Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Volume I: Clause
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more
Recommended publications
-
Differentiating Left Dislocated and Tripartite Verbless Clauses in Biblical Hebrew1
Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics, Vol. 48, 2017, 223-238 doi: 10.5774/48-0-293 At the interface of syntax and prosody: Differentiating left dislocated and tripartite verbless clauses in Biblical Hebrew1 Jacobus A. Naudé Department of Hebrew, University of the Free State, South Africa E-mail: [email protected] Cynthia L. Miller-Naudé Department of Hebrew, University of the Free State, South Africa [email protected] Abstract The so-called tripartite verbless clause in Biblical Hebrew consists of two nominal phrases and a pronominal element. Three analyses of the pronominal element have been advanced, each with implications for understanding the structure of the sentence. A first approach has been to view the pronominal element as a copular constituent, which serves only to link the two nominal constituents in a predication (Albrecht 1887, 1888; Brockelman 1956; and Kummerouw 2013). A second approach has been to view the pronominal element as the resumptive element of a dislocated constituent (Gesenius, Kautzsch and Cowley 1910; Andersen 1970; Zewi 1996, 1999, 2000; Joüon-Muraoka 2006). A third approach combines the first and second approaches and is represented by the work of Khan (1988, 2006) and Holmstedt and Jones (2014). A fourth approach views the pronominal element as a “last resort” syntactic strategy—the pronominal element is a pronominal clitic, which provides agreement features for the subject (Naudé 1990, 1993, 1994, 1999, 2002). The pronominal element is obligatory when the nominal predicate is a referring noun phrase—the pronominal clitic is used to prevent ambiguity in the assignment of subject and predicate (see Doron 1986; Borer 1983). -
Copyright © 2014 Richard Charles Mcdonald All Rights Reserved. The
Copyright © 2014 Richard Charles McDonald All rights reserved. The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary has permission to reproduce and disseminate this document in any form by any means for purposes chosen by the Seminary, including, without, limitation, preservation or instruction. GRAMMATICAL ANALYSIS OF VARIOUS BIBLICAL HEBREW TEXTS ACCORDING TO A TRADITIONAL SEMITIC GRAMMAR __________________ A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary __________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy __________________ by Richard Charles McDonald December 2014 APPROVAL SHEET GRAMMATICAL ANALYSIS OF VARIOUS BIBLICAL HEBREW TEXTS ACCORDING TO A TRADITIONAL SEMITIC GRAMMAR Richard Charles McDonald Read and Approved by: __________________________________________ Russell T. Fuller (Chair) __________________________________________ Terry J. Betts __________________________________________ John B. Polhill Date______________________________ I dedicate this dissertation to my wife, Nancy. Without her support, encouragement, and love I could not have completed this arduous task. I also dedicate this dissertation to my parents, Charles and Shelly McDonald, who instilled in me the love of the Lord and the love of His Word. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS.............................................................................................vi LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................vii -
Romani Syntactic Typology Evangelia Adamou, Yaron Matras
Romani Syntactic Typology Evangelia Adamou, Yaron Matras To cite this version: Evangelia Adamou, Yaron Matras. Romani Syntactic Typology. Yaron Matras; Anton Tenser. The Palgrave Handbook of Romani Language and Linguistics, Springer, pp.187-227, 2020, 978-3-030-28104- 5. 10.1007/978-3-030-28105-2_7. halshs-02965238 HAL Id: halshs-02965238 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-02965238 Submitted on 13 Oct 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Romani syntactic typology Evangelia Adamou and Yaron Matras 1. State of the art This chapter presents an overview of the principal syntactic-typological features of Romani dialects. It draws on the discussion in Matras (2002, chapter 7) while taking into consideration more recent studies. In particular, we draw on the wealth of morpho- syntactic data that have since become available via the Romani Morpho-Syntax (RMS) database.1 The RMS data are based on responses to the Romani Morpho-Syntax questionnaire recorded from Romani speaking communities across Europe and beyond. We try to take into account a representative sample. We also take into consideration data from free-speech recordings available in the RMS database and the Pangloss Collection. -
Polyvalent Case, Geometric Hierarchies, and Split Ergativity
