DOCSLIB.ORG

Towards Possessive Sentences Classification in English – the Preliminary Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Linguistics and Literature Studies 1(1): 37-42, 2013 http://www.hrpub.org DOI: 10.13189/lls.2013.010106 Towards Possessive Sentences Classification in English – The Preliminary Study V.A. Yatsko*, T.S. Yatsko Katanov State University of Khakasia *Corresponding Author: [email protected] Copyright © 2013 Horizon Research Publishing All rights reserved. Abstract The paper focuses on the structure of puck; also: an instance of having such control (as in football); predicative possessive constructions described in terms of 2) something owned, occupied, or controlled: property [4]. semantic features distinguished within scope of predication Christian Lehmann [5 p. 7] notes that control of the analysis, viz. causative, agentive, inchoative, egressive, possessum by the possessor is the default assumption and continuative, and stative features. Features that are in insofar the default interpretation of the possessive relation. complementary distribution yield contaminated forms of Such an interpretation excludes from the present analysis possessive constructions: inchoative-causative, sentences, in which X and Y are non-human, see (1) below, as inchoative-agentive, egressive-causative, egressive-agentive, continuative-causative, continuative-agentive. Causative well as sentences expressing family relations: *Nichols has a possessive constructions are taken to be basic since their brother, but he is not a twin. According to a broader structure corresponds to the structure of the prototypical approach possession is treated as a relational concept that situation while the other ones are derived from them by covers relations between persons and their body parts and omission of appropriate semantic features. The structure of products, between persons and their kin, between persons causative possessive sentences is described in terms of and their material belongings, between persons and things componential analysis. they control over, etc. [2 p. 1]. Keywords Possessive Sentences, Predication Analysis, 3. In English the category of possession is manifested on Classification, Causative Semantics, Prototypical Situation different levels of language system. On the morphological level it is realized by the 's (*the Winchester rifle is Alison's); on the lexical level it is expressed by means of possessive verbs, nouns, pronouns, and adjectives with possessive 1. Introduction meaning (own, possess, property); on the syntactic level it is expressed by noun phrases (*They hear a HORN HONKING, In contemporary linguistics possession is regarded as one and turn just as Ben 's car comes flying past them) and of the main categories investigated in a significant number of predicative constructions, in which the possessive relation is works. Summarizing their contents we distinguish the lexicalized in possessive verbs, e.g. *Her mother used to following specific features of the linguistic category of possession. drive her everywhere, and now Alyssa has a car. 1. Possession represents relationship between two entities, According to the way of expressing the category of manifested by the schematic structure X POSS Y, where X possession on the syntactic level languages are divided into and Y are nominal expressions referred to as 'possessor' and Habeo-languages having special possessive verbs, which 'possessee' (or 'possessum') [1 p. 2, 2]. The semantics of take a direct object, and Esso-languages, which have no possessive constructions involves referential characteristics possessive verbs, and in which the idea of possession is of the possessor, the possessee and the possessive relation expressed by the constructions with the verb be [6]. English holding between them (3 p. 2). is a typical Habeo-language since it has a number of 2. The essential feature of the possessive relation is control possessive verbs. that possessor (X) exercises over possessee (Y). Peter Willemse, Kristine Davidse and Liesbet Heyvaert [7] Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary gives the following argue that proper interpretation of possessum's referent definitions of possession: 1) a: the act of having or taking requires analysis of discourse context in which into control; b: control or occupancy of property without corresponding NPs occur thus adding a discourse dimension regard to ownership c: ownership; d: control of the ball or to the study of the category of possession. 38 Towards Possessive Sentences Classification in English – The Preliminary Study Linguistic studies of the category of possession usually the domain of alienable possession and reveal some factors differentiate between nominal possessives and clausal that influence the intensity of possessive semantics and possessives [8]. This paper will concentrate on predicative determine its gradational character. possessive constructions since they have been less The examples of predicative constructions were taken investigated and there is need in new methodologies for their from the Corpus of Contemporary American English [11] analysis. (these are marked with an asterisk) and the British National 4. Linguistic investigations of the category of possession Corpus (marked with double asterisk) [12]. Both corpora are have been focused on developing the taxonomy of available online, which makes it possible to easily verify possessive constructions, characterization of their types and presented data and their analysis. subtypes. John R. Taylor [1 p. 6] provides evidence that the first such taxonomy was created by H. Poutsma in the work dated as early as 1914. Since that time a number of 2. Predication Analysis taxonomies have been created that take into account The term "predication analysis" was introduced by Laurel semantic, syntactic, and pragmatic characteristics of X, Y and Brinton [13 pp. 276-287]. Depending on the distribution of POSS. As we showed earlier [9] the taxonomies have been semantic features of predicates Brinton distinguishes developed within scopes of two approaches. The taxonomic between stative, inchoative, continuative, egressive, approach is based on the principle of a univocal causative, and agentive sentences. Stative predicates and correspondence between the linguistic form and content: any sentences denote an unchanging condition whereas construction that contains lexical and grammatical inchoative sentences denote a change in state or the manifestations of possession is considered possessive. The beginning of a new state. Causative sentences denote restrictive approach holds that lexical and grammatical something effecting a change of state in an entity, and possessive markers can express not only possessive meaning agentive sentences involve a human agent who intentionally but also other types of meaning such as existence or location. and volitionally brings about a change in state in an entity. For example (1) within scope of the taxonomic approach The end or cessation of a state is termed egressive while will be regarded as a possessive sentence (since it features continuative sentences express a continuation of a state. the possessive marker has) while according to the restrictive Stative predicates and sentences are assumed to be basic, approach being possessive in form it is existential by its being analyzed with the stative feature BE; other types of nature. sentences are formed by adding additional semantic features. (1) *The house has several bedrooms In inchoative sentences the predicates are analyzed with the Existential semantics of (1) can be revealed by application stative feature plus an additional inchoative feature COME; of interrogation test, cf.: Are there bedrooms in the house? - causative sentences are distinguished by the additional Yes, the house has several bedrooms. Existential nature of feature CAUSE while the nature of agentive sentences can the sentence is clearly indicated by There + be construction. be represented by the agentive feature DO. Egressive and Other tests used to detect the semantics of possessive continative predicates can be analyzed with COME NEG and constructions include transposition of X and Y; substitution; NEG COME NEG features (ibid pp. 277-281). insertion; deletion; transformation of predicative Brinton's predication analysis is evidently based on the constructions into non-predicative and vice versa. These ideas earlier formulated by David Dowty [14] who tests correspond to those ones used in transformational distinguished between DO, BECOME, CAUSE operators to grammar as constituency tests [10 pp. 24-33). describe the meaning of four verb classes expressing state, Another assumption underlying the restrictive approach is achievement, activity, and accomplishment. Adding two that possessive semantics can vary in its intensity; in some more features BE and NEG allows getting six main predicate contexts it can be completely or partially neutralized. types and six contaminated types thus making up a powerful The aim of this paper is to suggest a novel approach to and flexible methodology for the explanation and description classification of possessive sentences based on predication of predicative constructions. analysis methodology. We will focus on the analysis of We think that Brinton's conception can be best explained causative sentences that, in our opinion, are prototypical to in terms of distributional analysis. Table 1. The distribution of semantic features of predicates Sta- Agen- Egres- Semantic features Inchoa-tive Causa-tive Continua-tive tive tive sive Stative 0 + 0 0 0 0 Inchoa- + 0 – – 0 0 tive Causative 0 – 0 + – – Agentive 0 – + 0 –
Recommended publications
  • Does English Have a Genitive Case? Amyrose@Linguist.Umass.Edu

