Levels of Syntactic Representation 1981
DOI: 10.1515/9783110874167-004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

3. French predication and linguistic theory

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
9
0
3

Year Published

1983
1983
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
9
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…However, Couquaux (1981), seconded by Burzio (1986: 73), has effectively argued that all such subject DPs of linking verbs have an underlying post-verbal source. 16 Gaps within such post-verbal DPs then reduce to the types seen in (16)-(21).…”
Section: The Relation Of En/ne To Subject Positionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, Couquaux (1981), seconded by Burzio (1986: 73), has effectively argued that all such subject DPs of linking verbs have an underlying post-verbal source. 16 Gaps within such post-verbal DPs then reduce to the types seen in (16)-(21).…”
Section: The Relation Of En/ne To Subject Positionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More specifically, DeGraff proposes that se is a last resort element that spells out the non-governed trace of the subject of a small clause after its movement to Spec IP. Following Stowell (1983) and Couquaux (1981) among others, DeGraff assumes that copular constructions are made up of a small clause dominated by a temporal structure IP (for short), in which TMA markers may occur. (56a) and (56b) represent respectively the proposed underlying and derived structures for examples like (1): (56) In (56b), se is an anaphoric element that spells out the trace left by the movement of the small clause subject Jan to the Spec of IP.…”
Section: Basic Assumptions Of the Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Burzio (1981Burzio ( , 1986, Couquaux (1981) and Rizzi (1986)) that this is part of a more general restriction, namely, that the reflexive clitic is incompatible with any type of derived subject, not just with a passive subject. *Jean se sera d6crit par sa femme.…”
Section: ! !mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(55a), for example, is to be contrasted with Jean lui semble avoir raison 'Jean seems to him to be right', from Couquaux (1981). (55a), for example, is to be contrasted with Jean lui semble avoir raison 'Jean seems to him to be right', from Couquaux (1981).…”
Section: ! !mentioning
confidence: 99%