DOCSLIB.ORG

The Syntax of Quirky Verbal Morphology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Syntax of Quirky Verbal Morphology The syntax of quirky verbal morphology PhD dissertation submitted by Anne Kjeldahl The Department of English University of Aarhus Supervisors: Professor Sten Vikner, Department of English, University of Aarhus Professor Josef Bayer, Department of Linguistics, University of Konstanz The syntax of quirky verbal morphology PhD dissertation, Department of English, Institute of Language, Literature and Culture, University of Aarhus. © copyright 2010 Anne Kjeldahl E-mail: [email protected] Acknowledgements I owe thanks to a lot of people who have helped and supported me while writing my dissertation. First and foremost, my supervisor Sten Vikner whose help has been priceless. Thanks for always having time for me, for constructive criticism, discussions and support. Also a big thanks to my co- supervisor Josef Bayer who provided for me the frame for three wonderful semesters at the University of Konstanz and Ellen Brandner from Konstanz for helpful advice and encouragement. Over the last three years I have discussed my thesis and other linguistic topics with a number of linguists and I am grateful for their comments, feedback and native speaker judgements. Among them are Ingrid Kaufmann, Paolo Acquaviva, Tanja Schmid, Markus Bader, Sebastian Roth, Arthur Stepanov, Martin Salzmann, Uli Lutz, Antje Lahne, Per Bærenzten, Eva Engels, Ken Ramshøj Christensen, Ocke-Schwen Bohn, Maia Andreasson, Volker Struckmeier, Joost Kremers, Richard Larson and Kleanthes Grohmann. I also owe a special thanks to Janet Grijzenhout for introducing me to generative grammar. Those hours of the last three years that were not filled with linguistics were made enjoyable by the company of my lovely friends, Louise Nørgaard Andersen, Birthe Jensen, Louise Ebbesen Nielsen and office mate Mette Hjortshøj Sørensen. Til allersidst en stor kærlig tak til mor, far og søs, fordi I har holdt ud at høre på al mit brok og altid støtter mig. Også en stor tak til søs for gentagen it-support. PART I – DANISH PSEUDO-COORDINATION.................................................................................... 5 1 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................. 5 1.1 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ...................................................................................................... 11 1.1.1 Theoretical assumptions ...................................................................................................... 12 1.1.2 Ramchand ............................................................................................................................ 12 1.1.3 Cinque and the functional hierarchy ................................................................................... 17 1.2 THE STRUCTURE OF THE DISSERTATION ..................................................................................... 19 2 INTRODUCING DANISH PSEUDO-COORDINATION ........................................................... 21 2.1 GENERATIVE ACCOUNTS ........................................................................................................... 23 2.2 POSITIONAL PSEUDO -COORDINATION ........................................................................................ 29 2.3 DIRECTIONAL PSEUDO -COORDINATION ..................................................................................... 31 2.4 POSITIONAL VS . DIRECTIONAL PC S ........................................................................................... 33 2.4.1 PC vs. for at-infinitive.......................................................................................................... 35 3 COORDINATION OR SUBORDINATION? ............................................................................... 36 3.1 EXTRACTION :............................................................................................................................ 38 3.2 WHAT -FOR -SPLIT AND ASYMMETRIC COORDINATION ................................................................. 39 2 3.3 TOPICALISATION OF V : ............................................................................................................ 43 3.4 NEGATION ................................................................................................................................. 45 3.5 VERB SECOND EFFECTS :............................................................................................................ 47 3.6 THE NATURE OF [Ɔ]? ................................................................................................................. 49 3.7 SUBJECT -RELATED MATERIAL ................................................................................................... 51 4 RESTRICTIONS ON PC ................................................................................................................ 52 4.1 AUXILIARY SELECTION .............................................................................................................. 52 1 4.2 RESTRICTIONS ON V ................................................................................................................. 54 4.2.1 Impersonal subjects ............................................................................................................. 55 4.2.2 Expletive subjects................................................................................................................. 58 4.2.3 Verb selection ...................................................................................................................... 61 1 4.2.4 Augmentations of V ............................................................................................................. 