In Czech, German, and many other languages, part of the semantic focus of the utterance can be moved to the left periphery of the clause. The main generalization is that only the leftmost accented part of the semantic focus can be moved. We propose that movement to the left periphery is generally triggered by an unspecific edge feature of C (Chomsky 2008) and its restrictions can be attributed to requirements of cyclic linearization, modifying the theory of cyclic linearization developed by Fox and Pesetsky (2005). The crucial assumption is that structural accent is a direct consequence of being linearized at merge, thus it is indirectly relevant for (locality restrictions on) movement. The absence of structural accent correlates with givenness. Given elements may later receive (topic or contrastive) accents, which accounts for fronting in multiple focus/contrastive topic constructions. Without any additional assumptions, the model can account for movement of pragmatically unmarked elements to the left periphery ('formal fronting', Frey 2005). Crucially, the analysis makes no reference at all to concepts of information structure in the syntax, in line with the claim of Chomsky (2008) that UG specifies no direct link between syntax and information structure.
The paper deals with lexical types of the reflexive marker in Slavic. On the one hand, this exponent shows up in a range of expressions associated with diverse interpretations. On the other hand, the properties within the various types are not homogeneous across the Slavic languages. The challenge consists in finding a unified analysis for the constructions and their varying properties, accounting for the marker with as few construction-specific assumptions as possible. In this paper, we will argue that two lexical types of the reflexive marker-argument blocking and argument binding-are sufficient to cover all constructions and their cross-Slavic variation.Аннотация Данная статья посвящена лексическим типам маркера возвратности в славянских языках. Этот маркер употребляется в предложениях разного типа, свя-занных с рядом интерпретаций. Однако, выясняется, что свойства отдельных типов в славянских языках не гомогенные. Задача состоит в том, чтобы разработать мак- симально обобщенный анализ конструкций и их варьирующих характеристик, огра-ничиваясь минимальным числом специфических для отдельных конструкций пред-положений. В статье выдвигается предположение, что для описания исследуемых конструкций и для объяснения варьирования свойств конструкций в славянских язы-ках достаточно двух маркеров возвратности-маркера возвратности, блокирующего аргумент глагола, и маркера возвратности, связывающего аргумент глагола и прида-ющего предложению интерпретацию неопределенного человеческого носителя дейст-вия.
One of the uses of the reflexive marker in Slavic is to signal Decausativesunagentively interpreted predicates formed from transitive verbs allowing non-volitional Causers as external arguments. The paper proposes an account treating Decausatives in a unified manner with other uses of the reflexive marker in Slavic. Building on the minimal system of reflexive markers presented in previous work, Decausatives are analysed by analogy with genuine Reflexives. The reflexive marker blocks the internal argument, the unbound semantic variable is identified with the external argument at the level of Conceptual Structure. The characteristic Decausative interpretation arises due to the internal argument being a non-volitional Causer rather than an Agent. The present analysis exploits an independently motivated representation of the marker, no additional means or operations are necessary.
Summary Slavic languages show differences in the syntactic realization of arguments of ditransitive verbs as, e.g., give. While Czech and Russian use dative indirect objects (IOs) which precede the direct object (DO), IOs of ditransitives in Bulgarian are marked by a preposition-like element na and follow the DO. Within a framework assuming that Argument Structure is a component part of verbal lexical entries (cf. Bierwisch 1996, a.o.) and syntactic structure of the VP is projected from the lexicon depending on the argument hierarchy, the question arises what is the basic linearization of arguments of ditransitives in Russian, Czech, and Bulgarian. We will argue that the two structures attested in the languages under investigation do not correspond to what has become known as Dative Alternation in English and that there is no need for specific semantic representations for Bulgarian ditransitives. In the relevant cases, the hierarchy of argument variables is changed through application of a semantic template. This accounts for the unmarked DO > IO order in Bulgarian.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.