DOCSLIB.ORG

Linguistics for Dummies‰

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Linguistics FOR DUMmIES‰ Linguistics FOR DUMmIES‰ by Strang Burton, Rose-Marie Déchaine, and Eric Vatikiotis-Bateson Linguistics For Dummies® Published by John Wiley & Sons Canada, Ltd. 6045 Freemont Blvd. Mississauga, Ontario, L5R 4J3 www.wiley.com Copyright © 2012 by John Wiley & Sons Canada, Ltd. All rights reserved. No part of this book, including interior design, cover design, and icons, may be repro- duced or transmitted in any form, by any means (electronic, photocopying, recording, or otherwise) without the prior written permission of the Publisher. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons Canada, Ltd., 6045 Freemont Blvd., Mississauga, ON L5R 4J3, or online at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions. For authorization to photo- copy items for corporate, personal, or educational use, please contact in writing The Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency (Access Copyright). For more information, visit www.accesscopyright.ca or call toll free, 1-800-893-5777. Trademarks: Wiley, the Wiley logo, For Dummies, the Dummies Man logo, A Reference for the Rest of Us!, The Dummies Way, Dummies Daily, The Fun and Easy Way, Dummies.com, Making Everything Easier, and related trade dress are trademarks or registered trademarks of John Wiley & Sons, Inc., and/or its affili- ates in the United States and other countries, and may not be used without written permission. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book. LIMIT OF LIABILITY/DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTY: THE PUBLISHER AND THE AUTHOR MAKE NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES WITH RESPECT TO THE ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS WORK AND SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITH- OUT LIMITATION WARRANTIES OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. NO WARRANTY MAY BE CREATED OR EXTENDED BY SALES OR PROMOTIONAL MATERIALS. THE ADVICE AND STRATEGIES CONTAINED HEREIN MAY NOT BE SUITABLE FOR EVERY SITUATION. THIS WORK IS SOLD WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE PUBLISHER IS NOT ENGAGED IN RENDERING LEGAL, ACCOUNTING, OR OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. IF PROFESSIONAL ASSISTANCE IS REQUIRED, THE SERVICES OF A COMPETENT PROFESSIONAL PERSON SHOULD BE SOUGHT. NEITHER THE PUBLISHER NOR THE AUTHOR SHALL BE LIABLE FOR DAMAGES ARISING HEREFROM. THE FACT THAT AN ORGANIZA- TION OR WEBSITE IS REFERRED TO IN THIS WORK AS A CITATION AND/OR A POTENTIAL SOURCE OF FURTHER INFORMATION DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE AUTHOR OR THE PUBLISHER ENDORSES THE INFORMATION THE ORGANIZATION OR WEBSITE MAY PROVIDE OR RECOMMENDATIONS IT MAY MAKE. FURTHER, READERS SHOULD BE AWARE THAT INTERNET WEBSITES LISTED IN THIS WORK MAY HAVE CHANGED OR DISAPPEARED BETWEEN WHEN THIS WORK WAS WRITTEN AND WHEN IT IS READ. For general information on John Wiley & Sons Canada, Ltd., including all books published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., please call our distribution centre at 1-800-567-4797. For reseller information, including discounts and premium sales, please call our sales department at 416-646-7992. For press review copies, author interviews, or other publicity information, please contact our publicity department, Tel. 416-646- 4582, Fax 416-236-4448.For technical support, please visit www.wiley.com/techsupport. Wiley publishes in a variety of print and electronic formats. Some material included with standard print versions of this book may not be included in e-books. Burton, Strang Linguistics for dummies / Strang Burton, Rose-Marie Déchaine, Eric Vatikiotis-Bateson. Includes index. ISBN 978-1-118-09169-2 1. Linguistics. 2. Language and languages. I. Déchaine, Rose-Marie, 1960– II. Vatikiotis-Bateson, Eric III. Title. P121.B87 2012 410 C2011-907371-4 ISBN 978-1-118-09169-2 (pbk); ISBN 978-1-118-10157-5 (ebk); ISBN 978-1-118-10158-2 (ebk); ISBN 978-1-118-10159-9 (ebk) Printed in the United States 1 2 3 4 5 RRD 15 14 13 12 11 About the Authors Strang Burton (Ph.D. Linguistics, Rutgers University, 1995) is a linguist and multimedia developer specializing in documentation and re-vitalization work for severely endangered languages. Working with elders and community members to document the Upriver Halq’emeylem (Halkomelem) language, he contributes to a community-run language revitalization program, the Stolo Shxweli Halq’emeylem Language Program, at the Stolo Nation, in Chilliwack, British Columbia. He is a multi-media trainer and technical consultant for many endangered-language documentation projects and teaches linguistics and language documentation at the University of British Columbia and the University of Victoria. Rose-Marie Déchaine (Ph.D. Linguistics, University of British Columbia, 1994) is a linguist who specializes