DOCSLIB.ORG

GRS LX 700 Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory Two

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
GRS LX 700 Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory Two GRS LX 700 Two hypotheses about learning Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory • LLEE (late learning early emergence) —A “commonsense” view— Things which “emerge” emerge early. Things which are learned appear later. Week 5. Optional infinitives, Unique Checking Constraint, ATOM, … Implies that parameters should be set late too (since at least the settings are learned) Two hypotheses about learning Two-word stage? • VEPS (very early parameter setting) Basic parameters are set correctly at the earliest • The reason both VEPS and VEKI mention observable stages, that is, at least from the time the two-word stage is just because this is the that the child enters the two-word stage around 18 first stage where we have evidence of months of age. utterance composition. • VEKI (very early knowledge of inflection) At the earliest observable stage (two-word stage), the child knows the grammatical and phonological properties of many important inflectional elements of their language. Optional Infinitive stage Optional Infinitive Stage • Root infinitives are possible grammatical • German: V2/SOV; kids put finite verbs in sentences; second position, leave nonfinite verbs in • These infinitives co-exist with finite forms; clause-final position • The children know the relevant grammatical principles (and how they distinguish finite • French: V-->I; kids move finite verbs to I, from nonfinite). leave nonfinite verbs in VP. Very Early Parameter Setting VEPS and the theory of learning • As soon as you can see it, kids have: • If parameters are set by the time kids are – VO vs. OV order set (Swedish vs. German) using multi-word utterance, no negative – V-->I [yes/no] (French vs. English) evidence could have played a role. – V2 [yes/no ] (German vs. French/English) – Null subject [yes/no] (Italian vs. Fr./E.) • So, at least by the 2-word stage, they have the parameters set (maybe earlier) Null subjects… Topic drop • Null subject parameter is not initially mis-set (kids • Where kids drop the subject of a finite verb, don’t all start off speaking Italian—contra Hyams perhaps this is “Topic-drop” 1986); rather, child null subjects are (at least in part) due to the availability of non-finite verbs (the OI stage). • Proposal: • Some null subjects are licensed by being the Topic-drop applies to Very Strong Topics subject of a nonfinite verb (i.e. PRO) • But there are some null subjects with finite Kids sometimes take (in reality) non-VS verbs… topics to be VS topics (a pragmatic error) Bromberg, Wexler, wh-questions, Prediction about NS and null subjects • OI’s have two ways of licensing NSs: • If topic drop is something which drops a – PRO (regular licensing of null subject) topic in SpecCP… – Topic drop • …and if wh-words also move to SpecCP… • Finite verbs have one way to license a NS: • …we would not expect null subjects with – Topic drop non-subject (e.g., where) wh-questions where the verb is finite (so PRO is not • So: We expect more null subjects with root licensed) infinitives (which we in fact see) Bromberg, Wexler, wh-questions, *Truncation and null subjects • And, that’s what they found: • Rizzi’s “truncation” theory predicts: • No wh-questions with root infinitives Finiteness of null and pronominal subjects in Adam’s – wh-question ⇒ CP, but wh-questions (Bromberg & Wexler 1995) – CP ⇒ IP, and Finite Nonfinite – IP ⇒ finite verb Null 2 118 • And of course we wouldn’t expect null subjects in wh-questions if null subjects are Pronoun 117 131 allowed (only) in the specifier of the root. But… *LLEE • German and Dutch have extremely few root • So: despite expectations of early infinitives when there is anything in SpecCP. practitioners of P&P: VEPS means *LLEE. • What then do we make of the fact that kids • But they are V2 languages—finite verbs are what make non-adult utterances in the face of you find in C, and when SpecCP is filled, there must be something in C. Hence, the prediction evidence that they aren’t learning the seems to be: parameters? • KW: Certain (very specific, it turns out) • V2 languages ⇒ no wh-question root infinitives properties of the grammar mature. VEKI? ATOM • Generally, when kids use inflection, they use it • Adult clause structure: correctly. Mismatches are vanishingly rare. AgrP – English (Harris & Wexler 1995) – German (Poeppel & Wexler 1993) ′ NOMi Agr • Again, this is kind of contrary to what the field Agr TP had been assuming (which was: kids are slow at, ′ bad at, learning inflection). ti T TVP ATOM ATOM • Kiddie clause, missing TP (—TNS): • Kiddie clause, missing AgrP (—AGR): AgrP ′ NOMi Agr Agr TP ⇒ ′ ACC defaulti T VP TVP Why either missing TP or AgrP One prediction of ATOM gives us a root infinitive (DM) • In English, we have the following rules for • +AGR +TNS: NOM with inflected verb (-s) pronouncing this tense/agreement affix: • +AGR –TNS: NOM with bare verb • –AGR +TNS: default (ACC) with bare verb • (V+)T is pronounced like: • –AGR –TNS: GEN with bare verb /s/ if we have features [3, sg, present] (not discussed but see Schütze & Wexler 1996) /ed/ if we have the feature [past] Ø otherwise • Nothing predicts ACC with inflected verb. EPP and missing INFL *Truncation again • Prior to splitting into AgrSP and TP, the • Incidentally, Rizzi’s “truncation” theory has hypothesis was that IP was missing and that the same problem—if root infinitives are IP was responsible for both NOM and tense. missing everything above tense, how come • Yet, there are many cases of root infinitives so many bare forms surface with NOM with NOM subjects (atom:+Agr –Tns) subjects? And why do the subjects raise past • And, even ACC subjects seem to raise out negation, and to where? Topic?! Bah. of the VP over negation (me not go) Wait—how can you say kids are Wait—how can you say kids are UG-constrained yet drop T/Agr? UG-constrained yet drop T/Agr? • So, aren’t TP and AgrSP required by UG? • Perhaps what requires TP and AgrP are principles Doesn’t this mean kids don’t have UG- of interpretation… • You need TP so that your sentence is “anchored” compliant trees? in the discourse. • Actually, perhaps no. UG requires that all • You need AgrSP … why? Well, perhaps features be checked, but it isn’t clear that something parallel…? there is a UG principle that requires a TP • Regardless, kids can check all the uninterpretable and an AgrP in every clause. features even without TP or AgrSP; hence, they can still be considered to be UG-constrained. NS/OI NS/OI • Some languages appear not to undergo the • What differentiates the OI and non-OI languages? “optional infinitive” stage. How can this be • Agreement? Italian (non-OI) has rich agreement, consistent with a maturational view? but so does Icelandic (OI). – OI languages: Germanic languages studied to • Null subjects! date (Danish, Dutch, English, Faroese, Icelandic, Norwegian, Swedish), Irish, Russian, • Null Subject/OI Generalization: Brazilian Portuguese, Czech Children in a language go through an OI stage iff – Non-OI languages: Italian, Spanish, Catalan, the language is not an INFL-licensed null subject Tamil, Polish language. NS/OI and Hebrew NS/OI and Hebrew (Rhee & Wexler 1995) (Rhee & Wexler 1995) • Hebrew is a NS language but only in 1st and 2nd person, non-present tense. kids up to 1;11 1/2 past/fut (NS) else (non-NS) Everywhere else (3rd past, future, present) null subjects 0 (of 21) 32% (36/112) subjects are obligatory. overt subjects 0 (of 6) 0 (of 28) • Hebrew-learning 2-year-olds showed optional infinitives except in 1/2-past, and all OI kids 1/2 past/fut (NS) else (non-NS) allowed null subjects elsewhere, with null subjects 0.6% (1/171) 25% (85/337) infinitives. overt subjects 1.4% (1/72) 0.6% (3/530) The UCC “Minimize Violations” • Unique Checking Constraint • The poor kid with the UCC is faced with a The D-feature of a DP can only check dilemma. It knows that it must obey three against one functional category things, but it can obey only any two: – Realize tense • Adults must check the D feature of the – Realize agreement subject both in TP and in AgrSP. Kids only – Unique checking constraint get one, so they have to choose: Omit TP, • So, the kid chooses which one to violate Omit AgrSP, or ignore the UCC. (satisfying two) for any given utterance. Speculations about D-features NS/OI via UCC • In adult syntax a DP must check its D- • An old idea about NS languages is that they feature against both AgrSP and TP. arise in languages where Infl is “rich” • AgrSP and TP each have a D-feature of a enough to identify the subject. special sort—the kind that deletes when it is • Maybe in NS languages, AgrS does not checked (an uninterpretable feature) need a D (it may in some sense be nouny • Might the UCC be a consequence of kids enough to say that it is, or already has, D). mistakenly taking the D-feature of DP to be • If AgrS does not need a D, the subject