    Does English Have a Genitive Case? [email protected]

    2. Amy Rose Deal – University of Massachusetts, Amherst Does English have a genitive case? [email protected] In written English, possessive pronouns appear without ’s in the same environments where non-pronominal DPs require ’s. (1) a. your/*you’s/*your’s book b. Moore’s/*Moore book What explains this complementarity? Various analyses suggest themselves. A. Possessive pronouns are contractions of a pronoun and ’s. (Hudson 2003: 603) B. Possessive pronouns are inflected genitives (Huddleston and Pullum 2002); a morphological deletion rule removes clitic ’s after a genitive pronoun. Analysis A consists of a single rule of a familiar type: Morphological Merger (Halle and Marantz 1993), familiar from forms like wanna and won’t. (His and its contract especially nicely.) No special lexical/vocabulary items need be postulated. Analysis B, on the other hand, requires a set of vocabulary items to spell out genitive case, as well as a rule to delete the ’s clitic following such forms, assuming ’s is a DP-level head distinct from the inflecting noun. These two accounts make divergent predictions for dialects with complex pronominals such as you all or you guys (and us/them all, depending on the speaker). Since Merger operates under adjacency, Analysis A predicts that intervention by all or guys should bleed the formation of your: only you all’s and you guys’ are predicted. There do seem to be dialects with this property, as witnessed by the American Heritage Dictionary (4th edition, entry for you-all). Call these English 1. Here, we may claim that pronouns inflect for only two cases, and Merger operations account for the rest.
  • Possessive Constructions in Modern Low Saxon