62 2 4.3 RESTRICTIONS ON V ................................................................................................................. 72 4.3.1 Verb selection ...................................................................................................................... 72 2 4.3.2 The functional domain of V ................................................................................................ 74 4.4 THE STRUCTURES ...................................................................................................................... 80 4.5 THE EXCEPTION OF TAGE ‘TAKE ’ ............................................................................................... 85 4.6 IMPERATIVE COPYING ?.............................................................................................................. 87 5 SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................... 88 2 6 NON-SCANDINAVIAN PC:........................................................................................................... 89 6.1 MARSALESE .............................................................................................................................. 89 6.2 ENGLISH AND AFRIKAANS PC................................................................................................... 92 6.2.1 English PC........................................................................................................................... 93 6.2.2 Afrikaans PC........................................................................................................................ 95 6.2.3 De Vos and Danish PC........................................................................................................ 97 7 MOTIVATING PC .......................................................................................................................... 98 7.1.1 An alternative progressive strategy ................................................................................... 100 7.1.2 Progressives in other languages........................................................................................ 101 8 SERIAL VERB CONSTRUCTIONS........................................................................................... 103 8.1 ANALYSES OF SVC S................................................................................................................ 109 8.2 PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION ON SVC S .................................................................................... 119 8.3 GERMANIC SERIAL VERB CONSTRUCTIONS ? ............................................................................ 119 8.3.1 SVC properties revisited .................................................................................................... 123 PART II – INFINITIVUS PRO PARTICIPIO..................................................................................... 129 9 INTRODUCTION TO IPP............................................................................................................ 129 9.1 BASIC PROPERTIES OF IPP ....................................................................................................... 129 9.2 THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF IPP.................................................................................. 131 9.3 IPP CROSS -LINGUISTICALLY .................................................................................................... 135 9.4 VERBAL STATUS AND WORD ORDER ........................................................................................ 136 10 DERIVING (IM)POSSIBLE WORD ORDERS ......................................................................... 140 10.1 HEAD MOVEMENT ..................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Syntax of Case and Agreement: Its Relationship to Morphology and Argument Structure
    The Syntax of Case and Agreement: its Relationship to Morphology and Argument Structure By Vita G. Markman A Dissertation submitted to the Graduate School – New Brunswick Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Program in Linguistics written under the direction of Professor Mark Baker and approved by Professor Mark Baker Professor Viviane Deprez Professor Ken Safir Professor Carson Schutze New Brunswick, New Jersey October 2005 © 2005 Vita G. Markman ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ABSTRACT OF DISSERTATION The Syntax of Case and Agreement: its Relationship to Morphology and Argument Structure by VITA G. MARKMAN Dissertation Director Professor Mark Baker In this thesis I argue for a non-arbitrary relationship between the syntax of case and agreement and its morphological realization, as reflected in the following linguistic universals: 1. If a language overtly case-marks the subject, it overtly marks the object; 2.If a language has overt object agreement, it has overt subject agreement (Moravcik 1974, Comrie 1988, Lehmann 1982). The goal of this thesis is to explain the nature of the morphology-syntax connection the above universals embody and explore the consequences it has for syntactic theory, grammars of individual languages, and for UG. In this dissertation I depart from the Universal Approach (e.g. Chomsky 1981, Rouveret and Vergnaud 1980, and later in Chomsky 1995, 2000, Harley 1995, Sigurdsson 2003 inter alia) that treats case and agreement as universal properties of language and their overt realization as arbitrary and language specific. Building on a proposal presented in Pesetsky and Torrego 2001 that features are interpretable but may become uninterpetable if placed on a wrong head, I argue that case and agreement features are misplaced interpretable features used by languages to create PF-records of thematic relations.
