Noun Phrases and Nominalizations

Siloni, Tal

doi:10.1007/978-94-015-8863-8

Cited by 172 publications

(142 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

127

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, the prediction is borne out. The parameter turns out to be responsible for crosslinguistic variation exhibited by reciprocals (Siloni 2001), and middles (Marelj 2004). Moreover, it seems that languages are consistent regarding the setting of the parameter.…”

Section: Parameter Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Lexicon-Syntax Parameter: Reflexivization and Other Arity Operations

2005

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We argue that crosslinguistic variation regarding verbal reflexivization is parametric, reflecting a broader lexicon-syntax parameter: arity operations—operations on θ-roles, which affect the valence of a predicate—can apply in the lexicon or in the syntax. The significant empirical coverage of this parameter supports the view that the lexicon must be an active component of the grammar. The discussion focuses mainly on the formation of reflexive verbs. We argue that the prevailing view that reflexive verbs have an unaccusative derivation cannot be maintained. Rather, the reflexivization operation bundles a θ-role with an external θ-role, forming a combination that must merge externally. Next, we also briefly review other arity operations: (a) reciprocalization, (b) decausativization, and (c) saturation, which is involved in the formation of passives, middles, and impersonals. Variation in auxiliary selection, owing to the application of reflexivization or other arity operations, is independent of the lexicon-syntax parameter and follows under our approach from a structural accusative Case parameter.

show abstract

Section: Parameter Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…So the question remains why we cannot find the same with reflexive entries. (46) We assume reflexive nominalizations are derived in the lexicon from the corresponding verbs, along lines proposed by Siloni (1997). The above data, then, immediately follow from the lex-syn parameter.…”

Section: Parameter Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Lexicon-Syntax Parameter: Reflexivization and Other Arity Operations

2005

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Semitic languages (Al Barrag, 2014;Aoun, 1978;Bardeas, 2010;Borer, 1999;Fassi Fehri, 1993;Mohammad, 1999;Ritter, 1987;1988;Shlonsky, 2004;Siloni, 1997).…”

Section: Da Vid Publishing Dmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The main difference between CS and FS is that FS uses a genitive exponent (ħagg in HA) to join both the head and genitive nouns (e.g., Bardeas, 2010 among many others;Fassi Fehri, 1993;Ritter, 1991;Shlonsky, 2004;Siloni, 1997). The element ħagg has been called variously by different names by different researchers: a particle, a preposition, an adjective, or just a genitive exponent.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Free Statementioning

confidence: 99%

Free State Constructions

Barrag¹,

Zahrani²

2017

SUET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper attempts to investigate Free State (FS) in Hijazi Arabic. This structure is not used in Modern Standard Arabic. It was introduced into the Arabic dialects later on as a competing structure to the Construct State (CS). First, we discuss the characteristics of this structure in comparison to its counterpart: the CS. we show that semantically FS can express only three semantic relations out of the five semantic relations CS can convey. Furthermore, the paper shows that the FS genitive exponent in HA "ħagg" agrees with the head noun of the matrix DP in phi-features. The discussion then shifts to the origin of the genitive exponent ħagg. The paper argues that it is originally a noun that has acquired a new meaning: an anaphor that means something like "one of". Hence, we gloss ħagg as ANAPH. Contrary to previous analyses for the FS genitive exponent, the paper proposes that ħagg, the noun, heads its own CS and it is linked to the preceding DP by a binding relationship, which involves feature agreement in gender and number. Consequently, we propose that ħagg-headed CS has the same structure of the nominal CS. Finally, we investigate the occurrence of both FS and CS structures in HA and show when one structure is preferred to the other.

show abstract

“…In order to account for the possessive data, I suggest that there is a PossP projection within the possessive DP immediately below DP (Anderson 1983-84;Longobardi 1994;Ritter 1991;Siloni 1997). It is in the specifier of the PossP projection that the possessor merges and receives its possessive (ergative) case.…”

Section: Wg Possessive Dp Structure -Initial Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%