[For Jackie Bunting, Sapna Desai, Robert Peachey, Chris Straughn, and Zuzana Tomkova (eds.), (2006) Proceedings of the 42nd annual meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, Chicago, Ill.] Polyvalent case, geometric hierarchies, and split ergativity JASON MERCHANT University of Chicago Prominence hierarchy effects such as the animacy hierarchy and definiteness hierarchy have been a puzzle for formal treatments of case since they were first described systematically in Silverstein 1976. Recently, these effects have received more sustained attention from generative linguists, who have sought to capture them in treatments grounded in well-understood mechanisms for case assignment cross-linguistically. These efforts have taken two broad directions. In the first, Aissen 1999, 2003 has integrated the effects elegantly into a competition model of grammar using OT formalisms, where iconicity effects emerge from constraint conjunctions between constraints on fixed universal hierarchies (definiteness, animacy, person, grammatical role) and a constraint banning overt morphological expression of case. The second direction grows out of the work of Jelinek and Diesing, and is found most articulated in Jelinek 1993, Jelinek and Carnie 2003, and Carnie 2005. This work takes as its starting point the observation that word order is sometimes correlated with the hierarchies as well, and works backwards from that to conclusions about phrase structure geometries. In this paper, I propose a particular implementation of this latter direction, and explore its consequences for our understanding of the nature of case assignment. If hierarchy effects are due to positional differences in phrase structures, then, I argue, the attested cross-linguistic differences fall most naturally out if the grammars of these languages countenance polyvalent case—that is, assignment of more than one case value to a single nominal phrase. -
Prayer Cards (709)
Pray for the Nations Pray for the Nations A Che in China A'ou in China Population: 43,000 Population: 2,800 World Popl: 43,000 World Popl: 2,800 Total Countries: 1 Total Countries: 1 People Cluster: Tibeto-Burman, other People Cluster: Tai Main Language: Ache Main Language: Chinese, Mandarin Main Religion: Ethnic Religions Main Religion: Ethnic Religions Status: Unreached Status: Unreached Evangelicals: 0.00% Evangelicals: 0.00% Chr Adherents: 0.00% Chr Adherents: 0.00% Scripture: Translation Needed Scripture: Complete Bible www.joshuaproject.net Source: Operation China, Asia Harvest www.joshuaproject.net Source: Operation China, Asia Harvest "Declare his glory among the nations." Psalm 96:3 "Declare his glory among the nations." Psalm 96:3 Pray for the Nations Pray for the Nations A-Hmao in China Achang in China Population: 458,000 Population: 35,000 World Popl: 458,000 World Popl: 74,000 Total Countries: 1 Total Countries: 2 People Cluster: Miao / Hmong People Cluster: Tibeto-Burman, other Main Language: Miao, Large Flowery Main Language: Achang Main Religion: Christianity Main Religion: Ethnic Religions Status: Significantly reached Status: Partially reached Evangelicals: 75.0% Evangelicals: 7.0% Chr Adherents: 80.0% Chr Adherents: 7.0% Scripture: Complete Bible Scripture: Complete Bible www.joshuaproject.net www.joshuaproject.net Source: Anonymous Source: Wikipedia "Declare his glory among the nations." Psalm 96:3 "Declare his glory among the nations." Psalm 96:3 Pray for the Nations Pray for the Nations Achang, Husa in China Adi -
Integration and Differentiation As Distinct Dimensions of Personality
W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 2015 Integration and Differentiation as Distinct Dimensions of Personality Victoria Claire Oleynick College of William & Mary - Arts & Sciences Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the Personality and Social Contexts Commons Recommended Citation Oleynick, Victoria Claire, "Integration and Differentiation as Distinct Dimensions of Personality" (2015). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539626810. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21220/s2-3tag-gx47 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Integration and Differentiation as Distinct Dimensions of Personality Victoria Claire Oleynick Broomall, Pennsylvania Bachelor of Arts, Lehigh University, 2010 A Thesis presented to the Graduate Faculty of the College of William and Mary in Candidacy for the Degree of Master of Arts Department of Psychology The College of William and Mary APPROVAL PAGE This Thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts A j C (H jj. AWr [l Victoria Claire Oleynick P* Approved by the Committee, July, 2015 JA/L Committee Chair Dr. Todd M. Thrash College of William and Mary \ L0r Jpanna Sfchug Ccylege of WLIJ&m and Mary Dr. D anielle Dallaire College of William and Mary COMPLIANCE PAGE Research approved by The Protection of Human Subjects Committee (PHSC) Protocol number(s): PHSC-2015-04-08-10340-tmthra PHSC-2014-10-02-9830-tmthra PHSC-2015-03-25-10299-tmthra Date(s) of approval: 4/23/2015 10/5/2014 4/3/2015 ABSTRACT Despite longstanding interest in integration and differentiation, these constructs have not been formally conceptualized and measured as dimensions of personality. -
Grammatical Categories and Word Classes Pdf