    [Show full text]
  • A Crosslinguistic Approach to Double Nominative and Biabsolutive Constructions
    A Crosslinguistic Approach to Double Nominative and Biabsolutive Constructions: Evidence from Korean and Daghestanian∗ Andrei Antonenko1 and Jisung Sun2 Stony Brook University1,2 1. Introduction Distribution of case among distinct grammatical relations is one of the most frequently studied topics in the syntactic theory. Canonical cases are, in accusative languages, subjects of both intransitive and transitive verbs being nominative, while direct objects of transitive verbs are usually marked accusative. In ergative languages, subjects of intransitive verbs share properties with direct objects of transitive verbs, and are marked absolutive. Subjects of transitive verbs are usually ergative. When you look into world languages, however, there are ‘non-canonical’ case patterns too. Probably the most extreme kind of non-canonical case system would be so-called Quirky Subject constructions in Icelandic (see Sigurðsson 2002). This paper concerns constructions, in which two nominals are identically case-marked in a clause, as observed in Korean and Daghestanian languages. Daghestanian languages belong to Nakh-Daghestanian branch of North Caucasian family. Nakh-Daghestanian languages are informally divided into Nakh languages, such as Chechen and Ingush, spoken in Chechnya and the Republic of Ingushetia, respectively; and Daghestanian languages, spoken in the Republic of Daghestan. Those regions are located in the Caucasian part of Russian Federation. Some Daghestanian languages are also spoken in Azerbaijan and Georgia. This study focuses on Daghestanian languages, such as Archi, Avar, Dargwa, Hinuq, Khwarshi, Lak and Tsez, due to similar behaviors of them with respect to the described phenomenon. 2. Ergativity in Daghestanian Aldridge (2004) proposes that there are two types of syntactically ergative languages, based on which argument is performing functions typical for subjects.
    [Show full text]
  • Zihlmann-Vowel Consonant Length
    Zurich Open Repository and Archive University of Zurich Main Library Strickhofstrasse 39 CH-8057 Zurich www.zora.uzh.ch Year: 2020 Vowel and consonant length in four Alemannic dialects and their influence on the respective varieties of Swiss Standard German Zihlmann, Urban Abstract: Dass die Alemannischen Dialekte (ALM) die Vokalqualität des Schweizerhochdeutschen (SHD) prägt, wurde bereits mehrmals untersucht. Hingegen liegen noch keine systematischen Studien über die dialektale Prägung der Vokal- und Konsonantenquantität im SHD vor. Diese Studie erforscht deshalb bei vier Dialekten, wie sich ALM auf die Länge der Vokale (V) und Konsonanten (K) in den jeweiligen SHD-Varietäten auswirkt. Segmentdaueranalysen zweisilbigerWörter mit kurzen/langen V/K zeigten, dass (1) die vier Dialekte im Prinzip das gleiche V/K-Quantitätssystem aufweisen (trotz z.T. unter- schiedlicher Verteilung der Vokalquantitäten bei bestimmten Wörtern) und dass dieses System auch im SHD angewendet wird. (2) Statistisch signifikante Dauerunterschiede in den regionalen SHD-Varietäten wurden nur bei Wörtern gefunden, bei denen ein phonologischer Quantitätsunterschied zwischen den ALM- und SHD-Äquivalenten vorliegt. Diese Unterschiede sind jedoch nicht dialektspezifisch, sondern können bei allen Dialekten mit diesen Quantitätsunterschieden vorkommen. Other titles: Vowel and consonant length in Alemannic and Swiss Standard German Posted at the Zurich Open Repository and Archive, University of Zurich ZORA URL: https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-186717 Journal Article Published Version Originally published at: Zihlmann, Urban (2020). Vowel and consonant length in four Alemannic dialects and their influence on the respective varieties of Swiss Standard German. Wiener Linguistische Gazette, 86:1-46. Vowel and consonant length in four Alemannic dialects and their influence on the respective varieties of Swiss Standard German Urban B.
