02per 1 22 22 Article 2 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">The noun phrase in Germanic and Romance</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>The </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">noun phrase in Germanic and Romance</TitleWithoutPrefix> <Subtitle textformat="02">Common developments and differences</Subtitle> 1 A01 Harry Perridon Perridon, Harry Harry Perridon ACLC, University of Amsterdam 2 A01 Petra Sleeman Sleeman, Petra Petra Sleeman ACLC, University of Amsterdam 01 In this introductory chapter some of the main (dis)similarities in DP-syntax between the Germanic and Romance languages, as well as between the individual languages of each group, are explored. We take a look at the following subjects: (a) the ways in which the various languages express definiteness; (b) the position of adjectives; (c) the function of the weak declension of adjectives in Germanic; (d) the evolution of genitive equivalents; and (e) the emergence of determining possessives in Germanic. In each case we try to find out whether a given construction is inherited from the parent language or is an independent development in each of the languages or language groups. Special attention is paid to common developments after the languages split up into separate entities, since they might indicate some inherent properties of human language that restrict the way in which languages may develop. 10 01 JB code la.171.03pa1 Section header 3 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Part I. Variation</TitleText> 10 01 JB code la.171.04ale 25 40 16 Article 4 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Scaling the variation in Romance and Germanic nominalizations</TitleText> 1 A01 Artemis Alexiadou Alexiadou, Artemis Artemis Alexiadou Universität Stuttgart 2 A01 Gianina Iordachioaia Iordachioaia, Gianina Gianina Iordachioaia Universität Stuttgart 3 A01 Florian Schäfer Schäfer, Florian Florian Schäfer Universität Stuttgart 01 We investigate the distribution of verbal and nominal layers in Romance and Germanic nominalizations. Specifically, we examine pairs of &#8216;verbal&#8217; vs. &#8216;nominal&#8217; nominalizations in two Romance (Spanish &#38; Romanian) and two Germanic (English &#38; German) languages. Our study proposes a large spectrum of nominal and verbal properties. While these are differently instantiated among languages, the variation we find cannot be attributed to a Germanic vs. Romance parameter; instead, we find micro-variation constrained by the compatibility between the general building blocks of verbal and nominal categories. Besides the vP-layers responsible for argument structure and Aktionsart and the DP-layer responsible for the nominal external syntax, we make a case for further functional verbal and nominal layers in nominalizations: Asp(ect)P, Class(ifier)P, and Num(ber)P. These projections are in complementary distribution in some languages and co-occur in others. 10 01 JB code la.171.05cir 41 56 16 Article 5 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02"><i>What all</i> happens when a universal quantifier combines with an interrogative DP</TitleText> 1 A01 Robert Cirillo Cirillo, Robert Robert Cirillo 01 Universal quantifiers such as <i>all</i> select a DP as their complement and can be &#8216;floated&#8217; or &#8216;stranded&#8217; by that DP, and in certain Germanic languages they can also co-occur with an interrogative DP. The purpose of this article is to investigate whether interrogative and non-interrogative DPs that co-occur with a universal quantifier in the Germanic languages have the same relationship to that quantifier and have gone through the same selection process. I begin with evidence from German that universal quantifiers can select and be stranded by interrogative as well as non-interrogative DPs, but I ultimately argue, going back to an analysis in Giusti (1990b), that a universal quantifier co-occurring with an interrogative is base-generated to the right of that interrogative, not to its left. I also propose that the formation of interrogative expressions involving universal quantifiers may take place in the syntax or in the lexicon, depending on the language. 