Grammatical categories and word classes pdf Continue 목차 qualities and phrases about qualities and dalakhin scared qualities are afraid of both hard long only the same, identical adjectives and common adverbs phrases and common adverbs comparison and believe adverbs class sayings of place and movement outside away and away from returning inside outside close up the shifts of time and frequency easily confused the words above or more? Across, over or through? Advice or advice? Affect or affect? Every mother of every? Every mother wholly? Allow, allow or allow? Almost or almost? Single, lonely, alone? Along or side by side? Already, still or yet? Also, as well as or too? Alternative (ly), alternative (ly) though or though? Everything or together? Amount, number or quantity? Any more or any more? Anyone, anyone or anything? Apart from or with the exception? arise or rise? About or round? Stir or provoke? As or like? Because or since then? When or when? Did she go or she?. Start or start? Next to or next? Between or between? Born or endured? Bring, take and bring can, can or may? Classic or classic? Come or go? Looking or looking? Make up, compose or compose? Content or content? Different from or different from or different from? Do you do or make? Down or down or down? During or for? All or all? East or East; North or North? Economic or economic? Efficient or effective? Older, older or older, older? The end or the end? Private or specific? Every one or everybody? Except or with exception? Expect, hope or wait? An experience or an experiment? Fall or fall? Far or far? Farther, farther or farther, farther? Farther (but not farther) fast, fast or fast? Fell or did you feel? Female or female; male or male? Finally, finally, finally or finally? First, first or at first? Fit or suit? Next or next? For mother since then? Forget or leave? Full or full? Funny or funny? Do you go or go? Grateful or thankful? Listen or listen (to)? High or long? Historical or historical? A house or a house? How is he...? Or what is .. -
Ed 205 72 Th 810 457
DOCUMENT RESUME ED 205 72 TH 810 457 AUTHOR Mullis, Ina V. S.: Mellon, John C. TTTL2 Guidelines for Describing Three.Aspects of Writing: .Syntax, Cohesion and Mechanics. INSTITUTION Education Commission of the States, 'Denver, Colo. National Assessment of Educational Progress. SPONS AGENCY, National Inst. of Education (ED1, Washington, D.C. REFORT NO NAEP-10-W-50 PUB DATE Jun 80' GIANT NIE-G-80-0003 NOTE 44. EDP! pPicr HF01/PCO2 Plus Postage. .D17SCRIPTORS Elementary Secondary Education: Essays; *Evaluation Methods: National Competency Tests: *National Programs: Scoring: *Writing Evaluation: *Writing Skills IDENTIFIEPS *National Assessment of Educational Progress: *Third Writing Assessment (19791 ABSTRACT The approaches used by the National Assessment of rducational Progress (NAEP1 to characterize syntax, cohesion and mechanics are described. These approaches are different fLom the Primary Trait System,-a scheme used by NAM) for rating essays. Part one of the publication describes the procedures NAEP used to characterize differences in syntactic structures. This Approach is bssed bn an analysis of the grammatical forms in which sentences are cast. Part two describes the procedure used to rate the cohesiveness of each essay. This approach is concerted with the number and variety of devices used to link-and7carry forward developing ideas. Part three,presents the procedures NAEP used to characterize writing mechanics. This approach accounts for matters of manuscript form. The systems used to tally error rates are essentially unchanged from those used in earlier assessments, with some.refinements, (Author/GKI 'Procedures (Analysis)(Conceptual) .1 *******************t************************************************ * 'Peproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can .be made .from *he original document. -
The Case for Unipartite Clauses. a View from Spoken Israeli Hebrew
Rev. Estud. Ling., Belo Horizonte, v. 26, n. 4, p. 1675-1726, 2018 Syntax, Prosody, Discourse and Information Structure: The Case for Unipartite Clauses. A View from Spoken Israeli Hebrew Sintaxe, prosódia, discurso e estrutura informacional: o caso das orações unipartidas. Uma visão do hebraico falado em Israel Shlomo Izre’el Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel [email protected] Abstract: The canonical view of clause requires that it include predication. Utterances that do not fit into this view because they lack a subject are usually regarded as elliptical or as non-sentential utterances. Adopting an integrative approach to the analysis of spoken language that includes syntax, prosody, discourse structure, and information structure, it is suggested that the only necessary and sufficient component constituting a clause is a predicate domain, carrying the informational load of the clause within the discourse context, including a “new” element in the discourse, carrying modality, and focused. Utterances that have not been hitherto analyzed as consisting of full clauses or sentences will be reevaluated. The utterance, being a discourse unit defined by prosodic boundaries, can thus be viewed as the default domain of a clause or a sentence, when the latter are determined according to the suggested integrative approach. Keywords: syntax; clause structure; information structure; discourse; context; prosody; utterance; history of linguistics; spoken Israeli Hebrew. Resumo: A posição canônica sobre as orações requer que elas contenham uma predição. Enunciados que não se encaixem nessa visão porque não possuem um sujeito são usualmente considerados elípticos ou como enunciados não-oracionais. Adotando uma visão integrativa para a análise da língua falada, que inclui a sintaxe, a prosódia, a estrutura discursiva e a estrutura informacional, sugere-se que o único componente eISSN: 2237-2083 DOI: 10.17851/2237-2083.26.4.1675-1726 1676 Rev. -