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Nominative Subjects in Comparison
    NON-NOMINATIVE SUBJECTS IN COMPARISON Josef Bayer University of Konstanz Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft Universität Konstanz Universitätsstr. 10 D-78457 Konstanz Germany [email protected] 1 NON-NOMINATIVE SUBJECTS IN COMPARISON Josef Bayer University of Konstanz 1. Introduction Among languages with a sufficiently rich system of morphological Case we observe unmarked constituent orderings which deviate from the “nomina- tive preceding non-nominative” pattern. This deviation, if one wants to call it that way, is to a large extent lexically and semantically predictable. Languages of this kind are classified as languages that permit non- nominative subjects. As is well known, however, they differ quite radically as to certain syntactic consequences which the non-nominative-first pat- tern may have. German and Icelandic are closely related Germanic lan- guages which – not surprisingly – show strong similarities in their argu- ment structures and syntax of Case. Nevertheless, they differ by the fact that non-nominative prominent DPs in Icelandic behave like genuine sub- jects while they do not (or do to a lesser extent) in German. The goal of the present article is to explore the possibility of deriving differences in “sub- jecthood” from the basic order of constituents. Icelandic has a head-initial 0 VP which is separated from an external argument by a functional head F 0 (or a number of functional heads), i.e., the order is SpecFP F [VP V …]. Ger- man has a head-final VP instead. There are strong indications that the or- 0 der [VP … V] F does not give rise to a functionally defined position SpecFP.
    [Show full text]
  • Amtsblatt Brotterode-Trusetal April 2017.Pdf
    AMTSBLATT der Stadt Brotterode-Trusetal Jahrgang 15 Freitag, den 7. April 2017 Nr. 4 www.brotterode-trusetal.de [email protected] [email protected] Im Namen des Stadtrates und der Verwaltung wünsche ich Ihnen und Ihrer Familie ein frohes Osterfest Ihr Karl Koch Bürgermeister Amtsblatt der Stadt Brotterode-Trusetal - 2 - Nr. 4/2017 Amtliche Bekanntmachungen Beschluss-Nr.: 198/35/16 Betreff: Beteiligungsbericht 2016 der Stadt Brotterode-Trusetal über die Beteiligung an der Bürgerenergiegenossenschaft Insel- Auftruf zur Mitarbeit als Wahlhelfer berg e. G im Jahre 2015 für die Wahl zum 19. Bundestag Beschluss: Der Stadtrat nimmt gemäß § 75a Abs. 3 ThürKO den Beteili- Am Sonntag, 24.09.2017 findet die Wahl zum 19. Deutschen gungsbericht 2016 vom 18.11.2016 über die unmittelbare Be- Bundestag statt. teiligung an der Bürgerenergiegenossenschaft Inselberg eG im Hierfür suchen wir interessierte Bürgerinnen und Bürger mit Jahr 2015 zur Kenntnis. Wohnsitz in Brotterode-Trusetal, die in einem Wahlvorstand mit- Abstimmung: wirken möchten. Aufgaben sind im Wesentlichen: Anzahl der Mitglieder: ............................................................ 21 anwesende Mitglieder: ........................................................... 18 - Prüfung der Wahlberechtigung Ja-Stimmen: ........................................................................... 15 - Vermerk der Stimmabgabe im Wählerverzeichnis Nein-Stimmen: ......................................................................... 0 - Ausgabe der Stimmzettel Stimmenthaltungen:
    [Show full text]
  • Are Doubly-Filled Comps Governed by Prosody in Swiss German? the Chameleonic Nature of Dass ‘That’1
    Are doubly-filled COMPs governed by prosody in Swiss German? The chameleonic nature of dass ‘that’1 1. Introduction Several decades ago, Chomsky and Lasnik (1977) stipulated the doubly-filled COMP filter according to which the co-occurrence of a wh-constituent and a complementizer is banned. In those days, COMP was a single position that could either contain a wh-constituent or a complementizer, but not both. Nowadays two positions, SpecCP, hosting maximal projections, and C, hosting heads, correspond to what was once labelled as COMP. There is thus no a priori reason why a wh-constituent in SpecCP could not co-occur with a complementizer in C, since these two elements do not compete for the same position. Indeed, many languages exist that violate the doubly-filled COMP filter. In some, doubly-filled COMPs (DFCs) are obligatory, e.g. West Flemish (see Haegeman 1992) and in others, DFCs are optional, at least to a certain extent, e.g. Bavarian and Alemannic (see Bayer and Brandner 2008a, 2008b; Bayer 2015; and Penner and Bader 1995; Penner 1986 for Bernese Swiss German; Schönenberger 2010 for Lucernese Swiss German) and Belfast English (Henry 1995). In yet others, they seem to be banned, e.g. Standard German and Standard English, but this may be due to normative pressure, since earlier stages of these languages allowed them. Zwicky (2002), for instance, lists various examples with DFCs produced by speakers of different varieties of modern English (see [1] and [2]). (1) We asked what sort of health care that they rely on. (2) What a mine of useless information that I am! Based on acceptability judgement data, Bayer and Brandner advance a structural account for DFCs in Alemannic and Bavarian, in which wh-words are generally incompatible with dass ‘that’ while wh-phrases generally require the presence of dass.
