The Subjunctive Disjoint Reference Effect

Kempchinsky, Paula

doi:10.1515/9783110846300.123

Cited by 28 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been proposed that subjunctive clauses contain an operator in Spec CP (Kempchinsky 1987). If this operator has been moved from a lower position, then the ungrammaticality of (40) is again due to an intervention effect.…”

Section: Conclusion and Further Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The internal syntax of adverbial clauses

Haegeman

2010

Lingua

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Conclusion and Further Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The internal syntax of adverbial clauses

Haegeman

2010

Lingua

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There is cross-linguistic justification for the connection between subjunctive and imperatives, including cases where subjunctive morphology appears in certain imperatives (Klein, 1975;Kempchinsky, 1987;Rivero and Terzi, 1995;Zanuttini, 1997;Han, 1998, and many others).…”

Section: Subjunctive Morphology As Underspecifiedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mood selection in Romance and Balkan

Siegel

2009

Lingua

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…I adopt the proposals in Kempchinsky (1987) and Zanuttini (1991) for the syntax of subjunctives. Kempchinsky (1987) proposes that in Romance, a volitional verb subcategorizes for a subjunctive complement clause with a subjunctive operator, in the same way that a verb subcategorizes for a wh-complement with a wh-operator.…”

Section: Spanish and Modern Greekmentioning

confidence: 99%

Force, negation and imperatives

Han¹

2001

The Linguistic Review

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents an account of the cross-linguistic variation in the availability of negative imperatives. By imperatives, I refer to sentences with a distinctive imperative morphology on the main verb and/or a distinctive syntax. In many languages (e.g., Italian, Modern Greek, and Spanish), imperatives cannot be negated. Instead, negative commands are expressed with negative subjunctives and/or infinitivals. However, in German, French, English, Bulgarian and Serbo-Croatian, imperatives can be negated. I argue that some languages rule out negative imperatives because the syntax of the language derives a structure which maps onto an incoherent interpretive representation. The analysis I propose builds on the intuition that the directive force contributed by the imperative mood cannot be negated. The negative imperative Don't call! means I require that you not call; it does not mean I do not require that you call. This judgment was already noted by Frege, consequently positing that illocutionary force operators cannot be negated. Pursuing this idea further, I propose that negative imperatives are unavailable in some languages because the syntax derives a structure in which the operator encoding directive force arrives within the c-command domain of negation, where it is interpreted as being negated. As this is incoherent, the structure is ruled impossible. The proposed analysis has implications for the mapping between syntax and semantics of imperatives in particular. In general, it provides evidence that the set of available syntactic structures in a language is restricted by uniform mechanisms for semantic interpretation across languages.

show abstract

The Subjunctive Disjoint Reference Effect

Cited by 28 publications

References 0 publications

The internal syntax of adverbial clauses

The internal syntax of adverbial clauses

Mood selection in Romance and Balkan

Force, negation and imperatives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About