is uninterpretable? free to check off T’s D-feature and be done. Is there any way to see the effects Or maybe in Korean negation… of UCC even in NS languages? • Italian: Mary has laughed. • Short Form Negation in Korean: • Suppose that auxiliaries (like have) also Chelswu-ka pap-ul an-mek-ess-ta. have a D-feature to be checked as the Chelswu-nom rice-acc neg-eat-past-decl subject (in the adult language) passes ‘Chelswu didn’t eat rice.’ through. UCC-constrained kids will have to drop something (the auxiliary or T) • Common OI-age kid error: • Lyons (1997) reports that a “substantial proportion of auxiliaries are omitted in OI- na an pap mek-e age Italian.” I neg rice eat-decl ‘I don’t eat rice.’ Negation errors in child Korean Negation errors in child Korean • Generalization about child errors with SFN: • Can this error be made to follow from the UCC VP-internal material is privileged in its ability to (you can’t check a D-feature twice)? occur between an and the verb in child errors.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Deixis and Reference Tracing in Tsova-Tush (PDF)
    DEIXIS AND REFERENCE TRACKING IN TSOVA-TUSH A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAIʻI AT MĀNOA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN LINGUISTICS MAY 2020 by Bryn Hauk Dissertation committee: Andrea Berez-Kroeker, Chairperson Alice C. Harris Bradley McDonnell James N. Collins Ashley Maynard Acknowledgments I should not have been able to finish this dissertation. In the course of my graduate studies, enough obstacles have sprung up in my path that the odds would have predicted something other than a successful completion of my degree. The fact that I made it to this point is a testament to thekind, supportive, wise, and generous people who have picked me up and dusted me off after every pothole. Forgive me: these thank-yous are going to get very sappy. First and foremost, I would like to thank my Tsova-Tush host family—Rezo Orbetishvili, Nisa Baxtarishvili, and of course Tamar and Lasha—for letting me join your family every summer forthe past four years. Your time, your patience, your expertise, your hospitality, your sense of humor, your lovingly prepared meals and generously poured wine—these were the building blocks that supported all of my research whims. My sincerest gratitude also goes to Dantes Echishvili, Revaz Shankishvili, and to all my hosts and friends in Zemo Alvani. It is possible to translate ‘thank you’ as მადელ შუნ, but you have taught me that gratitude is better expressed with actions than with set phrases, sofor now I will just say, ღაზიშ ხილჰათ, ბედნიერ ხილჰათ, მარშმაკიშ ხილჰათ..
    [Show full text]
  • Verbs in Relation to Verb Complementation 11-69
    1168 Complementation of verbs and adjectives Verbs in relation to verb complementation 11-69 They may be either copular (clause pattern SVC), or complex transitive verbs, or monotransitive verbs with a noun phrase object), we can give only (clause pattern SVOC): a sample of common verbs. In any case, it should be borne in mind that the list of verbs conforming to a given pattern is difficult to specífy exactly: there SVC: break even, plead guilty, Iie 101V are many differences between one variety of English and another in respect SVOC: cut N short, work N loose, rub N dry of individual verbs, and many cases of marginal acceptability. Sometimes the idiom contains additional elements, such as an infinitive (play hard to gel) or a preposition (ride roughshod over ...). Note The term 'valency' (or 'valencc') is sometimes used, instead of complementation, ror the way in (The 'N' aboye indicates a direct object in the case oftransitive examples.) which a verb determines the kinds and number of elements that can accompany it in the clause. Valency, however, incIudes the subject 01' the clause, which is excluded (unless extraposed) from (b) VERB-VERB COMBINATIONS complementation. In these idiomatic constructions (ef 3.49-51, 16.52), the second verb is nonfinite, and may be either an infinitive: Verbs in intransitive function 16.19 Where no eomplementation oecurs, the verb is said to have an INTRANSITIVE make do with, make (N) do, let (N) go, let (N) be use. Three types of verb may be mentioned in this category: or a participle, with or without a following preposition: (l) 'PURE' INTRANSITIVE VERas, which do not take an object at aH (or at put paid to, get rid oJ, have done with least do so only very rarely): leave N standing, send N paeking, knock N fiying, get going John has arrived.