    Possessive Constructions in Modern Low Saxon

    POSSESSIVE CONSTRUCTIONS IN MODERN LOW SAXON a thesis submitted to the department of linguistics of stanford university in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of master of arts Jan Strunk June 2004 °c Copyright by Jan Strunk 2004 All Rights Reserved ii I certify that I have read this thesis and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts. Joan Bresnan (Principal Adviser) I certify that I have read this thesis and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts. Tom Wasow I certify that I have read this thesis and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts. Dan Jurafsky iii iv Abstract This thesis is a study of nominal possessive constructions in modern Low Saxon, a West Germanic language which is closely related to Dutch, Frisian, and German. After identifying the possessive constructions in current use in modern Low Saxon, I give a formal syntactic analysis of the four most common possessive constructions within the framework of Lexical Functional Grammar in the ¯rst part of this thesis. The four constructions that I will analyze in detail include a pronominal possessive construction with a possessive pronoun used as a determiner of the head noun, another prenominal construction that resembles the English s-possessive, a linker construction in which a possessive pronoun occurs as a possessive marker in between a prenominal possessor phrase and the head noun, and a postnominal construction that involves the preposition van/von/vun and is largely parallel to the English of -possessive.
  • How Do Young Children Acquire Case Marking?

    How Do Young Children Acquire Case Marking?

    INVESTIGATING FINNISH-SPEAKING CHILDREN’S NOUN MORPHOLOGY: HOW DO YOUNG CHILDREN ACQUIRE CASE MARKING? Thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor in Philosophy in the Faculty of Medical and Human Sciences 2015 HENNA PAULIINA LEMETYINEN SCHOOL OF PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCES 2 Table of Contents LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... 6 LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... 7 ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................. 8 DECLARATION .......................................................................................................................... 9 COPYRIGHT STATEMENT .......................................................................................................... 9 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................... 10 Chapter 1: General introduction to language acquisition research ...................................... 11 1.1. Generativist approaches to child language............................................................ 11 1.2. Usage-based approaches to child language........................................................... 14 1.3. The acquisition of morphology .............................................................................
  • Morphological Causatives Are Voice Over Voice

    Morphological Causatives Are Voice Over Voice

    Morphological causatives are Voice over Voice Yining Nie New York University Abstract Causative morphology has been associated with either the introduction of an event of causation or the introduction of a causer argument. However, morphological causatives are mono-eventive, casting doubt on the notion that causatives fundamentally add a causing event. On the other hand, in some languages the causative morpheme is closer to the verb root than would be expected if the causative head is responsible for introducing the causer. Drawing on evidence primarily from Tagalog and Halkomelem, I argue that the syntactic configuration for morphological causatives involves Voice over Voice, and that languages differ in whether their ‘causative marker’ spells out the higher Voice, the lower Voice or both. Keywords: causative, Voice, argument structure, morpheme order, typology, Tagalog 1. Introduction Syntactic approaches to causatives generally fall into one of two camps. The first view builds on the discovery that causatives may semantically consist of multiple (sub)events (Jackendoff 1972, Dowty 1979, Parsons 1990, Levin & Rappaport Hovav 1994, a.o.). Consider the following English causative–anticausative pair. The anticausative in (1a) consists of an event of change of state, schematised in (1b). The causative in (2a) involves the same change of state plus an additional layer of semantics that conveys how that change of state is brought about (2b). (1) a. The stick broke. b. [ BECOME [ stick STATE(broken) ]] (2) a. Pat broke the stick. b. [ Pat CAUSE [ BECOME [ stick STATE(broken) ]]] Word Structure 13.1 (2020): 102–126 DOI: 10.3366/word.2020.0161 © Edinburgh University Press www.euppublishing.com/word MORPHOLOGICAL CAUSATIVES ARE VOICE OVER VOICE 103 Several linguists have proposed that the semantic CAUSE and BECOME components of the causative are encoded as independent lexical verbal heads in the syntax (Harley 1995, Cuervo 2003, Folli & Harley 2005, Pylkkänen 2008, a.o.).
  • Department of English and American Studies Possessive Pronouns in English and Czech Works of Fiction, Their Use with Parts of Hu

