DOCSLIB.ORG

A Profile of the Hungarian DP the Interaction of Lexicalization, Agreement and Linearization with the Functional Sequence

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Profile of the Hungarian DP the Interaction of Lexicalization, Agreement and Linearization with the Functional Sequence Faculty of Humanities, Social Sciences and Education Center for Advanced Study in Theoretical Linguistics A profile of the Hungarian DP The interaction of lexicalization, agreement and linearization with the functional sequence A dissertation for the degree of Philosophiae Doctor December 2011 A profile of the Hungarian DP The interaction of lexicalization, agreement and linearization with the functional sequence Eva´ Katalin D´ek´any A thesis submitted for the degree Philosophiae Doctor University of Tromsø Faculty of Humanities, Social Sciences and Education Center for Advanced Study in Theoretical Linguistics December 2011 ii Contents Acknowledgements ix Abbreviations xi Letter-to-sound correspondences xiii 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Thedomainofinquiryandaimofthethesis . ......... 1 1.2 Whythisempiricalbasis. ...... 1 1.2.1 Motivating the domain of inquiry . ...... 1 1.2.2 ProblemareasintheHungarianxNP . .... 2 1.2.3 Interimsummary................................ 6 1.3 Howtosetupthefunctionalsequence . ........ 6 1.3.1 Lexicalization................................ ... 8 1.3.2 Agreement .................................... 8 1.3.3 Linearization ................................. .. 9 1.4 Theoutlineofthethesis . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ...... 9 I The lexicalization problem 11 2 The functional sequence meets the lexicalization problem 13 2.1 Introducing the lexicalization problem . ............ 13 2.2 Polysemy in the lexicalization of the functional sequence............... 13 2.2.1 Polysemyofphrasalmodifiers. ..... 13 2.2.2 Polysemyofheads ............................... 16 2.2.3 Interimsummaryandoutlook. .... 18 2.3 Lexicalization algorithms using non-terminal spellout................. 18 2.4 The lexicalization algorithm of Nanosyntax . ............ 21 2.4.1 Two ways to do non-terminal spellout in Nanosyntax . .......... 21 2.4.2 General assumptions about lexicalization . .......... 22 2.4.3 Competitionbetweenlexicalentries . ........ 26 2.4.4 Sizematters................................... 28 2.5 Summary ......................................... 31 3 From N to Num 33 3.1 Abird’seyeviewoftheHungarianDP. ....... 33 3.2 ThelandscapeoftheDPuptonumerals. ....... 35 3.2.1 Abasicstructure............................... .. 35 3.2.2 Theoptionalityofprojections . ....... 37 3.3 Fine-tuning the position of classifiers . ............ 40 3.3.1 Multipleclassifierpositions . ....... 40 3.3.2 Adjectives and the Svenonius hierarchy . ........ 41 3.3.3 Thepositionofspecificclassifiers . ........ 42 3.3.4 Evidence fromcompositionalsemantics . ........ 43 iii iv CONTENTS 3.3.5 Earlier work on the interaction of adjectives and the count/mass distinction 44 3.3.6 Thepositionofthegeneralclassifier . ........ 45 3.3.7 Interimsummary................................ 47 3.4 Count adjectives: position and interpretation . .............. 47 3.4.1 Tokenreadings ................................. 47 3.4.2 Typeinterpretations . .... 49 3.4.3 Representing the flexibility . ...... 50 3.5 TheSpuriousNPEllipsis .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..... 51 3.5.1 NPellipsisinHungarian. .... 51 3.5.2 TheSNPEphenomenon ............................. 53 3.5.3 TheSNPEdoesnotinvolvefocus. .... 54 3.5.4 The SNPE via the Superset Principle . ..... 56 3.5.5 The SNPE and darab .............................. 58 3.5.6 The SNPE and the Exhaustive Lexicalization Principle ........... 60 3.6 Conclusions ..................................... ... 62 3.7 AppendixI ....................................... 64 3.8 AppendixII...................................... .. 65 3.8.1 The order of specific classifiers and adjectives . ........... 