    [Show full text]
  • Nonnative Acquisition of Verb Second: on the Empirical Underpinnings of Universal L2 Claims
    Nonnative acquisition of Verb Second: On the empirical underpinnings of universal L2 claims Ute Bohnacker Lund University Abstract Acquiring Germanic verb second is typically described as difficult for second-language learners. Even speakers of a V2-language (Swedish) learning another V2-language (German) are said not to transfer V2 but to start with a non-V2 grammar, following a universal developmental path of verb placement. The present study contests this claim, documenting early targetlike V2 production for 6 Swedish ab-initio (and 23 intermediate) learners of German, at a time when their interlanguage syntax elsewhere is nontargetlike (head-initial VPs). Learners whose only nonnative language is German never violate V2, indicating transfer of V2-L1 syntax. Informants with previous knowledge of English are less targetlike in their L3-German productions, indicating interference from non-V2 English. V2 per se is thus not universally difficult for nonnative learners. in press in: Marcel den Dikken & Christina Tortora, eds., 2005. The function of function words and functional categories. [Series: Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today] Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins (pp. 41-77). Nonnative acquisition of Verb Second: On the empirical underpinnings of universal L2 claims Ute Bohnacker Lund University 1. Introduction This paper investigates the acquisition of verb placement, especially verb second (V2), by native Swedish adults and teenagers learning German. Several recent publications (e.g. Platzack 1996, 2001; Pienemann 1998; Pienemann & Håkansson 1999; Håkansson, Pienemann & Sayehli 2002) have claimed that learners, irrespective of their first language (L1), take the same developmental route in the acquisition of syntax of a foreign or second language (L2).
    [Show full text]
  • Aspects of Chintang Syntax
    Zurich Open Repository and Archive University of Zurich Main Library Strickhofstrasse 39 CH-8057 Zurich www.zora.uzh.ch Year: 2015 Aspects of Chintang syntax Paudyal, Netra P Posted at the Zurich Open Repository and Archive, University of Zurich ZORA URL: https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-113367 Dissertation Published Version Originally published at: Paudyal, Netra P. Aspects of Chintang syntax. 2015, University of Zurich, Faculty of Arts. Aspects of Chintang Syntax Thesis presented to the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences of the University of Zurich for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Netra Prasad Paudyal Accepted in the fall semester 2013 on the recommendation of the doctoral committee: Prof. Dr. Balthasar Bickel (main advisor) Prof. Dr. John M. Peterson Zurich 2015 Table of Contents Acknowledgements vii Notational conventions and abbreviations ix List of figures xii List of tables xiii 1 Introduction 1 1.0 The linguistic situation in Nepal 1 1.1 The Chintang people and their language 3 1.2 The Chintang village profile 6 1.3 The ethnic and religious situation 7 1.4 Genetic affiliation 8 1.5 Sources of data and the fieldwork 9 1.6 Goals and overview of the dissertation 10 2 Phonology 13 2.0 Introduction 13 2.1 Consonants 13 2.1.1 Stop consonants 16 2.1.2 Fricatives 17 2.1.3 Nasals 17 2.1.4 Glides 17 2.1.5 Aspiration 18 2.1.6 Distribution of consonant phonemes 18 2.1.7 Consonant clusters and geminate consonants 20 2.2 Vowel phonemes 23 2.2.1 Monophthongs 23 2.2.2 Diphthongs 24 2.2.3 Vowel sequences 27 2.3 Syllable structure 28 2.4 Basic