10 01 JB code la.171.06cor 57 88 32 Article 6 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Micro-diversity in Dutch interrogative DPs</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">A case study on the (dis)continuous <i>wat</i> <i>voor</i> <i>&#8217;n</i> <i>N</i>-construction</Subtitle> 1 A01 Norbert Corver Corver, Norbert Norbert Corver UiL-OTS, Utrecht University 2 A01 Marjo van Koppen Koppen, Marjo van Marjo van Koppen UiL-OTS, Utrecht University 01 This paper presents a micro-comparative perspective on the Dutch <i>wat</i> <i>voor</i> <i>&#8217;n</i> <i>N</i>-construction (meaning: &#8220;what kind of N&#8221;). Besides a description of the various formal manifestations of this nominal construction as found intra-dialectally and cross-dialectally, an analysis is given of the dimensions of variation at the level of internal syntax and external syntax. As regards the external syntax, an analysis will be given of patterns that permit a split <i>wat</i> <i>voor</i> <i>&#8217;n</i> <i>N</i>-pattern and those that do not. An important outcome of our analysis will be that a uniform structural basis &#8216;underlies&#8217; the different manifestations of the <i>wat</i> <i>voor</i> <i>&#8217;n</i> <i>N</i>-construction: more specifically, predication, configurationally defined as a DP-internal small clause structure, and predicate displacement. 10 01 JB code la.171.07woo 89 110 22 Article 7 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Noun phrase structure and movement</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">A cross-linguistic comparison of <i>such</i>/<i>s&#229;dan</i>/<i>solch</i> and <i>so</i>/<i>s&#229;</i>/<i>so</i></Subtitle> 1 A01 Johanna L. Wood Wood, Johanna L. Johanna L. Wood University of Aarhus 2 A01 Sten Vikner Vikner, Sten Sten Vikner University of Aarhus 01 We investigate the etymologically related words <i>so</i> and <i>such</i> (English); <i>s&#229;</i> and <i>s&#229;dan</i> (Danish); and <i>so</i> and <i>solch</i> (German). Similarities and differences that have to be accounted for cross-linguistically are i. position (pre- or post- indefinite article), ii. agreement morphology (in Danish and German), and iii. semantics (whether an AdjP or a DP/NP is modified). English and Danish <i>so/s&#229;</i> may only modify an AdjP, while German <i>so</i> may also modify the DP/NP. English <i>such</i> may only modify the DP/NP (Bolinger 1972, Wood 2002) and may only precede the indefinite article. Danish and German allow inflected <i>s&#229;dan/solch</i> to follow the article. We discuss two possible syntactic derivations, predicate raising (e.g. Corver 1998, Bennis, Corver &#38; den Dikken 1998) and XP movement from an attributive adjective position within the nominal (e.g. Matushansky 2002). The analysis links up with the morphological agreement facts of predicate and of attributive adjectives in Danish and German (Vikner 2001). 10 01 JB code la.171.08loh 111 126 16 Article 8 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">A unified structure for Scandinavian DPs</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>A </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">unified structure for Scandinavian DPs</TitleWithoutPrefix> 1 A01 Susanne Lohrmann Lohrmann, Susanne Susanne Lohrmann Universität Stuttgart 01 This paper discusses doubling patterns of determiners in Scandinavian, the interaction between definite markers and adjectival inflection, and its effects on the structure of the DP. When an adjective precedes a definite noun an additional article is added preceding the adjective. This phenomenon has been referred to as &#8216;double definiteness&#8217;. Moreover, the adjective receives definite inflection so that the noun is actually defined three times. Questions arise as to the function of this multiple exponence of definiteness and the syntactic/semantic role of the morphemes involved. This article develops an account that argues for three components of definiteness in Scandinavian expressed by three distinct morphemes (the two articles and the adjectival inflection). The result is an analysis, based on the framework of Distributed Morphology, which captures the different realizations of definiteness in the Standard Scandinavian languages and which shows that multiple exponence in Scandinavian DPs evidently contributes to interpretation. 10 01 JB code la.171.09str 127 140 14 Article 9 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">A semantic approach to noun phrase structure and the definite &#8211; indefinite distinction in Germanic and Romance</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>A </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">semantic approach to noun phrase structure and the definite &#8211; indefinite distinction in Germanic and Romance</TitleWithoutPrefix> 1 A01 Ulla Stroh-Wollin Stroh-Wollin, Ulla Ulla Stroh-Wollin Department of Scandinavian Languages Uppsala University, Sweden 01 This article deals with the relation between the structure and the semantics of noun phrases. Two complexes of meaning are taken to be grammatically derived in noun phrases. One complex concerns the conceptualization of the entity denoted by the noun phrase, whereas the other concerns the restriction of the set of referents. The latter complex is related to the distinction between definite and indefinite noun phrases.The article also deals with the variation within and between Germanic and Romance noun phrases, showing how this variation may be explained on the basis of the preceding analysis. In particular, the different uses of definite and indefinite noun phrases are highlighted. 