65 3.8.2 The order of the general classifier and adjectives . ........... 66 4 From Num to D 69 4.1 The landscapeofthe DP betweennumeralsandD . ........ 69 4.1.1 Quantifiers have their own projection . ....... 69 4.1.2 Demonstratives................................ .. 71 4.1.3 Possessors.................................... 77 4.1.4 Non-finiterelativeclauses . ...... 80 4.1.5 Interimsummary................................ 81 4.2 LexicalizingtheDposition . ....... 81 4.2.1 Thedata ..................................... 81 4.2.2 A spanning account of non-inflecting demonstratives and -ik quantifiers . 83 4.2.3 Previoustreatments . ... 90 4.2.4 Extending the analysis to proper names . ....... 93 4.2.5 Revisiting haplology vs. spanning . ....... 95 4.2.6 The article that wouldn’t go away . ..... 101 4.3 Summary ......................................... 102 5 Case and PPs 105 5.1 Elements of the extended nominal projection above DP . ............ 105 5.1.1 TheinventoryofHungariancasemarkers . ....... 106 5.1.2 The inventory of Hungarian postpositions . ......... 107 5.2 Thedistributionofpostpositions . .......... 110 5.2.1 Case-markingofthecomplement . ..... 110 5.2.2 Adjacencyeffects............................... 111 5.2.3 Morphologicaleffects. .... 112 5.2.4 Sharedpropertiesofpostpositions . ........ 114 5.2.5 Interimsummary................................ 116 5.3 LexicalizingthepositionsaboveD . ......... 116 5.3.1 Recapitulation: disruption effects and Underassociation ........... 116 5.3.2 DressedPsspancase,nakedPsdon’t . ..... 117 5.4 Capturing the distribution via size . .......... 119 5.4.1 Accountingfortheadjacencyeffects . ....... 119 5.4.2 Potential counter-examples: can dressed PPs be separated from their com- plement? ..................................... 125 5.4.3 Accounting for the morphological effects . ......... 128 5.4.4 WhyallnakedPsarenotequal. ... 130 5.4.5 Interimsummary................................ 131 CONTENTS v 5.5 What this analysis tells us about the case vs. adposition debate.. .. .. .. .. 132 5.5.1 ThedecompositionofPP . 132 5.5.2 The problem of distinguishing case markers from postpositions . 133 5.5.3 Integrating the proposal into the Path > Place decomposition. 135 5.5.4 Refiningthestructure . ... 138 5.5.5 Spatial case markers with and without naked Ps . ........ 142 5.5.6 Against an adjunction analysis of naked Ps . ........ 145 5.5.7 Against naked Ps being higher than dressed Ps . ........ 146 5.5.8 Tyingintemporalandnon-spatialPs . ...... 147 5.6 Summary ......................................... 148 II The agreement problem 151 6 The functional sequence meets the agreement problem 153 6.1 The problem of deciding whether a morpheme is agreement ornot ......... 153 6.2 The syntactic representationof agreement . ............ 157 6.2.1 TheriseandfallofAgrP . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 157 6.2.2 ProblemswithAgrP .............................. 157 6.2.3 AgreementmorphemeswithoutAgrP . .... 160 6.2.4 Against treating agreement on a par with negation . .......... 161 6.3 The approach to Agreement adopted in this thesis . ........... 162 6.3.1 Thepositionofagreementingrammar . ...... 162 6.3.2 The representation of agreement morphemes . ........ 163 6.3.3 The linearizationof agreementmorphemes . ........ 163 6.3.4 ThetechnicalitiesofAgree . ..... 166 6.3.5 Agreementvs.concord. ... 167 7 Possessive agreement and appositives 169 7.1 Featureco-varianceintheHungarianKP . ......... 169 7.2 Possessor-possesseeagreement. .......... 170 7.2.1 Themorphologyofpossession. ..... 170 7.2.2 The representation of possessive morphology in f-seq ............. 172 7.3 Possessive agreement defies the Mirror Principle . ............. 175 7.3.1 Agreementandthepluralonthepossessee . ....... 175 7.3.2 Agreement and the plural on possessor pronouns . ......... 178 7.3.3 Agreement and case on postpositions (non-standard) . ............ 