    [Show full text]
  • Nonfinite Clauses in Dutch and English Child Language
    Nonfinite Clauses in Dutch and English Child Language: An Experimental Approach * Elma Blom, Evelien Krikhaar and Frank Wijnen Utrecht Institute of Linguistics OTS, Groningen University, and Utrecht Institute of Linguistics OTS 1. Introduction Children learning Dutch and English as opposed to adult speakers of these languages frequently use nonfinite clauses. In this paper we will focus on children's usages of a specific set of nonfinite clauses, namely root infinitives. Root infinitives are main clauses in which the verb carries no inflection1. Our main interest is a cross-linguistic difference in the use of root infinitives. With the help of an experiment, we derive meaning properties of the construction and test whether the interpretation of Dutch and English root infinitives differs. 2. Theoretical and Empirical Background The data reported in previous corpus studies suggest that Dutch root infinitives are modal while in English they are nonmodal (data on Dutch are described in Wijnen 1997; English data are reported by Hyams 2000, an attempt to compare Dutch and English experimental data can be found in Schöneberger et al. 1995). Hoekstra & Hyams (1998) provided the theoretical arguments to explain this, based on Giorgi & Pianesi (1996). Their explanation follows from a morphological difference between Dutch and English nonfinite verb forms. In Dutch, the verb form used in root infinitives has infinitival morphology (-en) while in English the bare verb form is used. See the examples in (1) and (2): (1) a. Ien koffie eten Ien coffee eat-Vinf b. Bob op bank liggen Bob on couch lie-Vinf (2) a. Eve sit floor b.
    [Show full text]
  • Adverbial Clause Non Finite Verb
    Adverbial Clause Non Finite Verb Fumatory Tracy always harmonizing his hymnal if Stavros is unmasked or headreaches magisterially. Unshapen and incubatory Giordano forget some cucurbits so uppermost! Unexhausted Felicio never oversubscribes so inferiorly or acquired any Beale unbeknownst. A Non-finite clause nFC contain a medicine which does only show hall Here watch some example nFs I had something people eat first leaving I had round to eat. Non-finite verbs are invariable and include participles and infinitives. Prototypical finite verbs are the heads of prototypically finite clauses. Young D J The Structure of English Clauses Hutchinson 190 11 Brown E K. Adverbial clauses Taylor & Francis Group. Classification of adverbial clauses. Sentenceclause tree University of Michigan. In linguistics a non-finite clause is rate dependent or embedded clause that represents a mimic or. An interesting feature of Chintang non-finite adverbial clause with their. On other contrary non-finite clauses contain other verb that. NON-FINITE AND VERBLESS CLAUSES TEXTUAL VALUES. Non-finite verb form participial clause adv accusative wout prep subject passive verb number ablative absolute Linking noun in apposition finite adverbial. A ratio is non-finite if another verb not an infinitive gerund participle or gerundive. This expression took a finite verb owns and it also has a jumper who care is called a. Glish while in non-finite clauses verbs follow negation as in French The paper. Clauses finite and non-finite English Grammar Today. Ling 222 Types of Embedded Clauses in English 1 Finite. Often an adverbial clause as a non-finite verb and lacks a direct.