    [Show full text]
  • Person Versus Default Number in Agreement Peter Ackema University of Edinburgh Ad Neeleman UCL
    Chapter 2 Default person versus default number in agreement Peter Ackema University of Edinburgh Ad Neeleman UCL In this paper, we compare the behaviour of the default in the person system (third person) with the default in the number system (singular). We argue, following Nevins (2007; 2011), that third person pronouns have person features, while singu- lar DPs lack number features. The evidence for these claims comes from situations in which a single head agrees with multiple DPs that have contrasting person and number specifications. In cases where the number of morphological slots inwhich agreement can be realized is lower than the number of agreement relations estab- lished in syntax, such contrasting specification may prove problematic. As it turns out, conflicts between singular and plural do not result in ungrammaticality, but conflicts between third person and first or second person do. Such person clashes can be avoided if the morphological realization of the relevant person features is syncretic. Alternatively, languages may make use of a person hierarchy that reg- ulates the morphological realization of conflicting specifications for person. The argument we present is rooted in, and supports, the theory of person developed in Ackema & Neeleman (2013; 2018). 1 Introduction The problem addressed in this paper is an apparent paradox involving singular number and third person. On the one hand, there is evidence that in the per- son system the default is third person, while in the number system the default is singular. For example, dummy pronouns and verbs that fail to agree (as in impersonal passives) show up in the third person singular: Peter Ackema & Ad Neeleman.
    [Show full text]
  • CASE ALTERNATIONS in ANCIENT GREEK PASSIVES and the TYPOLOGY of CASE Elena Anagnostopoulou Christina Sevdali
    CASE ALTERNATIONS IN ANCIENT GREEK PASSIVES AND THE TYPOLOGY OF CASE Elena Anagnostopoulou Christina Sevdali University of Crete Ulster University This article presents and discusses evidence that genitive and dative objects regularly become nominative in Ancient Greek passives of monotransitives and ditransitives. This is a typologically and theoretically significant state of affairs for two reasons . (i) As is well known, nonaccusative objects are, in many languages, not allowed to enter into Case alternations, a fact that has been ac - counted for in the government-binding /principles-and-parameters literature on the basis of the as - sumption that nonaccusative objects —prototypically datives —bear inherent , lexical , or quirky Case. By this reasoning, Ancient Greek genitives and datives must be concluded to have structural Case. (ii) Even in languages where dative -nominative (DAT-NOM) alternations do obtain, they are often limited to ditransitives, a fact that can been taken to suggest that dative qual - ifies as structural Case only in ditransitives. A language like Ancient Greek , which allows genitive and dative objects to become nominative in all passives (monotransitives and ditransitives) , shows that it is, in principle, possible to have a linguistic system where genitive and dative qualify as structural Cases in both monotransitives and ditransitives. Case theories must be designed in such a way as to allow for this option. We argue for an analysis of Case alternations that combines the view that alternating datives and
    [Show full text]
  • Raising to Quirky Subject in Tatar∗ 1 Introduction
    A-2 Raising to Quirky Subject in Tatar∗ Chihiro Taguchi Nara Institute of Science and Technology [email protected] Keywords— Tatar, Turkic, syntax, morphology, raising, quirky subject Abstract Tatar (< Kipchak < Turkic) has subject-to-subject raising predicates where the raised argument is marked by nominative, dative and genitive case, of which the latter two are “quirky (i.e., non-nominative) subjects” (Sigurðsson 1992). Poole (2016) proposed the Quirky Subject Hierarchy, a three-level hierarchy of the subjecthood of quirky subjects, and classified languages with quirky subject into three categories: Hindi type, Icelandic type, and Laz type. However, the Tatar data in this paper demonstrate that a language may fit more than one categories; a raised subject with dative case-marking in Tatar displays the Icelandic-type characteristics, and a raised subject with genitive displays the Laz-type. I propose that these properties are not language-specific but lexicon-specific. 1 Introduction The Tatar language is a Kipchak language of the Turkic language family. It is an agglutina- tive language with several nominal case suffixes. The canonical word order is SOV, and the modification order is AN. This paper deals with two kinds of subject-to-subject raising (SSR) predicates whose subject is marked by genitive and dative. (1)-(3) are examples of raising constructions in Tatar, (1) with a nominative subject which is a typical way of marking a subject, (2) with a dative, and (3) with a genitive, all having by and large similar deontological meaning. Section 2 outlines what raising is and how it is analyzed in general theoretical linguistics.