180 7.3.4 Anorderthatdoesn’tlookMirror,butitis . ........ 181 7.4 Appositives ..................................... ... 185 7.5 Summary ......................................... 187 8 Demonstrative concord 189 8.1 Introduction.................................... .... 189 8.2 Demonstrativesarenotappositives . .......... 190 8.3 Suffixes participating in demonstrative concord . ............. 193 8.4 DemonstrativeconcordinvolvesAgree . .......... 195 8.4.1 Theinsidesofdemonstratives . ...... 197 8.4.2 Case concord as KP, plural concord as an agreement feature......... 201 8.5 DemonstrativeconcordviaReverseAgree . .......... 203 8.6 Cross-linguistic evidence for Reverse Agree . ............. 205 8.7 Demonstrative concord with -´e ............................. 207 8.7.1 The meaning and distribution of -´e ....................... 207 8.7.2 Previous analyses of -´e .............................. 209 8.7.3 -E´ istheGenitivecase.............................. 212 8.7.4 Co-occurrence restrictions in the context of -´e ................. 215 8.7.5 The merge-in position of -´e possessors ..................... 218 vi CONTENTS 8.7.6 Suffixaufnahme with -´e possessors ....................... 221 8.7.7 Further research: the associative plural . .......... 226 8.8 Summaryandconclusion .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... 228 8.9 Appendix ........................................ 228 9 The plural suffix 231 9.1 Introduction.................................... .... 231 9.2 Plural versus classifier cross-linguistically . ................ 232 9.2.1 Aclaimaboutcomplementarity. ..... 232 9.2.2 Counter-examples .............................. 233 9.2.3 Approaches to the (non)-complementarity . ......... 234 9.3 The complementarity with classifiers in Hungarian . ............. 235 9.3.1 Thedata ..................................... 235 9.3.2 The Hungarian plural as a ‘pluralclassifier’ . 237 9.4 Excursusontheassociativeplural . ......... 239 9.4.1 The associative plural in the functional sequence . ............ 240 9.4.2 -´ek = -´e+-k ...................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Effect of Using the Mind Mapping Technique on the Mastery of Grammar Among Tenth Graders In
    Al Azhar University - Gaza Deanery of Graduate Studies & Scientific Research Faculty of Education Department of Curriculum and Teaching Methods The Effect of Using The Mind Mapping Technique on The Mastery of Grammar among Tenth Graders in Gaza Governorates Submitted By Aziz Harbi Elkahlout Supervised By Prof. Dr. Hassan Abu Jarad 2013/2014 أَلَمْ تَزَ كَيْفَ ضَزَبَ اللَّهُ مَثَلًا كَلِمَتً طَيِّبَتً كَشَجَزَةٍ طَيِّبَتٍ أَصْلُهَا ثَابِتٌ وَفَزْعُهَا فِي السَّمَاءِ}42{ تُؤْتِي أُكُلَهَا كُلَّ حِنيٍ بِإِذْنِ رَبِّهَا وَيَضْزِبُ اللَّهُ الْأَمْثَالَ لِلنَّاسِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَذَكَّزُونَ}42{ صدق اهلل العظيم )سورة إبراهيم، اﻵية: 42-42( II Dedication To the soul of my mother, To my father for his love, endless support and encouragement, To my teachers and guides, To my dear wife for her extraordinary patience and understanding, To my daughters and sons, who endured a lot to let me continue. To my brothers, especially Safawt, for opening my eyes to higher education, To my friends for motivating and encouraging me to attain my dream, To the great martyrs and prisoners, the symbol of sacrifice, To all those who believe in the importance of learning. To all, I dedicate my research. III Acknowledgement All praise to Allah, the Lord of the worlds; and prayers and peace be upon prophet Mohammed, His servant and messenger. This thesis could not have been accomplished without the assistance, support, and encouragement of many people in my life. I would like to thank them for their support and guidance along the way. I would like to express my deepest appreciation to my supervisor, Professor Dr. Hassan Abu Jarad, who patiently revised each chapter of this thesis and provided invaluable guidance and support throughout my writing process.