in the formal analysis of language, with a focus on Native American and African languages. She is particularly interested in understanding how the languages of the world distinguish parts-of-speech and what this reveals about the relation between categorization and cognition. Her current research explores how gesture and speech are woven together in the course of performing language in communicative interaction. She teaches in the linguistics and cognitive systems programs at the University of British Columbia. Eric Vatikiotis-Bateson (Ph.D. Linguistics, Indiana University, 1987) is Director of the Cognitive Systems Program at the University of British Columbia. He has developed experimental and analytic techniques for laboratory and field evaluation of communicative performance. Eric’s empirical studies of the production, perception, and neural processing of multimodal speech focus on spatial and temporal coordination in spoken communication and musical performance at different scales ranging from conversation to ensemble performance to rock concerts. Authors’ Acknowledgments Nothing worth doing is ever done alone. All three authors express their heartfelt thanks to the many people who provided (often lively and colorful!) advice, feedback and comments on different aspects of this book, including Peter Ackema, Outi-Bat-tel, Molly Babel, Eric Bakovic, Mauro Chiesa, Bryan Gick, Louis Goldstein, Laurence Horn, Ives Goddard, Lisa Matthewson, Shana Poplack, Bill Poser, Douglas Pulleyblank, Michael Rochemont, Philip Rubin, Hotze Rullmann, and Martina Wiltschko. We are deeply grateful to the Wiley editors — Robert Hickey and Laura Peterson Nussbaum — who patiently guided us through this project, and to Laurel Fais who assisted with the final revision of large chunks of the book. Too numerous to mention are the teachers who, in different ways, transmitted their passion for knowledge to each us. Our debt to them is the greatest, and this book is our way of carrying forward the rich intellectual traditions that they individually embody. Publisher’s Acknowledgments We’re proud of this book; please send us your comments at http://dummies.custhelp.com. For other comments, please contact our Customer Care Department within the U.S. at 877-762-2974, outside the U.S. at 317-572-3993, or fax 317-572-4002. Some of the people who helped bring this book to market include the following: Acquisitions, Editorial, and Composition Services Vertical Websites Project Coordinator: Kristie Rees Acquisitions Editor: Robert Hickey Layout and Graphics: Carrie Cesavice, Project Editor: Laura Peterson Nussbaum Joyce Haughey, Corrie Socolovitch, Production Editor: Lindsay Humphreys Laura Westhuis Technical Editor: Steve Winters Proofreaders: Laura Bowman, Susan Moritz Editorial Assistant: Jeremy Hanson-Finger Indexer: Christine Karpeles Cover Photo: © iStock / José Luis Gutiérrez Figure Credits: Cartoons: Rich Tennant Fig 1-1: © International Phonetic Association; Figs 15-1 and 15-2: © 2011. Used with (www.the5thwave.com) permission of Philip Rubin and Haskins Laboratories (www.haskins.yale.edu); Fig 16-2a: Reprinted from NeuroImage, 14(3), Pulvermuller, F., Kujala, T., Shtyrov, Y., Simola, J., Tiitinen, H., Alku, P., Alho, K., Martinkauppi, S., Ilmoniemi, R.I. & Naatanen, R., Memory Traces For Words As Revealed By The Mismatch Negativity (MMN), 607- 616, Copyright (2001), with permission from Elsevier; Fig 16-2b: Lee Osterhout. John Wiley & Sons Canada, Ltd. Deborah Barton, Vice-President and Director of Operations Jennifer Smith, Vice-President and Publisher, Professional & Trade Division Alison Maclean, Managing Editor, Professional & Trade Division Publishing and Editorial for Consumer Dummies Kathleen Nebenhaus, Vice President and Executive Publisher Kristin Ferguson-Wagstaffe, Product Development Director Ensley Eikenburg, Associate Publisher, Travel Kelly Regan, Editorial Director, Travel Publishing for Technology Dummies Andy Cummings, Vice President and Publisher Composition Services Debbie Stailey, Director of Composition Services Contents at a Glance Introduction ................................................................ 1 Part I: Looking at Language through the Lens of Linguistics .............................................................. 7 Chapter 1: Knowing a Language Versus Knowing What Language Is ..........................9 Chapter 2: Communicating with Language: The Design Features .............................21 Part II: The Building Blocks of Language .................... 33 Chapter 3: Building Sounds: Phonetics .........................................................................35 Chapter 4: Putting Sounds Together: Phonology ........................................................57 Chapter 5: Building Words: Morphology ......................................................................77
Recommended publications
  • Ditransitive Verbs in Language Use

