In this paper, we explore some previously unanalysed interactions between verbal aktionsart and prepositional complementation in Norwegian, namely the alternations between a DP object and PP complements with på ‘on/at’ and til ‘to/at’. We argue that a simple account based on [±telic] or [±quantized] features cannot be correct. Instead, we generalize the notion of path and homomorphism, and integrate it in a syntactic theory of how complex events are built up compositionally. The path structure introduced by the PP interacts with the path structure of the VP to produce complex events based on ‘homomorphic unity’ in much the same way as has been argued for in the Verb + Nominal domain (Krifka 1992). Specifically, an extended location (a på-PP) in the complement of and activity verb (in our terms, a process subevental projection) gives rise to a non-directed path for the event; a point location ( a til-PP) in the complement of an accomplishment verb (one which in our terms will contain a result subevental projection) gives rise to the specification of an endpoint.
In relation to inanimates, nouns that normally denote body parts when constructed in relation to an animate whole (pied ‘foot’, tête ‘head’, etc.) lose their literal meaning in French and acquire instead a spatial interpretation. This paper argues that spatial part Ns in French divide into two coherent groups with distinct properties: fixed spatial part terms, which denote concrete, perceptible objects and whose interpretation is completely predictable on the basis of the shape and position of the whole and relative spatial part terms, which denote a location projected from the whole. A detailed study of the two classes of expressions shows that, while the former are true nouns, the latter are in fact Axial Parts, a category motivated crosslinguistically in the semantic decomposition of preposition.
In this paper, I discuss the categorial status of Kîîtharaka adpositions. I demonstrate that there are two main classes of adpositions(to be referred to as Class A and Class B). Class A adpositions are syntactic heads and they belong to the functional lexical category P. Class B adpositions are a phrasal P category with a nominal component. They therefore spell out a complex structure than adpositional heads do. This bipartation of Kîîtharaka Ps is based on (i) optionality of complements (ii) case assignment (iii) modification (iv) recoverability of content (v) movement and (vi) derivational morphology.
In this paper, I argue that an atelic path PP headed by -(u)lo ‘toward’ in Korean is an argument of a directed motion verb on a par with its telic counterpart headed by the locative -ey ‘(be) AT’. I further argue that, despite having the same argumental status, the atelic path PP is distinguished from the goal-marking locative PP in terms of an entailment of a result state and predicativity; while the goal PP in directed motion constructions forms a secondary predicate associated with a resultative interpretation, the atelic path PP merges with the verb as a non-predicative complement and does not license a resultative interpretation.
Recent approaches to the cross-linguistic variation in the expressions of directed motion assume a tight correlation between adjectival
resultative and directed motion constructions (e.g., Beck and Snyder 2001, Mateu and Rigau 2001; 2002, McIntyre 2004, Beavers et al. 2004). Beck and Snyder (2001), in particular, argue that languages that allow adjectival resultatives also allow directed motion with goal PP (or telic Path PP) based on the compounding parameter proposed
by Snyder (1995; 2001). This paper, however, shows that such ‘macro’-parametric approaches to the cross-linguistic variation (in directed motion) fail when individual languages are investigated in detail. Based on Korean, Japanese, Hebrew, Czech, and Indonesian, I show that there is no necessary correlation between directed motion (i.e., goal PP) constructions and the availability of resultative phrases, and that the previous parameter approaches face challenges
in explaining the facts drawn from these languages. I further show that the variation in directed motion is better explained by careful
examination of individual adpositions that differ from one language (e.g., English) to another (e.g., Korean).
This paper presents a survey of Faroese wh-nominals, in particular (i) the hvør N construction, (ii) the hvat fyri (ein) N construction, and (iii) the hvat slag av N.dat construction. The first construction involves a wh-item which is used both pronominally, corresponding to English who and what, and adnominally, corresponding to English which, what (N), and what kind of. The second construction is the Faroese version of the was für/what for construction, including versions with and without an indefinite article and with and without both the preposition (fyri) and the indefinite article (i.e. a “bare what” construction). The last construction involves an overt kind noun which must be followed by the preposition av ‘of’ which in turn assigns dative case to the main/head noun. The survey is based on data collected during the NORMS fieldwork in the Faroe Islands in August 2008, focusing on a number of morphosyntactic issues as well as the semantic distinction between kind and token interpretation. The various findings on Faroese are compared to data on other varieties of Germanic, in particular the North Germanic ones.