    [Show full text]
  • Genitive Constructions in Coptic Barbara Egedi
    Genitive constructions in Coptic Barbara Egedi 1. Introduction 1.1. Definition of ‘Coptic’ Coptic is the language of Christian Egypt (4th to 14th century) written in a specific version of the Greek alphabet. It was gradually superseded by Ara- bic from the ninth century onward, but it survived to the present time as the liturgical language of the Christian church of Egypt. In this paper I examine only one of its main dialects, the Sahidic Coptic and I use a transcription which simply reflects the Coptic letters irrespectively of phonological de- tails.1 1.2. UG in the reconstruction of dead languages Natural languages are claimed to have universal properties or principles which constitute what is referred to as Universal Grammar. Accepting cer- tain universal principles and observing the corresponding parameters in Coptic, we can also analyse a language without living native speakers, and explain its structural relations with the help of coherent models. For example, it is considered a universal principle that the projections of lexical heads are extended by one or more functional projections. If we assume that it can be demonstrated in many languages, why could not we suppose the same in the case of Coptic? Indeed, as it will be shown in chap- ter 4, there are at least two functional projections above Coptic lexical noun phrase as well. The aim of this paper is to provide an adequate account of the basic structure of the Coptic NP within the theoretical framework of the Mini- malist Program (a short summary of which will be found in the following section); at the same time, I intend to find the answer to unsolved questions related to genitive constructions.
    [Show full text]
  • Positions for Oblique Case-Marked Arguments in Hungarian Noun Phrases1
    17.1-2 (2016): 295-319 UDC 811.511.141'367.4=111 UDC 811.511.411'367.622=111 Original scientific article Received on 10. 07. 2015 Accepted for publication on 12. 04. 2016 Judit Farkas1 Gábor Alberti2 1Hungarian Academy of Sciences 2University of Pécs Positions for oblique case-marked arguments in Hungarian noun phrases1 We argue that there are four positions open to oblique case-marked arguments within the Hungarian noun phrase structure, of which certain ones have never been mentioned in the literature while even the others have been discussed very scarcely (for different reasons, which are also pointed out in the paper). In order to formally account for these four positions and the data “legitimizing” them, we provide a new DP structure integrating the basically morphology-based Hungarian traditions with the cartographic Split-DP Hypothesis (Giusti 1996; Ihsane and Puskás 2001). We point out that, chiefly by means of the four posi- tions for oblique case-marked arguments in Hungarian noun phrases and the operator layers based upon them, this language makes it possible for its speakers to explicitly express every possible scopal order of arguments of verbs, even if the given verbs are deeply embedded in complements of deverbal nominalizers. Key words: Hungarian noun phrase; generative syntax; Split-DP Hypothesis; oblique case-marked arguments; possessive construction. 1 We are grateful to OTKA NK 100804 (Comprehensive Grammar Resources: Hungarian) for their financial support. The present scientific contribution is dedicated to the 650th anniversary of the foundation of the University of Pécs, Hungary. 295 Judit Farkas – Gábor Alberti: Positions for obliques case-marked arguments in Hungarian noun phrases 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Ba'da and Qabla in Online News: a Corpus-Based Study
    The American University in Cairo School of Humanities and Social Sciences ba’da and qabla in Online News: A Corpus-Based Study A Thesis Submitted to The Department of Applied Linguistics in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts by Ayman Eddakrouri Under the supervision of Prof. Zeinab Taha Department of Applied Linguistics May 2016 This thesis is dedicated to my lovely wife, Dr. Amani Ramadan, who is indeed a gift from Allah. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to begin by expressing my deep gratitude to my supervisor, Prof. Zeinab Taha, not only for her guidance, comments, and notices during the whole period in which the research of this thesis was conducted, but also for her personal advice, encouragements, kindness, and thoughtfulness. I cannot capture in words what it has meant to me to have had the privilege of working with her. Indeed, she is more than a supervisor to me. I am most grateful to my first reader, Prof. Raghda Elessawi. Her guidance and patience with me, both during the writing of this thesis and over the entire course of my time at the American University in Cairo, were invaluable. I am deeply indebted to her. Also, I would like to thank my second reader, Prof. Amira Agameya, for her distinguished suggestions, notices, and feedback. I have greatly profited from her insightful responses to my work. A very special gratitude goes to Dr. Ashraf Abdou who helped me at the very beginning and initiated my knowledge in Corpus Linguistics. I owe a debt of gratitude to him.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 the Distribution of Quantifiers in Old and Modern