    [Show full text]
  • Lexical Verbs ) – E.G
    SEMINAR 3 – FULL VERBS As word class, verbs can be divided into 3 major categories : a) full verbs (=lexical verbs ) – e.g. work, live, like….etc. → can act only as main verbs b) primary verbs : be, have, do → can act either as main verbs or auxiliaries c) modal auxiliaries : can, may, shall, will, must, could, might, should, would → can act only as auxiliary verbs - if there is only one verb in the verb phrase, it is the main verb - if there are more verbs , the final one is the main verb , the other verbs that come before it are auxiliaries e.g. He lives with his mother and sister. He has been working on the project for 3 months. FULL VERBS Verb forms - regular full verbs have four morphological forms : a) base form (the form which has no inflection = the bare infinitive or to-infinitive) b) –s form c) –ing participle d) –ed form - irregular verbs – the number of forms varies: speak (5 forms), cut (3 forms), build (4 forms) ! the primary verb “be” has eight forms: __________________________________________ Finite and nonfinite verb phrases and forms We distinguish a) finite and nonfinite verb phrases (and finite clauses ) b) finite and nonfinite verb forms Finite verb phrase - is a phrase in which the first or only word is a finite verb – i.e. –s form and past form (always) and the base form (only sometimes!) e.g. She works in a shop. (=finite verb and finite phrase) I saw her yesterday. (= finite verb and finite phrase) Call me later. (here the base form is finite, the verb phrase is therefore finite too) - imperative If the verb phrase consists of more verbs and the first is a finite verb – the whole phrase is finite ; the other verbs in the phrase are nonfinite verb forms! e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • A Grammar Glossary
    97 A Grammar Glossary f you think your understanding of grammatical terminology may be a bit rusty, then this glossary should be helpfuL It defines familiar terms I(such as adjective) and some not quite as familiar (such as adjectival) and gives examples. It is not intended to be a complete grammar glossary. More complete descriptions can be found in Martha KoHn and Robert Funk's Understanding English Grammar and other grammar texts. Absolute phrase: A noun phrase with one modifier, often a participial phrase, following the noun headword. An absolute phrase can explain a cause or condition, as in The temperature having dropped suddenly, we decided to build afire in the fireplace, or it can add a detail or a point of focus, as in The children rushed out the schoolhouse door, their voices filling the playground with shouts of• ;> freedom . Active voice: A feature of sentences in which the subject performs the action of the verb and the direct object is the goa lor the recipient: The mechanic fixed the car. See also Passive voice. Adjectival: Any structure (word, phrase, or clause) that fills the role of an ad­ jective-that is, that functions as an adjective normally does, modify­ ing a noun: The hOllse is new. In this sentence, on the comer is an adjectival prepositional phrase. Adjective: A form-class word that functions as a noun modifier. Adjectives can be made comparative and superlative (tall, taller, tallest) and canbe quali­ fied or intensified (very tal/). Adverb: A form-class word that generally modifies a verb, as in I will be going soon.
    [Show full text]
  • Study Notes for Ssc and State Level Exams
    STUDY NOTES FOR SSC AND STATE LEVEL EXAMS NON-FINITE VERBS: (Traveling is the gerund) Gerund as direct object: The do not appreciate singing. (The gerund is sleeping) Gerund as object of preposition: The police arrested him for speeding. (The gerund is speecing) Gerunds are words that are formed with verbs but act as nouns. They’re very easy to spot, since every gerund is a verb with ‘ing’ tacked to its tail. There Just when we thought we had verbs figured out, are no exceptions to this rule. we’re brought face-to-face with a new animal: non-finite verbs. These words look similar to verbs Like all things grammar, gerunds do take a tiny bit we’ve already been talking about, but they act quite of detective work to spot. The problem here is that different from those other verbs. present participles also end with the letters ‘ing’. Besides being able to spot gerunds, you should be By definition, a non-finite verb cannot serve as the able to tell the difference between a gerund and a main verb in an independent clause. In practical present participle. terms, this means that they don’t serve as the action of a sentence. They also don’t have a tense. While Let’s go back to the definition of a gerund for a the sentence around them may be past, present, or moment. Remember that gerunds are words that future tense, the non-finite verbs themselves are are formed with verbs but act as nouns. Present neutral. There are three types of non-finite verbs: participles do not act as nouns.