    Department of English and American Studies Possessive Pronouns in English and Czech Works of Fiction, Their Use with Parts of Hu

    Masaryk University Faculty of Arts Department of English and American Studies English Language and Literature Kristýna Onderková Possessive Pronouns in English and Czech Works of Fiction, Their Use with Parts of Human Body and Translation Master’s Diploma Thesis Supervisor: Ing. Mgr. Jiří Rambousek 2009 0 I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently, using only the primary and secondary sources listed in the bibliography. …………………………………………… 1 I would like to express thanks to my supervisor, Ing. Mgr. Jiří Rambousek, for his valuable advice. 2 Table of Contents 1 Introduction.................................................................................................................... 5 2 Theory.............................................................................................................................. 7 2.1 English possessive pronouns.......................................................................... 7 2.1.1 Grammatical properties................................................................... 7 2.1.2 Use...................................................................................................... 8 2.2 Czech possessive pronouns............................................................................. 9 2.2.1 Grammatical properties................................................................... 10 2.2.2 Use...................................................................................................... 11 2.3 Translating possessive pronouns...................................................................
  • AN INTRODUCTORY GRAMMAR of OLD ENGLISH Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies

    AN INTRODUCTORY GRAMMAR of OLD ENGLISH Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies

    AN INTRODUCTORY GRAMMAR OF OLD ENGLISH MEDievaL AND Renaissance Texts anD STUDies VOLUME 463 MRTS TEXTS FOR TEACHING VOLUme 8 An Introductory Grammar of Old English with an Anthology of Readings by R. D. Fulk Tempe, Arizona 2014 © Copyright 2020 R. D. Fulk This book was originally published in 2014 by the Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies at Arizona State University, Tempe Arizona. When the book went out of print, the press kindly allowed the copyright to revert to the author, so that this corrected reprint could be made freely available as an Open Access book. TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE viii ABBREVIATIONS ix WORKS CITED xi I. GRAMMAR INTRODUCTION (§§1–8) 3 CHAP. I (§§9–24) Phonology and Orthography 8 CHAP. II (§§25–31) Grammatical Gender • Case Functions • Masculine a-Stems • Anglo-Frisian Brightening and Restoration of a 16 CHAP. III (§§32–8) Neuter a-Stems • Uses of Demonstratives • Dual-Case Prepositions • Strong and Weak Verbs • First and Second Person Pronouns 21 CHAP. IV (§§39–45) ō-Stems • Third Person and Reflexive Pronouns • Verbal Rection • Subjunctive Mood 26 CHAP. V (§§46–53) Weak Nouns • Tense and Aspect • Forms of bēon 31 CHAP. VI (§§54–8) Strong and Weak Adjectives • Infinitives 35 CHAP. VII (§§59–66) Numerals • Demonstrative þēs • Breaking • Final Fricatives • Degemination • Impersonal Verbs 40 CHAP. VIII (§§67–72) West Germanic Consonant Gemination and Loss of j • wa-, wō-, ja-, and jō-Stem Nouns • Dipthongization by Initial Palatal Consonants 44 CHAP. IX (§§73–8) Proto-Germanic e before i and j • Front Mutation • hwā • Verb-Second Syntax 48 CHAP.
  • The Finnish Noun Phrase

    The Finnish Noun Phrase

    Università Ca’ Foscari di Venezia Facoltà di Lingue e Letterature Straniere Corso di Laurea Specialistica in Scienze del Linguaggio The Finnish Noun Phrase Relatore: Prof.ssa Giuliana Giusti Correlatore: Prof. Guglielmo Cinque Laureanda: Lena Dal Pozzo Matricola: 803546 ANNO ACCADEMICO: 2006/2007 A mia madre Table of contents Acknowledgements ………………………………………………………….…….…… III Abstract ………………………………………………………………………………........ V Abbreviations ……………………………………………………………………………VII 1. Word order in Finnish …………………………………………………………………1 1.1 The order of constituents in the clause …………………………………………...2 1.2 Word order and interpretation .......……………………………………………… 8 1.3 The order of constituents in the Nominal Expression ………………………… 11 1.3.1. Determiners and Possessors …………………………………………………12 1.3.2. Adjectives and other modifiers …………………………………………..… 17 1.3.2.1 Adjectival hierarchy…………………………………………………………23 1.3.2.2 Predicative structures and complements …………………………………26 1.3.3 Relative clauses …………………………………………………………….... 28 1.4 Conclusions ............……………………………………………………………. 30 2. Thematic relations in nominal expressions ……………………………………….. 32 2.1 Observations on Argument Structure ………………………………….……. 32 2.1.1 Result and Event nouns…………………………………………………… 36 2.2 Transitive nouns ………………………………………………………………... 38 2.2.1 Compound nouns ……………….……………………………………... 40 2.2.2 Intransitive nouns derived from transitive verbs …………………… 41 2.3 Passive nouns …………………………………………………………………… 42 2.4 Psychological predicates ……………………………………………………….. 46 2.4.1 Psych verbs ……………………………………………………………….
  • The Esperantist Background of René De Saussure's Work