    Word Order Change Edited by ANA MARIA MARTINS and ADRIANA CARDOSO 1 3 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OXDP, United Kingdom Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries © editorial matter and organization Ana Maria Martins and Adriana Cardoso © the chapters their several authors The moral rights of the authors have been asserted First Edition published in Impression: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press Madison Avenue, New York, NY , United States of America British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Control Number: ISBN –––– Printed and bound by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CRYY Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
    [Show full text]
  • Differential Object Marking in Hungarian and the Morphosyntax of Case and Agreement
    Differential object marking in Hungarian and the morphosyntax of case and agreement András Bárány Downing College, University of Cambridge November 2015 This dissertation is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Voor ⴰⵎⵓⵛⵛ Contents Declaration ix Acknowledgements xi Abbreviations xiii List of Tables xv List of Figures xvii 1 DOM, case and agreement 1 1.1 Introduction .................................... 1 1.2 Differential object marking ........................... 2 1.3 Person features and hierarchies ........................ 5 1.3.1 Hierarchies and functional approaches to DOM ......... 9 1.4 Case and agreement ............................... 10 1.5 Theoretical assumptions ............................. 14 1.5.1 Cyclic Agree ............................... 14 1.5.2 Agree can fail .............................. 17 1.5.3 Syntax and morphology ........................ 18 1.6 The sample of languages ............................ 21 Part I Differential object marking in Hungarian 23 2 DOM in Hungarian 25 2.1 Introduction: Hungarian object agreement ................. 25 v Contents 2.2 The distribution of object agreement ..................... 27 2.2.1 Direct objects and subject agreement ................ 28 2.2.2 Direct objects that trigger object agreement ............ 33 2.2.3 “Unexpected” object agreement ................... 43 2.3 Summary ...................................... 45 3 A hybrid analysis of object agreement: syntactic structure and π-features 47 3.1 Introduction .................................... 47 3.2 Towards an analysis ............................... 48 3.2.1 Problems for semantic approaches ................. 48 3.2.2 Problems for syntactic approaches ................. 50 3.2.3 Syntactic structure and person features .............. 53 3.3 Evidence from possessive noun phrases in Hungarian .......... 58 3.3.1 Types of possessors: nominative, dative, pronominal ...... 58 3.3.2 Non-specific possessives and dative possessors .......... 61 3.3.3 Possessed noun phrases and object agreement .........
    [Show full text]
  • The Internal Structure of Noun Phrases in the Scandinavian Languages a Comparative Study Delsing, Lars-Olof
    The Internal Structure of Noun Phrases in the Scandinavian Languages A Comparative Study Delsing, Lars-Olof 1993 Document Version: Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Delsing, L-O. (1993). The Internal Structure of Noun Phrases in the Scandinavian Languages: A Comparative Study. Institutionen för nordiska språk, Lunds universitet. Total number of authors: 1 Creative Commons License: CC BY-NC-ND General rights Unless other specific re-use rights are stated the following general rights apply: Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Read more about Creative commons licenses: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. LUND UNIVERSITY PO Box 117 221 00 Lund +46 46-222 00 00 Tun INrnnN¡¡ SrnucruRn oF NouN Pnnasns IN THE Sc.lNnrNAvrAN Lr¡¡cuacBs A ConrpaRATrvE Sruoy Lars-Olof Delsing Departrnent of Scandinavian Languages University of Lund 1993 O Lars-Olof Delsing 1993 ISBN 91-628-0988-1 Printed in Sweden Team Offset Malmri, 1993 Acknowledgements Six years ago, I asked my supervisor, Christer Platzack, if he could think of a sub¡ect within generative grammar, which would be suit- able for a paper that should be done in five weeks.
