Zulu ngani ‘why’: Postverbal and yet in CP

Buell, Leston

doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2010.11.004

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In Zulu, the copula is expressed by a depressor low tone and an optional segmental pre x, either ng-, y(i)-, or w(u). (See Buell 2009;Doke 1961, andPoulos &Msimang 1998. ) is can be seen in the identi cational sentences in (2), where the syllable following the copular pre x is low-toned: 1 (2) a.…”

Section:  Structure Of Cle S: Data and Generalizationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Clefts in Durban Zulu

Cheng¹,

Downing²

2013

Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we argue that cle s in Zulu have a bipartite structure: a copular sentence with an adjoined DP/clause. is structure accounts for the prosody of cle s. Each constituent is parsed into a separate Intonation Phrase by the independently motivated phrasing algorithm of Zulu. It also accounts for the syntactic properties of Zulu cle s. We further argue that the nature of agreement in Zulu copular sentences support a pronominal predicate analysis.

show abstract

Section:  Structure Of Cle S: Data and Generalizationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An additional problem for a structure such as (16b), which involves a FocusP above the CP, is that Zulu does not have a high FocusP. (See Buell (2009), Downing (2009, 2012), and Hyman and Polinsky (2010) for detailed discussion. )…”

Section:  Zulu Cle S: Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Clefts in Durban Zulu

Cheng¹,

Downing²

2013

Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The locality approach accounts for this behavior if both perché 'why' and come mai 'how come' can be externally merged in the left periphery. The idea that certain wh-elements including why and/or how come are externally merged in the left periphery of the clause they modify semantically is of course not new (see, e.g., Buell 2011, Ko 2005, Rizzi 1990, Starke 2001.…”

Section: Ipmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Italian Left Periphery: A View from Locality

Abels

2012

Linguistic Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, I discuss the interaction of locality phenomena with the left periphery in Italian as elaborated in Rizzi 1997Rizzi , 2001aRizzi , 2004b. It turns out that long-distance crossing possibilities fully predict the local orderings entailed by Rizzi's left-peripheral template. In fact, both descriptive gains (in terms of topic positions) and explanatory gains (regarding the position and behavior of topics and of Rizzi's (2001a) Int) can be made if local ordering is reduced to locality. This suggests that the left-peripheral template should be derived from some appropriate theory of locality and should not be taken as a theoretical primitive.

show abstract

“…In the cartographic approach, this is linked to a certain hierarchical projection, but the descriptive data only show us a linear order, and this may in fact be of more impact than the structural position. Buell (2011) provides an example of a case where structural and linear positions vary, and the linear position seems to determine what counts as immediately after the verb . Buell shows that, in Zulu, wh -words (which are inherently focused) must appear in IAV position.…”

Section: Other Markers Of Information Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Information structure, (inter)subjectivity and objectification

Wal

2014

J. Ling.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0022226714000541How to cite this article: Jenneke van der Wal Information structure, (inter)subjectivity and objectication.This paper discusses how information structure can be seen as a subjective and intersubjective concept in Verhagen's (2005) and Breban's (2010) definitions, though less so in Traugott's (2010) use of the terms. More difficult is the question of whether MARKERS of information structure can be characterised as (inter)subjective; this is more easily determined for morphological markers than for prosody or word order. For unambiguous markers of information structure, I suggest that their emergence (e.g. copula > focus marker) is typically accompanied by (inter)subjectification, whereas their further development (e.g. topic marker > subject marker) displays objectification. The paper not only shows that grammatical items can undergo an increase as well as a decrease in (inter)subjectivitythus denying strict unidirectionality -but also confirms that these processes are independent of grammaticalisation.

show abstract

Zulu ngani ‘why’: Postverbal and yet in CP

Cited by 8 publications

References 16 publications

Clefts in Durban Zulu

Clefts in Durban Zulu

The Italian Left Periphery: A View from Locality

Information structure, (inter)subjectivity and objectification

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About