    The Esperantist Background of René De Saussure's Work

    Chapter 1 The Esperantist background of René de Saussure’s work Marc van Oostendorp Radboud University and The Meertens Institute ené de Saussure was arguably more an esperantist than a linguist – R somebody who was primarily inspired by his enthusiasm for the language of L. L. Zamenhof, and the hope he thought it presented for the world. His in- terest in general linguistics seems to have stemmed from his wish to show that the structure of Esperanto was better than that of its competitors, and thatit reflected the ways languages work in general. Saussure became involved in the Esperanto movement around 1906, appar- ently because his brother Ferdinand had asked him to participate in an inter- national Esperanto conference in Geneva; Ferdinand himself did not want to go because he did not want to become “compromised” (Künzli 2001). René be- came heavily involved in the movement, as an editor of the Internacia Scienca Re- vuo (International Science Review) and the national journal Svisa Espero (Swiss Hope), as well as a member of the Akademio de Esperanto, the Academy of Es- peranto that was and is responsible for the protection of the norms of the lan- guage. Among historians of the Esperanto movement, he is also still known as the inventor of the spesmilo, which was supposed to become an international currency among Esperantists (Garvía 2015). At the time, the interest in issues of artificial language solutions to perceived problems in international communication was more widespread in scholarly cir- cles than it is today. In the western world, German was often used as a language of e.g.
  • A Morphological Comparative Study Between Albanian and English Language

    A Morphological Comparative Study Between Albanian and English Language

    European Scientific Journal A morphological comparative study between Albanian and English language Aida Kurani Anita Muho University “Aleksander Moisiu”, Durres, Albania Abstract: The aim of this study is to point out similarities and differences of English and Albanian language in the morphological level, trying to compare different parts of speech of both languages. Many languages do not distinguish between adjectives and adverbs or adjectives and names etc, i.e. the Albanian language differs in terms of gender and plural adjectives, while English has not such a feature. Therefore formal distinctions between parts of speech should be done within the framework of a given language and should not be applied in other languages .In this study we have analyzed nouns, verbs, adverbs, adjective structures, the use of articles, pronouns etc. in Albanian and English. In the light of modern linguistics, comparative method plays an important role in the acquisition of languages comparing the first language with the target language. Comparative method is also considered as a key factor in the scientific research of modern linguistics, so it can be used successfully in teaching. Keywords; Albanian, English, differences, morphology, similarities, teaching. 28 European Scientific Journal Introduction In Albanian language, the comparative studies in linguistics are very rare. Considering the fact that language is closely related to culture, a linguistic comparative study is also a cultural comparison. Although all languages mainly play a similar role, there are similarities and differences between them. Knowing the differences between the two languages also helps in identifying students' linguistic errors in the process of teaching the grammar.
  • Errors in Applying Rules for English Possessive Case.The Case of 3