    [Show full text]
  • Receptive Multilingualism Across the Lifespan: Cognitive and Linguistic Factors in Cognate Guessing
    Languages and Literatures \ Multilingualism research Receptive multilingualism across the lifespan Cognitive and linguistic factors in cognate guessing Jan Vanhove Dissertation zur Erlangung der Doktorwürde an der Philosophischen Fakultät der Universität Freiburg in der Schweiz Genehmigt von der philosophischen Fakultät auf Antrag der Professoren Raphael Berthele (1. Gutachter) und Charlotte Gooskens (2. Gutach- terin). Freiburg, den 17. Januar 2014. Prof. Marc-Henry Soulet, Dekan. 2014 Receptive multilingualism across the lifespan Cognitive and linguistic factors in cognate guessing Jan Vanhove Cite as: Vanhove, Jan (2014). Receptive multilingualism across the lifespan. Cognitive and linguistic factors in cognate guessing. PhD thesis. University of Fribourg (Switzerland). Data and computer code available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.795286. Contents Tables xi Figures xiii Preface xv I Introduction 1 1 Context and aims 3 1.1 Cross-linguistic similarities in language learning . 4 1.2 Receptive multilingualism . 5 1.3 Multilingualism and the age factor . 8 1.4 The present project . 9 1.4.1 The overarching project ‘Multilingualism through the lifespan’ . 9 1.4.2 Aim, scope and terminology . 10 1.5 Overview . 13 II The lifespan development of cognate guess- ing skills 15 2 Inter-individual differences in cognate guessing skills 17 2.1 Linguistic repertoire . 18 2.1.1 Typological relation between the Lx and the L1 . 18 2.1.2 The impact of multilingualism . 19 2.2 Previous exposure . 26 vi Contents 2.3 Attitudes . 28 2.4 Age . 29 3 The lifespan development of cognition 33 3.1 Intelligence . 34 3.1.1 Fluid and crystallised intelligence . 34 3.1.2 Lifespan trajectories .