    [Show full text]
  • Nonfinite Verb Infinitive / Gerund / Participle
    Nonfinite Verb Infinitive / Gerund / Participle Mishra English Study Centre BY – M. K. Mishra Nonfinite Verb Infinitive An Infinitive is a Verb form that works as a Noun or Pronoun in Sentence. Ex.:- To teach is an art. According to uses Infinitive is divided into two forms. (i) Full Infinitive - [To + v1] (ii) Bare Infinitive - [v1] Rules & Uses 1) A full Infinitive can be used as the Subject of a Sentence. Ex.:- To teach is an art. Subject 2) A full Infinitive can be used as the Object of a Sentence also. Ex.:- I want to teach. Object 3) A Bare Infinitive can’t be used as the Subject of a Sentence. 4) A Bare Infinitive comes as the Object of a Sentence. Ex.:- (a) He made me laugh. (b) He made me a doctor. Object Object 5) An Infinitive can’t be changed into Plural Form. Ex.:- To teaches is an art. – () To teach is an art. – () 6) An Infinitive can’t get Article before itself. Ex.:- The to walk is an exercise. – () To walk is an exercise. – () 7) An Infinitive can’t be used just after a Possessive form. Ex.:- My to run is fast. – () My running is fast. – () To run is fast. – () 8) An Infinitive can’t be used just after a Preposition. Ex.:- I have a pen for to write. – () I have a pen for writing. – () 9) Noun + full Infinitive, comes to show the use of Noun. Ex.:- I have a pen to write with. 10) An Ordinal Adjective of Number can get full Infinitive after itself.
    [Show full text]
  • UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Previously Published Works
    UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Previously Published Works Title Person as an inflectional category Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3w33c23j Journal Linguistic Typology, 21(3) ISSN 1430-0532 Author Nichols, J Publication Date 2017-12-20 DOI 10.1515/lingty-2017-0010 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ 4.0 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Author's final version. A number of errors and omissions were corrected by the editors and in the proofs, so do not quote this version; refer to the publication and quote from there: Nichols, Johanna. 2017. Person as an inflectional category. Linguistic Typology 21:3.387- 456. Person as an inflectional category Abstract The category of person has both inflectional and lexical aspects, and the distinction provides a finely graduated grammatical trait, relatively stable in both families and areas, and revealing for both typology and linguistic geography. Inflectional behavior includes reference to speech-act roles, indexation of arguments, discreteness from other categories such as number or gender, assignment and/or placement in syntax, arrangement in paradigms, and general resemblance to closed-class items. Lexical behavior includes sharing categories and/or forms and/or syntactic behavior with major lexical classes (usually nouns) and generally resembling open-class items. Criteria are given here for typologizing person as more vs. less inflectional, some basic typological correlations are tested, and the worldwide linguistic-geographical distribution is mapped. Keywords: person, inflection, morphology, linguistic geography, typology 2 Person as an inflectional category 1. Introduction Person, probably more than any other inflectional category, originates in arguments but is strongly prone to end up as indexation on predicates and other phrase heads.
    [Show full text]
  • GRS LX 700 Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory
    GRS LX 700 Syntax Language Acquisition n Recall the basic structure and of adult sentences. n IP (a.k.a. TP, INFLP, …) is the position of modals Linguistic Theory and auxiliaries, also assumed to be home of Week 2. The emergence of syntax tense and agreement. n CP is where wh-words move and where I moves in subject-aux-inversion Splitting the INFL Splitting the INFL n Syntax since 1986 has n Distinct syntactic been more or less functions assigned to driven by the distinct functional heads. principle “every n T: tense/modality n AgrO: object agreement, separable functional accusative case element belongs in its n AgrS: subject agreement, own phrase.” nominative case n Neg: negation n Various syntactic tests support these moves n Origins: Pollock (1989) as well (cf. CAS LX (split INFL into Agr and T), 523). Chomsky (1993) (split INFL into AgrS, T, AgrO). Functional heads Functional heads n The DP, CP, and VP n VP was split into two parts, vP where the agent all suffered a similar starts, and VP where the fate. patient starts. V and v combine by head movement. n DP was split into DP n Origins: Larson (1988) and NumP proposed a similar structure for double-object verbs, Hale & Keyser (1993) proposed something like n Origin: Ritter 1991 and this structure, which was related work adopted by Chomsky (1993). 1 Functional heads Functional structure n CP was split into n Often, the “fine structure” n The heart of “syntax” several “discourse- of the functional heads is really in the related” functional does not matter, so functional heads, on people will still refer to heads as well (topic, “IP” (with the this view.
    [Show full text]