    Errors in Applying Rules for English Possessive Case.The Case of 3

    People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research Mentouri University Constantine Faculty of Letters and Languages Department of Languages Errors in Applying Rules for English Possessive Case.The Case of 3rd Year Students, Constantine. Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Master Degree in Applied Language Studies Submitted By Supervisor Lemtaiche Sabrina Dr. Belouahem Riad Academic Year: 2009/2010 Dedication “Yesterday is a history, tomorrow is a mystery, today is a gift that is why we call it the present.” To : My beloved family; my father and my mother. My brother and my sisters. To: My best friends. i Acknowledgement First and foremost, I would like to express my greatest gratitude to Allah the almighty for the completion of my study. In this opportunity, I would like to express my gratitude to the people who helped me finishing my final project. My greatest gratitude goes to: Dr. Belouhem Riad, my supervisor, for his patience in providing continuous and careful guidance as well as encouragement, indispensible suggestion and advice. Dr. Ahmed Sid haoues who has permitted me to conduct the test in his class. My beloved family and my best friends who always give their love, care, and support me to finish my project. Finally, I realize that the study is still far from perfect; I have great expectation that this final project would be useful for further study. ii Abstract This project aims mainly at determining the main errors and finding out the causes or sources of the errors in using English possessive case markers by 3rd year university learners at the English Department, Mentouri University, Constantine.
  • Conjugation Class and Transitivity in Kipsigis Maria Kouneli, University of Leipzig Maria.Kounel@Uni-Leipzig.De

    Conjugation Class and Transitivity in Kipsigis Maria Kouneli, University of Leipzig [email protected]

    April 22nd, 2021 Workshop on theme vowels in V(P) structure and beyond University of Graz Conjugation class and transitivity in Kipsigis Maria Kouneli, University of Leipzig [email protected] 1 Introduction • Research on conjugation classes and theme vowels has mostly focused on Indo- European languages, even though they are not restricted to this language family (see Oltra-Massuet 2020 for an overview). • The goal of this talk is to investigate the properties of inflectional classes in Kip- sigis, a Nilotic language spoken in Kenya: – in the nominal domain, the language possesses a variety of thematic suffixes with many similarities to Romance theme vowels; the theory in Oltra-Massuet & Arregi (2005) can account for their distribution – in the verbal domain, the language has two conjugation classes, which I will argue spell out little v, and are closely related to argument structure, espe- cially the causative alternation • Recent syntactic approaches to the causative alternation treat it as a Voice alterna- tion: – the causative and anticausative variants have the same vP (event) layer, but differ in the presence vs. absence of an external argument-introducing Voice head (e.g., Marantz 2013, Alexiadou et al. 2015, Wood 2015, Kastner 2016, 2017, 2018, Wood & Marantz 2017, Nie 2020, Tyler 2020). (1) a. The cup broke. Anticausative b. Mary broke the cup. Causative • I show that the causative alternation in Kipsigis cannot be (just) a Voice alterna- tion: (in)transitivity in the language is calculated at the little v level for most verbs that participate in the alternation. Roadmap: 2: Inflectional classes in Kipsigis 3: Theories of the causative alternation (with a focus on morphology) 4: More on the causative alternation in Kipsigis 5: The challenge for Voice theories 6: Conclusion 1 Maria Kouneli Theme vowels in VP structure 2 Inflectional classes in Kipsigis 2.1 Language background • Kipsigis is the major variety of Kalenjin, a dialect cluster of the Southern Nilotic branch of Nilo-Saharan.
  • The Influence of Animacy and Context on Word Order Processing: Neurophysiological Evidence from Mandarin Chinese

    The Influence of Animacy and Context on Word Order Processing: Neurophysiological Evidence from Mandarin Chinese

    Impressum Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, 2011 Diese Arbeit ist unter folgender Creative Commons-Lizenz lizenziert: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0 Druck: Sächsisches Druck- und Verlagshaus Direct World, Dresden ISBN 978-3-941504-13-4 The Influence of Animacy and Context on Word Order Processing: Neurophysiological Evidence from Mandarin Chinese Von der Philologischen Fakultät der Universität Leipzig genehmigte DISSERTATION Zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades doctor philosophiae Dr. Phil. vorgelegt von Luming Wang geboren am 16. Februar 1981 in Zhoushan, China Dekan: Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Lörscher Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Balthasar Bickel Prof. Dr. Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky Prof. Dr. Kaoru Horie For my mother tongue, one of the many languages in this world. Acknowledgements This thesis could not have been written without the support and friendship of many people. If life is like online sentence processing in the sense that one must make a decision even without being sure of where it will lead, those people are definitely “prominent” characters that have greatly influenced my decisions, especially when I was experiencing “ambiguities” during different periods. I would like to thank them in chronological order. I thank my parents for giving me the initial processing preference, which has driven me to become closer to those things and people that I like, but unexpectedly lead me farther from them. I thank them from the bottom of my heart for their continuing selfless love. I am lucky for having been a student of Prof. Kaoru Horie and Prashant Pardesh during my MA studies at Tohoku University in Japan.