    [Show full text]
  • Kleinschmalkalden Volcano Trail
    At the Foot of the Inselsberg Volcano We look forward to seeing you! Explore the region around the GROssER INSELSBERG & visit our GEOINFOCENTRES ! On this GeoRoute you will discover the picturesque Contact: valley of the Ebersbach. Pele, the goddess of volcanoes Tourist Information Floh-Seligenthal will accompany you from the famous cow bell – the Bahnhofstraße 4 , 98593 Floh-Seligenthal largest of its type in the world and made by the local Tel.: +49 3683/408848, Fax: +49 3683/408850 bellfounders Venter Glocken GmbH – on to the Gold- Email: [email protected], www.floh-seligenthal.de born and up to the Kuhplatz and down again towards KleinschmalkaldenBurgenroute Volcano Trail Kleinschmalkalden. Opening hours: Without doubt, the best view can be had from the Monday and Friday: 9 am - 12.30 pm "Grauer Stuhl“, which, at 763 m above sea-level, marks Tuesday: 9 am - 12.30 pm and 1 pm - 4.30 pm GeoRouten-FührerGuide for GeoRoute 3 14 the highest point along the Kleinschmalkalden Volcano Thursday: 9 am - 12.30 pm und 1 pm - 5.30 pm Trail. You may also discover some native orchids and -55,192 mm herbs growing on the mountain meadows. Geopark-Geologist: Dipl. Geol. Stephan Brauner Tel.:+493623-332014 The Kleinschmalkalden Volcano Trail email: [email protected] Distance: approx. 8 km (main route only) Duration: approx. 3-4 hrs. Imprint: Difficulty : moderate (see elevation profile) 12 explanatory panels - especially suited for upper Community Floh-Seligenthal school pupils! Bahnhofstr. 4 Start/end: GeoInfopoint Kleinschmalkalden 98593 Floh-Seligenthal (Interactive rock park at the world's largest cow bell Professional advice and GeoPark management: -10,115 mm opposite the bridge Hirschbrücke) This circular route can be walked in both directions.
    [Show full text]
  • SV Floh-Seligenthal Thüringer Skiverband E.V. WSV Kleinschmalkalden 15. Skiroller-Anstiegslauf
    SV Floh-Seligenthal Thüringer Skiverband e.V. WSV Kleinschmalkalden 15. Skiroller-Anstiegslauf - Auf dem Mommelsteinradweg Rahmenprogramm Inlinerlauf U8 - U12 04. September 2020 O F F I Z I E L L E E R G E B N I S L I S T E Kampfgericht Technische Daten Organisationsleiter: Achim Petter Inliner-WK: 1.8 km - U8 bis U12 m/w FT ohne Stöcke Wettkampfleiter: Marcel Hollandt Skiroller-WK: 3.5 km - U13 m/w bis D/H76 klassisch Höhenunterschied: 1.8 km / 45 m 3.5 km / 92 m WK - Beginn: 17.30 / 18.15 Uhr WK - Ende: 18.25 / 18.54 Uhr Wetter: bedeckt Temperatur: 23 °C Rang StNr Name Jg Verein Fahrzeit Rückstand Schüler U8 m 1 84 ECKARDT Moritz 13 SV Floh-Seligenthal 7:05.8 2 81 ENDERS Lars 13 SWV Goldlauter 7:50.7 44.9 3 82 FLEISCHHAUER Ben 13 WSV 07 Kleinschmakalden 7:56.7 50.9 4 83 RENNER Matti 13 WSV 07 Kleinschmakalden 8:59.1 1:53.3 Schüler U8 w 1 87 DIETZEL Luisa 13 WSV Brotterode 7:31.7 2 85 FUSS Lena 13 SWV Goldlauter 8:30.4 58.7 3 86 KELLER Hedi 13 SWV Goldlauter 8:47.8 1:16.1 4 90 SCHIERITZ Hedi 13 SV Floh-Seligenthal 9:21.4 1:49.7 5 89 ECKARDT Luisa 13 SV Floh-Seligenthal 9:58.6 2:26.9 6 88 LIEBE Lotta 13 WSV 1907 Steinbach 10:28.0 2:56.3 Schüler U9 m 1 92 ZOBIREI Arian 12 SWV Goldlauter 6:24.6 2 94 WEIGELT Jesko 12 WSV Scheibe-Alsbach 6:55.1 30.5 3 93 FRIEDRICH Hannes 12 WSV 08 Lauscha 7:15.1 50.5 4 91 MALSCH Oskar 12 SV Medizin Bad Liebenstein 7:52.8 1:28.2 Schüler U9 w 1 99 MENZ Mila 12 SC Steinbach-Hallenberg 5:58.7 2 96 REUTER Selma 12 SV Biberau 7:54.9 1:56.2 3 98 MÖLLER Sarah 12 SV Floh-Seligenthal 8:33.2 2:34.5 4 97 RIECHEL Ida Isabella
    [Show full text]