CHAPTER Nouns and Modifiers
Ch14_pp152–162.qxd 6/13/06 9:43 AM Page 152 CHAPTER 14 Nouns and Modifiers Overview This chapter deals with many ways to modify a noun. It begins with the terminology “adjective” and “noun”; then it shows that a noun can modify another noun. Students learn the order of nouns and their modifiers, some of which come before and some of which follow the noun. Next, students practice using multiple modifiers and learn some new vocabulary. This is followed by practice with phrases of quantity that modify nouns. Students then study how to solve subject-verb agreement problems that arise when they use these phrases. Indefinite pronouns and the use of every follow. Finally, students are introduced to the way adjectives are used with linking verbs and how common adverbs are contrasted with adjectives. □ EXERCISE 1, p. 405. Noun and adjective practice. This exercise is a quick review of what students already know about nouns and adjectives. It can be done in class. Its purpose is to check on students’ understanding of the grammar terms “noun” and “adjective” before proceeding with the chapter. ANSWERS: 3. ADJ 4. NOUN 5. NOUN 6. NOUN 7. ADJ 8. NOUN 9. ADJ 10. NOUN 11. ADJ 12. NOUN CHART 14-1: MODIFYING NOUNS WITH ADJECTIVES AND NOUNS • The word modify is explained in Chart 6-2, p. 161, in the student book. • One unusual feature of English is that a noun can modify another noun. These nouns are called “noun adjuncts” and do not add any letters or sounds. Call attention to the incorrect example in (c) where the modifier has been given a plural form. -
ENGLISH AS an ANALYTIC LANGUAGE – the Importance of Word Order
ENGLISH AS AN ANALYTIC LANGUAGE – the importance of word order In linguistic typology, an analytic language is a language that primarily conveys relationships between words in sentences by way of helper words (particles, prepositions, etc.) and word order, as opposed to utilizing inflections (changing the form of a word to convey its role in the sentence) (Wiki) AFFIRMATIVE SENTENCES subject verb(s) object I speak English I can speak English subject verb(s) indirect object direct object place time I will tell you the story at school tomorrow. NEGATIVE SENTENCE The word order in negative sentences is the same as in affirmative sentences. Note, however, that in negative sentences we usually need an auxiliary verb*: subject verbs indirect object direct object place time I will not tell you the story at school tomorrow. *An auxiliary verb helps the main (full) verb and is also called a "helping verb." With auxiliary verbs, you can write sentences in different tenses, moods, or voices. Auxiliary verbs are: be, do, have, will, shall, would, should, can, could, may, might, must, ought, etc. INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES In questions, the word order subject-verbs-object is the same as in affirmative sentences. The only thing that is different is that you usually have to put the auxiliary verb (or the main verb “be”) before the subject. Interrogatives (Question Words) are put at the beginning of the sentences: interrogative auxiliary *verb subject other verb(s) indirect object direct object place time What would you like to tell me Did you have a party in your flat yesterday? When were you here? Question Words in English The most common question words in English are the following: WHO is only used when referring to people. -
To Ba Or Not to Ba Differential Object Marking in Chinese
î To ba or not to ba Differential Object Marking in Chinese Geertje van Bergen I To ba or not to ba Differential Object Marking in Chinese Geertje van Bergen PIONIER Project Case Cross-linguistically Department of Linguistics Radboud University Nijmegen P.O. Box 9103 6500 HD Nijmegen the Netherlands www.ru.nl/pionier [email protected] III To ba or not to ba Differential Object Marking in Chinese Master’s Thesis General Linguistics Faculty of Arts Radboud University Nijmegen November 2006 Geertje van Bergen 0136433 First supervisor: Dr. Helen de Hoop Second supervisor: Prof. Dr. Pieter Muysken V Acknowledgements I would like to thank Lotte Hogeweg and the members of the PIONIER-project Case Cross-linguistically for the nice cooperation during the past year; many thanks go to Monique Lamers for the pleasant teamwork. I am especially grateful to Yangning for the close cooperation in Beijing and Nijmegen, which has laid the foundation of ¡ £¢ this thesis. Many thanks also go to Sander Lestrade for clarifying conversations over countless cups of coffee. I would like to thank Pieter Muysken for his willingness to be my second supervisor and for his useful comments on an earlier version. Also, I gratefully acknowledge the Netherlands Organisation of Scientific Research (NWO) for financial support, grant 220-70-003, principal investigator Helen de Hoop (PIONIER-project ‘Case cross-linguistically’). Especially, I would like to thank Helen de Hoop for her great support and supervision, for keeping me from losing courage and keeping me on schedule, for her indispensable comments and for all the opportunities she offered me to develop my research skills.