    [Show full text]
  • The Levinas Reader
    The Levinas Reader Emmanuel Levinas EDITED BY SEAN HAND Basil Blackwell Copyright © Introduction and editorial apparatus, Sean Hand 1989 Copyright © 'The Phenomenological Theory of Being', 'There Is', 'Time and the Other', 'Martin Buber and the Theory of Knowledge', 'Ethics as First Philosophy', 'Substitution', 'Reality and Its Shadow', 'The Transcendence of Words', 'The Servant and her Master', 'The Other in Proust', 'God and Philosophy', 'Revelation in the Jewish Tradition', 'The Pact', 'Ideology and Idealism', 'Judaism', 'Judaism and the Pre­ sent', 'The State of Israel and the Religion of Israel', 'Means of Identification', 'The State of Caesar and the State of David', 'Politics After', 'Assimilation and New Culture', 'Ethics and Politics', Emmanuel Levinas, 1930, 1946, 1947, 1963, 1984, 1968, 1948, 1949, 1966, 1947, 1975, 1977, 1982, 1973, 1971, 1960, 1951, 1963, 1971, 1979, 1980, 1982 First published 1989 Basil Blackwell Ltd 108 Cowley Road, Oxford, OX4 lJF, UK Basil Blackwell Inc. 3 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA All rights reserved . Except for the quotation of short passages for the purposes of criticism and review, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanic­ al, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. Except in the United States of America, this book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, re-sold, hired out, or otherwise circulated without the publisher's prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and witout a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser.
    [Show full text]
  • Syntax of Hungarian. Nouns and Noun Phrases, Volume 2
    Comprehensive Grammar Resources Series editors: Henk van Riemsdijk, István Kenesei and Hans Broekhuis Syntax of Hungarian Nouns and Noun Phrases Volume 2 Edited by Gábor Alberti and Tibor Laczkó Syntax of Hungarian Nouns and Noun Phrases Volume II Comprehensive Grammar Resources With the rapid development of linguistic theory, the art of grammar writing has changed. Modern research on grammatical structures has tended to uncover many constructions, many in depth properties, many insights that are generally not found in the type of grammar books that are used in schools and in fields related to linguistics. The new factual and analytical body of knowledge that is being built up for many languages is, unfortunately, often buried in articles and books that concentrate on theoretical issues and are, therefore, not available in a systematized way. The Comprehensive Grammar Resources (CGR) series intends to make up for this lacuna by publishing extensive grammars that are solidly based on recent theoretical and empirical advances. They intend to present the facts as completely as possible and in a way that will “speak” to modern linguists but will also and increasingly become a new type of grammatical resource for the semi- and non- specialist. Such grammar works are, of necessity, quite voluminous. And compiling them is a huge task. Furthermore, no grammar can ever be complete. Instead new subdomains can always come under scientific scrutiny and lead to additional volumes. We therefore intend to build up these grammars incrementally, volume by volume. In view of the encyclopaedic nature of grammars, and in view of the size of the works, adequate search facilities must be provided in the form of good indices and extensive cross-referencing.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER FOUR the WORD ORDER in SINHALA CHAPTER FOUR the Word Order in Sinhala
    CHAPTER FOUR THE WORD ORDER IN SINHALA CHAPTER FOUR The Word Order in Sinhala 4.0. Preliminaries Languages in the world are classified according to their most typical syntactic structures. Greenberg (1963: 73-113) while considering the characteristics of different languages, divides them into three principal order types: Type 1. VSO (Verb, subject and object) Type 2. SVO (Subject, verb and object) Type 3. SOV (Subject, object and verb) Sinhala provides evidence for being classified as type 3. Indo -Aryan and Dravidian have the same order type. a. guruvaraya poto liyanovsi The teacher-S the book-0 writes- V-Pres The teacher writes the book "The basic word order in Sinhala remains as SOV, but this order may vary depending upon the context and the focus'' (Gair 2003:788). Thus, a simple SOV sentence like a can undergo changes as in the sentences l(b, c, d) b. kumsi.'rg pota kiyavonavn Kuma.ra-S the book-0 reads-V-Pres Kumara reads the book c. kumsi.ra kiyovondva poto Kumara—S reads-V-Pres the book-0 Kumara reads the book potd kiyavondva kuma.Td the book-0 reads- V-Pres Kumara -S Kumara reads the book The following utterance is less dominant in Sinhala. e. kiyavangvsi potd kumsi:r9 reads- V-Pres the book-0 Kuma:ra -S Kumara reads the book This chapter deals with the word order in Sinhala at the phrase level clause level and the sentence level. 