    Ditransitive Verbs in Language Use

    Chapter 3 Aspects of description: ditransitive verbs in language use This chapter provides a corpus-based description of individual ditransitive verbs in actual language use. First, the two verbs that are typical of ditransitivity in ICE-GB will be analysed: give and tell (see section 3.1). Second, the four habitual ditransitive verbs in ICE-GB (i.e. ask, show, send and offer) will be scrutinised (see section 3.2). Particular emphasis in all the analyses will be placed on the different kinds of routines that are involved in the use of ditransitive verbs. The description of peripheral ditransitive verbs, on the other hand, will centre on the concepts of grammatical institutionalisation and conventionalisation (see section 3.3). At the end of this chapter, the two aspects will be discussed in a wider setting in the assessment of the role of linguistic routine and creativity in the use of ditransitive verbs (see section 3.4). 3.1 Typical ditransitive verbs in ICE-GB In the present study, typical ditransitive verbs are verbs which are frequently attested in ICE-GB in general (i.e. > 700 occurrences) and which are associated with an explicit ditransitive syntax in some 50% of all occurrences or more (cf. Figure 2.4, p. 84). These standards are met by give (see section 3.1.1) and tell (see section 3.1.2). 3.1.1 GIVE In light of recent psycholinguistic and cognitive-linguistic evidence, it is not sur- prising that the most frequent ditransitive verb in ICE-GB is GIVE.1 Experiment- al data have led Ninio (1999), for example, to put forward the hypothesis that children initially acquire constructions through one (or very few) ‘pathbreaking verbs(s)’.
  • Flexible Valency in Chintang.∗

    Flexible Valency in Chintang.∗

    Flexible valency in Chintang.∗ Robert Schikowskia , Netra Paudyalb , and Balthasar Bickela a University of Zürich b University of Leipzig 1 e Chintang language Chintang [ˈts̻ ʰiɳʈaŋ]̻ (ISO639.3: ctn) is a Sino-Tibetan language of Nepal. It is named aer the village where it is mainly spoken. e village lies in the hills of Eastern Nepal, bigger cities within day’s reach being Dhankuṭā and Dharān. ere are no official data on the number of speakers, but we estimate there to be around 4,000 - 5,000 speakers. Most speakers are bi- or trilingual, with Nepali (the Indo-Aryan lingua franca of Nepal) as one and Bantawa (a related Sino-Tibetan language) as the other additional language. Monolingual speakers are still to be found mainly among elderly women, whereas a considerable portion of the younger generation is rapidly shiing to Nepali. Genealogically, Chintang belongs to the Kiranti group. e Kiranti languages are generally accepted to belong to the large Sino-Tibetan (or Tibeto-Burman) family, although their position within this family is controversial (cf. e.g. urgood 2003, Ebert 2003). Based on phonological evidence, Chintang belongs to the Eastern subgroup of Kiranti (Bickel et al. 2010). ere are two major dialects (Mulgaũ and Sambugaũ ) named aer the areas where they are spoken. e differences between them concern morphology and the lexicon but, as far as we know, not syntax, and so we will not distinguish between dialects in this chapter. For all examples the source has been marked behind the translation. Wherever possible, we take data from the Chintang Language Corpus (Bickel et al.
  • Sudha Arunachalam Positions Held

