Chapter 7
Serbian clitics as a challenge for the linguistic theory
Article outline
- 1.Serbian clitic auxiliaries: Syntactic heads or dependents?
- 1.1The problem stated
- 1.2Determining the direction of the syntactic dependency in the configuration V(aux)fin –v(lex)
- 1.2.1Two formal criteria for determining the direction of the syntactic dependency
- 1.2.1.1criterion 1: Imposition of the passive syntactic valence
- 1.2.1.2criterion 2: Control of inflection
- 1.2.2Informal considerations for determining the direction of the syntactic dependency
- 1.Meaning considerations
- 2.Form considerations
- 3.Omissibility from the surface-syntactic structure of the clause
- 4.Statistical predictability
- 1.2.3Additional arguments in favor of treating Serbian auxiliaries as clausal heads
- 1.Parallelism with lexical counterparts
- 2.Co-occurrence with negation
- 3.Coordination with semantically full verbs
- 4.Government: Taking a clausal complement
- 2.Serbian future-tense markers: Clitics or affixes?
- 2.1The problem stated
- 2.1.1Wordform and affix
- 2.1.2Puzzling properties of future-tense markers
- 2.2Criteria for distinguishing clitics from affixes
- 2.2.1Syntactic criteria
- 2.2.2Morphonological criteria
- 2.2.3Criteria proposed in Zwicky & Pullum (1983)
- 3.Summary
-
Notes