4.1. The Word Order at the Phrase Level A phrase which is called in Sinhala /pHdokcefi/ is a group of words which form a grammatical unit.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Analysis of English and Igala Morphological Processes by Andrew-Ogidi, Rakiya Christiana December, 2006
    A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH AND IGALA MORPHOLOGICAL PROCESSES BY ANDREW-OGIDI, RAKIYA CHRISTIANA DECEMBER, 2006 A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH AND IGALA MORPHOLOGICAL PROCESSES BY ANDREW-OGIDICHRISTIANA RAKIYA MA/ARTS/38422/02-04 A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL, AHMADU BELLO UNIVERSITY, ZARIA, IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF MASTER DEGREE. (ENGLISH LANGUAGE) DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH FACULTY OF ARTS AHMADU BELLO UNIVERSITY, ZARIA NIGERIA DECEMBER, 2006 ii DECLARATION I Andrew-Ogidi, Rakiya Christiana do solemnly declare that, this Thesis has been written by me and that it is a record of my own research work. It has not been presented in any previous application for higher degree. All sources of information are duly acknowledged by means of references. ………………………………..…………. …………….……… Andrew-Ogidi, Christiana Rakiya Date iii CERTIFICATION This is to certify that, this thesis, entitled ‘A comparative analysis of English and Igala Morphological processes’ submitted by Andrew-Ogidi, Rakiya Christiana meets the regulations governing the award of the Degree of Master of Arts of Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria and is approved for its contribution to knowledge and literary presentation. ……………………………………….. ………………… Dr. Joshua A. Adebayo Date Chairman, Supervisory Committee ……………………………………….. ………………… Dr. Gbenga Ibileye Date Member Supervisory Committee ……………………………………….. ………………… Dr. Joshua A. Adebayo Date ……………………………………….. ………………… Dean Post-graduate School Date iv DEDICATION To Faith Eneole Ogidi – my beautiful daughter v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Glory belongs to God who sees the intents of a mans heart, life up the humble, and debases the proud. In Him is the fullness of all knowledge. Without Him, this research would have been a mirage. Once again, by Him, I have lept over a well.
    [Show full text]
  • Stone-Kovner Presentation on the Use of Articles in English
    Stone and Kovner: Tips for the Imperfectly Articulate 1 OUR FIRST STEP: Two studies on article errors made by Russian speakers. Differences in two studies: Lydia, 84 self-generated sentences or translations: Number of subjects (ca. 25) Russian native speaker translators, interpreters, wannabees, and guides. Volodia’s study, sentences pre-selected for difficulty, ca. 20 Russian native speakers long-time residents of U.S. Correct is 0 Correct is the Correct is a Study Used the Used a Used a Used 0 the>0 Used the Used 0 0>the 0>a the>a a>the a>0 LRS study (84 errors) 34 5 10 20 7 8 VK Study (21 subjects, 18 25 (4*) 0 14(2) 39 (6) 20 (6) 10 (2) sentences, 108 errors) *number of different sentences in which errors occurred Set of Errors Over use of Under use of the<->0 errors a<->0 errors a<->the errors (no. of errors) articles articles Lydia (84) 39 28 54 13 17 Vladimir (83) 25 49 64 10 51 Total (167) 64 76 118 23 68 Two interesting differences between results of studies: 1) greater tendency to underuse articles in speech and overuse in a written test situation with unlimited time; 2) “a-the” errors are much more common in the written test situation (possibly because very difficult choices do not occur frequently under natural conditions) There is some hint that different individuals tend preferentially to make different types of errors. Conclusions of the two studies: Errors in article use by Russian speakers are not random. Errors made on a given sentence or type of sentence tend to be the same.
    [Show full text]