    Sudha Arunachalam Positions Held

    Updated 6/17/19 SUDHA ARUNACHALAM [email protected] 665 Broadway, Rm. 923 Department of Communicative Sciences and Disorders Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development New York University New York, NY 10012 POSITIONS HELD New York University, New York, NY 2018 to present Associate Professor of Communicative Sciences and Disorders Affiliated faculty in Linguistics and Psychology Boston University, Boston, MA 2018 Associate Professor of Speech, Language & Hearing Sciences Associate Professor of Linguistics Program Director, Joint Bachelor of Science in Linguistics and Speech, Language & Hearing Sciences 2011 to 2018 Assistant Professor of Speech, Language & Hearing Sciences Assistant Professor of Linguistics EDUCATION Northwestern University, Evanston, IL Postdoctoral Fellow, Psychology – September 2007 to August 2011 Supervisor: Sandra R. Waxman University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA Ph.D., Linguistics – May 2007 Dissertation: Early verb representations Committee: David Embick, Lila R. Gleitman, John C. Trueswell M.A., Psychology – August 2004 Thesis: Learning to parse and parsing to learn: Effects of structure and event properties on verb learning Supervisors: Lila R. Gleitman, John C. Trueswell University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA B.A., Linguistics/Psychology, Minor in Natural Sciences – June 2001 Summa cum laude Honors Thesis: When the creampuff met the boxer: Reading metaphorical reference Supervisor: Amit Almor RESEARCH FUNDING 2018-2023 NIH R01DC016592, “Language processing and word learning in
  • The Representation of Third Person and Its Consequences for Person-Case Effects

    The Representation of Third Person and Its Consequences for Person-Case Effects

    The Representation of Third Person and Its Consequences for Person-Case Effects The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Nevins, Andrew. The representation of third person and its consequences for person-case effects. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 25 (2007): 273-313. Published Version http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11049-006-9017-2 Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:2223518 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Open Access Policy Articles, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#OAP Nat Lang Linguist Theory (2007) 25:273–313 DOI 10.1007/s11049-006-9017-2 ORIGINAL PAPER The representation of third person and its consequences for person-case effects Andrew Nevins Received: 13 June 2005 / Accepted: 3 July 2006 / Published online: 28 April 2007 © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007 Abstract In modeling the effects of the Person-Case Constraint (PCC), a common claim is that 3rd person “is not a person”. However, while this claim does work in the syntax, it creates problems in the morphology. For example, characterizing the well-known “spurious se effect” in Spanish simply cannot be done without reference to 3rd person. Inspired by alternatives to underspecification that have emerged in phonology (e.g., Calabrese, 1995), a revised featural system is proposed, whereby syntactic agreement may be relativized to certain values of a feature, in particular, the contrastive and marked values.
  • The Diachronic Development of Differential Object Marking in Spanish Ditransitive Constructions Klaus Von Heusinger Universität Zu Köln

    The Diachronic Development of Differential Object Marking in Spanish Ditransitive Constructions Klaus Von Heusinger Universität Zu Köln

    Chapter 11 The diachronic development of Differential Object Marking in Spanish ditransitive constructions Klaus von Heusinger Universität zu Köln Differential Object Marking (DOM) in Spanish synchronically depends on the referential features of the direct object, such as animacy and referentiality, and on the semantics of the verb. Recent corpus studies suggest that the diachronic development proceeds along the same features, which are ranked in scales, namely the Animacy Scale, the Referentiality Scale and the Affectedness Scale. The present paper investigates this development in ditran- sitive constructions from the 17th to the 20th century. Ditransitive constructions in Spanish are of particular interest since the literature assumes that the differential object marker a is often blocked by the co-occurrence of the case marker a for the indirect object. The paper focuses on the conditions that enhance or weaken this blocking effect. It investigates three types of constructions with a ditransitive verb: (i) constructions with indirect objects real- ized as a-marked full noun phrases, (ii) constructions with indirect objects as clitic pronouns, and (iii) constructions with non-overt indirect objects. The results clearly show that DOM is more frequent with (iii) and less frequent with (i). Thus the results support the observation that the co-occurrence of an a-marked indirect object (partly) blocks a-marking of the di- rect object to a certain extent. Furthermore, the results show for the first time that indirect objects realized as clitic pronouns without the marker a have a weaker blocking effect, but still a stronger one than constructions without overt indirect objects. In summary, the paper presents new and original evidence of the competition between arguments in a diachronic perspective.
  • Ditransitive Constructions Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig (Germany) 23-25 November 2007