10 01 JB code la.171.10bob 141 156 16 Article 10 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Definite determiners in two English-based creoles</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Specificity or definiteness?</Subtitle> 1 A01 Ekaterina Bobyleva Bobyleva, Ekaterina Ekaterina Bobyleva University of Amsterdam 01 It has been repeatedly observed in the literature that unlike their European lexifiers, creoles do not mark definiteness categorically. The question addressed here is whether the distribution of overt definite determiners and bare definite NPs in two Atlantic English-based creoles, Jamaican and Sranan, can be accounted for in terms of the specificity constraint that underlies the determiner use in Gbe, one of their most important substrate languages. The data examined shows that definite determiners in the two creoles tend to follow the definiteness-based pattern. This suggests that English rather than Gbe played the most crucial role in the formation of the discourse-semantic and distributional properties of Jamaican and Sranan definite determiners. Bare definite NPs in the two creoles may occur when the referent is either unimportant or self-evident. Thus, determiner use in Jamaican and Sranan is sensitive not only to language-specific grammar rules but also to universally prominent pragmatic factors. 10 01 JB code la.171.11pa2 Section header 11 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Part II. Change</TitleText> 10 01 JB code la.171.12luc 159 174 16 Article 12 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Form-function mismatches in (formally) definite English noun phrases</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Towards a diachronic account</Subtitle> 1 A01 Christopher Lucas Lucas, Christopher Christopher Lucas School of Oriental and African Studies 01 This article discusses two classes of so-called &#8216;weak definites&#8217;, arguing that their (definite) form is misleading as to their (non-definite) semantics, and outlining a diachronic explanation for why each of these classes (observable in sentences such as <i>Let&#8217;s go to the pub</i> and <i>He came to the bank of a river</i>) should exhibit this particular form-function mismatch. For examples such as <i>the pub</i> the loss of an obligatorily definite interpretation is argued to be the result of a semantic reanalysis such that reference is no longer to a specific entity but to the activity conventionally associated with that entity. For examples such as <i>the bank of a river</i> the mismatch is argued to be a consequence of an incompatibility between the semantics of indefiniteness marking and the semantics of relational nouns, which arises when definiteness marking becomes obligatory in a language. 10 01 JB code la.171.13cri 175 192 18 Article 13 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">The emergence of the definite article in English</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>The </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">emergence of the definite article in English</TitleWithoutPrefix> <Subtitle textformat="02">A contact-induced change?</Subtitle> 1 A01 Paola Crisma Crisma, Paola Paola Crisma Università di Trieste 01 In this paper, based on quantitative evidence collected on the YCOE, I argue that the establishment of the definite article in English is no later than the last quarter of the 9th century, being regularly used in Old English prose of the &#8216;Alfredian&#8217; period. This dating enables one to exclude the possibility that the levelling of inflections, the Norman invasion or the contact with the Danes might have played a role in introducing the definite article as an innovation, and leaves as the sole possible &#8216;external&#8217; influence the Celtic substratum/adstratum. 10 01 JB code la.171.14cor 193 222 30 Article 14 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">On the syntax of Romanian definite phrases</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Changes in the patterns of definiteness checking</Subtitle> 1 A01 Alexandra Cornilescu Cornilescu, Alexandra Alexandra Cornilescu University of Bucharest 2 A01 Alexandru Nicolae Nicolae, Alexandru Alexandru Nicolae “Iorgu Iordan - Al. Rosetti” Institute of Linguistics, Bucharest 01 We discuss a type of variation in the pattern of definiteness valuation in Old Romanian (XVIth to XVIIIth century), which has never been noticed before, and examine its significance for the evolution of the DP. In Old Romanian, the suffixed definite article variably occurs <i>either on the first or on a lower [+N] constituent</i> (noun or adjective), so that an indefinite adjective may precede the definite noun. In contrast, in Modern Romanian, it is always the first noun which bears the definite article, while, in case an adjective precedes the noun, the definite article occurs on the adjective. The existence of this lower (definite) article raises several questions (the contexts where it occurs, its significance for the emergence of the enclitic definite article, etc.), to which this paper provides tentative answers. We propose that the existence of a lower definite article combined with a tendency for economy made possible the extension of the use of the article to (pre&#8209;nominal) adjectives, gradually leading to stricter conditions in the valuation of definiteness in Modern Romanian (Local Agree). At the same time, the lower article is evidence that the Romanian enclitic definite article originates in a post-posed demonstrative. 10 01 JB code la.171.15mag 223 240 18 Article 15 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Coexisting structures and competing functions in genitive word order</TitleText> 1 A01 Elisabetta Magni Magni, Elisabetta Elisabetta Magni University of Bologna 01 This paper examines the correlations between word order at the clause level and word order at the noun phrase level in languages with no dominant genitive order. In this perspective, the comparison between Latin and English is a revealing domain for investigating both synchronic variation and diachronic evolution. The analysis uses a functional-typological approach; the assumption is that coexisting and competing patterns, as well as regularities and irregularities in word order, can be analyzed through diachrony. Results show that (1) in both languages, structures developing from different sources are assigned different functions according to multiple processing factors; (2) the mechanisms of word order flexibility observed in Latin, <i>mutatis mutandis</i>, can provide some useful insights for English as well. 10 01 JB code la.171.16vel 241 256 16 Article 16 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Anaphoric adjectives becoming determiners</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">A corpus-based account</Subtitle> 1 A01 Freek Van de Velde Van de Velde, Freek Freek Van de Velde Research Foundation FWO/University of Leuven 01 Standard accounts of determiners typically deal with the few well-known elements that fall under this category: articles, demonstratives, possessives and (some) quantifiers. It can be shown, however, that the determiner slot in Dutch can also be occupied by certain elements that do not regularly feature in reference grammars, namely the anaphoric adjectives like <i>voornoemd</i> (&#8220;aforementioned&#8221;). Their syntax is subject to variation in Present-day Dutch, and possibly to change as well: a corpus study reveals that they are increasingly used as unequivocal determiners, irrespective of their token frequency. 10 01 JB code la.171.17dp 257 280 24 Article 17 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">From N to D</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Charting the time course of the internal rise of French n-words</Subtitle> 1 A01 Viviane Déprez Déprez, Viviane Viviane Déprez Rutgers University, L2C2, CNRS 01 Based on a thorough review of their feature make up and on novel diachronic data on their modification properties, this paper maps out the internal syntactic structure of French n-words and the historical time course of their internal rise within a nominal projection. It charts out precise steps that directly relate internal structural changes to corresponding changes in concord properties. Indirect modification with <i>autre</i> as in <i>rien d&#8217;autre</i> is shown to be an innovation of modern French that serves to provide a distinctive signature of the final morphosyntactic change of n-words into negative quantificational expressions. The evidence offered supports the hypothesis (D&#233;prez 2000; Condoravdi &#38; Kiparsky 2006) that it was change in the internal structure of n-words that determined the current properties of negative concord, not changes in the sentential negation marker, contra Zeijlstra (2004 and following work). 10 01 JB code la.171.18ind 281 284 4 Miscellaneous 18 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Index</TitleText> 02 JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia NL 04 20110216 2011 John Benjamins 02 WORLD 01 245 mm 02 164 mm 08 690 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 41 18 01 02 JB 1 00 99.00 EUR R 02 02 JB 1 00 104.94 EUR R 01 JB 10 bebc +44 1202 712 934 +44 1202 712 913 sales@bebc.co.uk 03 GB 21 18 02 02 JB 1 00 83.00 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 18 01 gen 02 JB 1 00 149.00 USD