This paper proposes an account of final devoicing in Friulian which relies on contrastive feature specification and feature geometry to explicate the connection between final devoicing and vowel lengthening. It is proposed that obstruents which are the outcome of final devoicing are phonologically distinct from true voiceless obstruents, being completely unspecified for laryngeal features. It is argued that the representational deficiency of such delaryngealized obstruents is directly connected to their inability to license a mora, which opens the way to vowel lengthening. More generally, the paper shows how feature geometrymay be adapted to capture the effects of contrastive specification and express markedness relations, and proposes a novel approach to hierarchies involving the sonority of coda segments.
I argue in this paper for a novel analysis of case in Icelandic, with implications for case theory in general. I argue that structural case is the manifestation on the noun phrase of features which are semantically interpretable on verbal projections. Thus, Icelandic case does not encode features of noun phrase interpretation, but it is not uninterpretable either; case is properly seen as reflecting (interpretable) tense, aspect, or Aktionsart features. Accusative case in Icelandic is available when the two subevents introduced in a transitive verb phrase are temporally identified with each other, and dative case is available when the two parts are distinct. This analysis bears directly on the theory of feature checking in the Minimalist Program. Specifically, it is consistent with a restrictive theory of feature checking in which no features are strictly uninterpretable: all formal features come in interpretable-uninterpretable pairs, and feature checking is the matching of such pairs, driven by legibility conditions at Spell-Out.
This paper examines the problem of selectional ‘matching’ effects in Bengali V-V complex predicates, and English denominal verbs within the context of a decompositional syntax/semantics for verbal meaning and a theory of lexical insertion under non-terminals. It argues that within the particular version of this kind of lexical insertion, as proposed by Ramchand 2008b, selection can be captured by the underassociation of category features constrained by Agree. In
this way, I argue that we can achieve many of the effects of selection without any distinct lexical subcategorization frame, or sub-type of feature-checking, once we have a suitably articulated theory of lexical insertion.
In this paper, I revisit the licensing and interpretation of instrumental case-marked nominals in Hindi/Urdu causative constructions to argue against the hypothesis that the se-marked phrase corresponds to a demoted agent. Rather, I will argue that a more unified analysis of se-phrases can be achieved through an event-structural analysis, in line with the standard interpretation of other adverbials in the syntax. Since the ‘intermediate agent’ interpretation is only possible with indirect causatives in Hindi/Urdu, the event structural analysis proposed here also has implications for the direct vs. indirect causation distinction in the syntax.
All Germanic languages make extensive use of verb-particle combinations (known as separable-prefix verbs in the OV languages). I show some basic differences here distinguishing the Scandinavian type from the OV West Germanic languages, with English superficially patterning with Scandinavian but actually manifesting a distinct type. Specifically, I argue that the P projection is split into p and P (in accordance with earlier work), roughly analogous to v and V in the verb phrase. In English, p is always present in PP, and enables P to assign case, if P has an internal argument (as it does in "fall in the hole"). The arguments of particle verbs are then arguments of p, external arguments of the particle (as in "throw the rock in"). OV West Germanic allows p to be missing completely, thus having a type of unaccusative particle whose inner argument must receive case from the verb (corresponding to "fall the hole in," impossible in English). Scandinavian allows p to be missing, so that there is no external argument of the particle, but provides an alternative source for case for the internal argument (giving examples corresponding to "pour in the glass"). Thus English and Scandinavian are different from OV West Germanic in lacking the unaccusative type of particle, while Scandinavian differs from OV West Germanic and English in having an alternative source of case.
Nanosyntax is a novel approach to the architecture of language, designed to make (better) sense of the new empirical picture emerging from recent years of syntactic research. It is a large-scale project, addressing a wide array of issues, ranging from big issues such as the modularity of language, to fine details, such as the derivation of allomorphy in irregular patterns of given languages and its interaction
with syntactic structures.
This paper discusses different types of zero-derived de-verbal nominals with a focus on result nominals, simple event nominals and complex event nominals. I argue that zero-derived nominals should be treated on a par with overtly derived nominals. I claim that verbs that have related zero-derived nominals have nominal gender features in their lexical entries in addition to verbal features, like Proc and Res, and that merging a gender feature on top of an event-structure representation results in a nominal. To capture the fact that verbal entries can be inserted in both nominal and verbal contexts, I apply the principle of underattachment, or underassociation, that allows lexical entries to be inserted in the syntax even when not all of the
features in the lexical entry are present in the syntax (see e.g. Ramchand 2008 and Caha 2009). In verbal contexts, no gender feature is inserted, and in some of the nominal contexts, only a subset of the verbs event features are present. I further argue that the only function of overt nominalizing suffixes is to lexicalize a gender feature. If the lexical entry of a verb already contains a gender feature, no overt nominalizing suffix needs to be inserted.