    Ditransitive Constructions Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig (Germany) 23-25 November 2007

    Conference on Ditransitive Constructions Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig (Germany) 23-25 November 2007 Abstracts On “Dimonotransitive” Structures in English Carmen Aguilera Carnerero University of Granada Ditransitive structures have been prototypically defined as those combinations of a ditransitive verb with an indirect object and a direct object. However, although in the prototypical ditransitive construction in English, both objects are present, there is often omission of one of the constituentes, usually the indirect object. The absence of the indirect object has been justified on the basis of the irrelevance of its specification or the possibility of recovering it from the context. The absence of the direct object, on the other hand, is not so common and only occur with a restricted number of verbs (e.g. pay, show or tell).This type of sentences have been called “dimonotransitives” by Nelson, Wallis and Aarts (2002) and the sole presence in the syntactic structure arises some interesting questions we want to clarify in this article, such as: (a) the degree of syntactic and semantic obligatoriness of indirect objects and certain ditransitive verbs (b) the syntactic behaviour of indirect objects in absence of the direct object, in other words, does the Oi take over some of the properties of typical direct objects as Huddleston and Pullum suggest? (c) The semantic and pragmatic interpretations of the missing element. To carry out our analysis, we will adopt a corpus –based approach and especifically we will use the International Corpus of English (ICE) for the most frequent ditransitive verbs (Mukherjee 2005) and the British National Corpus (BNC) for the not so frequent verbs.
  • Grammatical Sketch of Beng

    Grammatical Sketch of Beng

    Mandenkan Numéro 51 Bulletin d’études linguistiques mandé Printemps 2014 ISSN: 0752-5443 Grammatical sketch of Beng Denis PAPERNO University of Trento, Italy [email protected] Denis Paperno Content 1. Introduction 1 2. General information 9 2.1. Beng people and their language 9 2.2. Sociolinguistic situation 11 2.3. Names of the language 12 3. The history of Beng studies 12 3.1. Students of the Beng language and society 12 3.2. Beng dialects according to reports from the early 1900s 13 3.2.1. Delafosse: Beng of Kamélinsou 15 3.2.3. Tauxier: Beng of Groumania neighbourhood 16 4. Beng phonology 18 4.1. Phonological inventory 18 4.1.1. Tones 20 4.1.2. Syllable structure 22 4.1.3. Segmental sandhi 22 4.1.4. Tonal sandhi 22 4.2. Morphonology 23 4.2.1. ŋC simplification 23 4.2.2. Deletion of /l/ 24 4.2.3. High tone in the low tone form of verbs 24 5. Personal Pronoun Morphology 25 5.1. On the allomorphy of the 1SG subject pronoun 27 5.2. Contraction with 3SG object pronoun 28 5.3. Subject series of pronouns 29 5.4. Stative pronouns with verbs tá, nṵ̄ 29 6. Morphology of content words 30 6.1. Tonal changes in suffixation 31 6.1.1. Mobile tone suffixes 31 6.1.2. Low tone suffixes 31 6.1.3. Other suffixes 31 6.1.4. Stems ending in L tone 31 3 Denis Paperno 6.1.5. The verb blö ‘to press out’ 32 6.2.
  • Features of Lexical Verbs in the Discussion Section of Masters' Dissertations

    Features of Lexical Verbs in the Discussion Section of Masters' Dissertations

    FEATURES OF LEXICAL VERBS IN THE DISCUSSION SECTION OF MASTERS' DISSERTATIONS FAIZAH BINTI MOHAMAD NUSRI FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTICS UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR 2018 FEATURES OF LEXICAL VERBS IN THE DISCUSSION SECTION OF MASTERS' DISSERTATIONS FAIZAH BINTI MOHAMAD NUSRI DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ENGLISH AS SECOND LANGUAGE FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LINGUISTICS UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR 2018 UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA ORIGINAL LITERARY WORK DECLARATION Name of Candidate: Faizah binti Mohamad Nusri I.C/Passport No: 860610-38-6394 Matric No: TGB 120045 Name of Degree: Master of English as Second Language Title of Project Paper/Research Report/Dissertation/Thesis (“this Work”): Features of Lexical Verbs in the Discussion Section of Masters’ Dissertations Field of Study: Corpus Linguistics I do solemnly and sincerely declare that: (1) I am the sole author/writer of this Work; (2) This Work is original; (3) Any use of any work in which copyright exists was done by way of fair dealing and for permitted purposes and any excerpt or extract from, or reference to or reproduction of any copyright work has been disclosed expressly and sufficiently and the title of the Work and its authorship have been acknowledged in this Work; (4) I do not have any actual knowledge nor do I ought reasonably to know that the making of this work constitutes an infringement of any copyright work; (5) I hereby assign all and every rights in the copyright to this Work to the University of Malaya (“UM”), who henceforth shall be owner of the copyright in this Work and that any reproduction or use in any form or by any means whatsoever is prohibited without the written consent of UM having been first had and obtained; (6) I am fully aware that if in the course of making this Work I have infringed any copyright whether intentionally or otherwise, I may be subject to legal action or any other action as may be determined by UM.
  • English Ditransitive Verbs Often Allow Two Distinct Structures, the Double Object and the To-Dative Constructions

    English Ditransitive Verbs Often Allow Two Distinct Structures, the Double Object and the To-Dative Constructions

    SHIGERU MIYAGAWA AND TAKAE TSUJIOKA ARGUMENT STRUCTURE AND DITRANSITIVE VERBS IN JAPANESE Ditransitive verbs such as send and give appear in two distinct structures in English, the double object and the to-dative constructions. It is well known that the two differ semantically and syntactically. In some recent works, it is suggested that the semantic differences observed by Bresnan (1978), Oehrle (1976) and others, and the struc- tural properties noted by Barss and Lasnik (1986), Larson (1988), and others, can both be captured by postulating an extra head for the Double Object Construction (DOC, e.g., Marantz (1993), Harley (1995), Pylkkänen (2002)). This head, which corresponds to the applicative head in Bantu languages, takes the goal as its speci- fier and relates it either to the VP that contains the verb and the theme (Marantz (1993)), or directly to the theme (Pylkkänen (2002)). The applicative head contributes the meaning distinct to the DOC, and it gives rise to the hierarchical structure noted by Barss and Lasnik. This applicative head is missing in the to-dative so that this con- struction has an argument structure distinct from the DOC. In this paper, we will look at the corresponding construction(s) in Japanese. Unlike English, Japanese appears to have only one structure, in which the goal is marked with the dative and the theme with the accusative case marking. The goal-theme order is assumed to be the basic order (Hoji (1985), Takano (1998), Yatsushiro (1998, 2003)). The only variation is that the theme can occur before the goal, but this is viewed simply as an instance of optional scrambling.
  • Ditransitive Constructions: Creole Languages in a Cross-Linguistic Perspective

    Ditransitive Constructions: Creole Languages in a Cross-Linguistic Perspective

    Creolica, 23 avril 2003 – Ditransitive constructions : Creole languages in a cross-linguistic perspective – Susanne Michaelis et Martin Haspelmath CREOLICA Ditransitive constructions: Creole languages in a cross-linguistic perspective 23 avril 2003, par Susanne Michaelis & Martin Haspelmath (Max-Planck-Institut für evolutionäre Anthropologie, Leipzig) To Annegret Bollée on the occasion of her 65th birthday 1. Introduction The goal of this paper is to describe and explain ditransitive constructions in creole languages. By ditransitive constructions we mean constructions with verbs of transfer like 'give', 'send', 'show' which require two objects, a Recipient (or receiver) and a Theme (or patient), i.e. the entity that is transferred1. Thus our class of ditransitive verbs does not comprise verbs like 'put', 'fill' or 'load', which in addition to a Theme role also have a Location role. In this paper we will mainly concentrate on the verb 'give', which is by far the most frequent ditransitive verb in all languages. There are three major constructions for expressing Recipient and Theme of ditransitive verbs in creole languages. First, there is the Double-Object Construction in which Recipient and Theme are equally zero-marked. Example (1) from English illustrates this construction: Double-Object Construction (DOC): (1) Lea gave Teresa a mango. A second option is the Indirect-Object Construction. An example is given in (2), in which the Recipient is marked by a special preposition: Indirect-Object Construction (IOC): (2) Lea gave the mango to Teresa. 1 We prefer the term "theme", which is not to be confused with "theme" in the (information-structural) theme/rheme-distinction. Creolica, 23 avril 2003 – Ditransitive constructions : Creole languages in a cross-linguistic perspective – Susanne Michaelis et Martin Haspelmath There is yet another possibility to link the two objects in question, the Serial-Verb Construction.
  • SENTENCES Wlth BOTH Lndirect OBJECT and VERB Particles•

    SENTENCES Wlth BOTH Lndirect OBJECT and VERB Particles•

    Edebiyat Dergisi, Yıl:2006, Sayı:15, s.51-58 SENTENCES WlTH BOTH lNDIRECT OBJECT AND VERB PARTICLEs• Arş. Gôr. Ayşen ÖZÇİMEN Selçuk Üniuersitesi, Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi İngiliz Dili ve Edebiyatı Bölümü DOLAYLI NESNE VE EYLEM PARTİKELİ İÇEREN CÜMLELER Özet Bu çalışma, dolaysız ve dolaylı nesne; çift geçişli yüklem partikellerinden oluşan İngilizce cümleleri içermektedir. Özne-yüklem-nesne dizimi göz önünde tutularak İnglllzce cümle yapısı içinde aynı yüklemle nesne ve partikelin yerleri değiştirilerek altı cümle kurulabilir. Ancak bu cümlelerin hepsi dilbilgisel değildir. Bu cümlelerden hangilerinin kabul edilebilir olduğunu belirlemek için ana dili İngilizce olan beş kişiye başuurulmuştur. Katılımcılar, bu cümleler içerisinde partikellerin en az vurgulu olduğu yapılara yönelmişlerdir. Anahtar Kelimeler: partikel, kabul edilebilirlik, çift geçişli yüklem Abstract This study deals wlth Eng//sh sentences with both direct object and indired object and ditransitiue verb partide. Considering the Eng/ish sentence structure, subject-uerb­ object, one can make six sentences using the same verb by moving around the objed and the partide. Not ali of these comblnatlons are accepted as grammaticaf. in order to determine which combinations are acceptable, /ive speakers of English are asked to mark a number of sentences constructed /rom phrasal verbs, for acceptability. Participants prefer sentences where the particles are placed in position of least focus. Key Words: Partide, Acceptable, Ditransitive uerb lntroduction In every language there are sets of rules that allow its speakers to combine words in a language into larger units. Not all the combinations of words are possible in most languages. As a speaker of a language, one can distinguish between the possible sentences and those that are not.
  • The Possessive Dative and the Syntax of Affected Arguments*

    The Possessive Dative and the Syntax of Affected Arguments*

    The possessive dative and the syntax of affected arguments* CRISTINA SÁNCHEZ LÓPEZ Abstract The goal of this paper is to provide an analysis of possessive dative constructions which explains the relationship between possessive datives and inalienable possession relation, on the one hand, and possessive datives and affectedness, on the other hand. I assume that inalienable possession is a kind of part-whole relation syntactically configured as a predication relation headed by a locative preposition. Under this assumption, I propose that the argument denoting the whole can be licensed by an extra verbal projection associated with the semantic feature of affectedness and able to give structural dative case. The analysis can explain some facts of Spanish dative constructions: the existence of diathetical alternations in transitive and unaccusative predicates (between dative/oblique adjunct and nominative/oblique adjunct, respectively), and the existence of (locative) datives within ergative predicates. 1. The problem The so-called possessive dative (cf. Bally 1926; Delbecque & Lamiroy 1996a, b among many others) denotes the possessor of the internal argument of a predicate, be it a direct object as in (1a) or a subject (as in (1b)): (1) a. El gato le arañó la cara. the cat him.DAT1 scratched the face ‘The cat scratched his/her face.’ b. A Juan le duele el brazo. to John him.DAT hurts the arm ‘His arm hurts.’ Possessive dative constructions are common to other languages, like romance languages and German. (2) are examples of transitive constructions analogous to (1a); (3) are examples of unaccusative constructions analogous to (1b): (2) a. ESP. Yo le corté los cabellos.