Complement Clauses and Complementation Systems: A Cross-Linguistic Study of Grammatical Organization Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades eines Doctor philosophiae (Dr. phil.) vorgelegt dem Rat der Philosophischen Fakultät der Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena von Karsten Schmidtke-Bode, M.A. geb. am 26.06.1981 in Eisenach Gutachter: 1. Prof. Dr. Holger Diessel (Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena) 2. Prof. Dr. Volker Gast (Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena) 3. Prof. Dr. Martin Haspelmath (MPI für Evolutionäre Anthropologie Leipzig) Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 16.12.2014 Contents Abbreviations and notational conventions iii 1 Introduction 1 2 The phenomenon of complementation 7 2.1 Introduction 7 2.2 Argument status 9 2.2.1 Complement clauses and argument-structure typology 10 2.2.2 On the notion of ‘argument’ 21 2.3 On the notion of ‘clause’ 26 2.3.1 Complementation constructions as biclausal units 27 2.3.2 The internal structure of clauses 31 2.4 The semantic content of complement clauses 34 2.5 Environments of complementation 36 2.5.1 Predicate classes as environments of complementation 37 2.5.2 Environments studied in the present work 39 3 Data and methods 48 3.1 Sampling and sources of information 48 3.2 Selection and nature of the data points 53 3.3 Storage and analysis of the data 59 4 The internal structure of complementation patterns 62 4.1 Introduction 62 4.2 The morphological status of the predicate 64 4.2.1 Nominalization 65 4.2.2 Converbs 68 4.2.3 Participles 70 4.2.4 Bare verb stems 71 4.2.5 Other dependent forms 72 4.2.6 Distributional aspects of the different verb forms 74 4.2.7 Theoretical aspects of the different verb forms 77 4.3 Predicate modification 78 4.3.1 Tense-aspect-mood (TAM) inflection 78 4.3.2 Manner satellites 85 4.4 Actant modification 86 4.4.1 The coding of the complement subject 87 4.4.1.1 Same-subject contexts 87 4.4.1.2 Different-subject contexts 94 Excursus: Raising 98 4.4.2 The coding of the internal direct object 108 4.4.3 Finding patterns of argument-structural coding 110 4.5 Boundary-marking devices and nominal flagging 114 4.6 Degrees of de-/re-categorization in complementation systems 121 | ii 5 Syntagmatic relations to the matrix 129 5.1 Introduction 129 5.2 The positional patterns of S-clauses 130 5.2.1 Establishing positioning patterns 130 5.2.2 The conformity type 135 5.2.3 Partial or full type shifts 138 5.2.4 Adding flexibility 142 5.2.5 Constraining flexibility 145 5.3 The positional patterns of A-clauses 147 5.4 Discussion 154 5.5 Placeholders of subject clauses in the matrix 171 6 Selectional relations to the matrix 181 6.1 Introduction 181 6.2 Determining co-occurrence patterns 182 6.3 Productivity and coding preferences of CTP classes 189 6.3.1 Overview 189 6.3.2 Environments in P-function 194 6.3.3 Environments in S-function 201 6.3.4 Environments in A-function 210 6.3.5 Summary: General findings 220 6.4 Syntactic functions of complementation patterns 229 6.4.1 Complementation patterns as objects 229 6.4.2 Complementation patterns as subjects 234 7 Emergence, diffusion and systemic organization of complementation patterns 242 7.1 Introduction 242 7.2 Emergence and diffusion 243 7.2.1 The cross-linguistic clustering of complementation patterns 243 7.2.2 The cross-linguistic clustering of complementation environments 271 7.2.3 Résumé 278 7.3 Outlook: Organizational differences in complementation systems 280 Envoi 291 Appendix 293 Bibliography 305 Curriculum Vitae and Declaration of Academic Integrity 328 | iii Abbreviations and notational conventions For each example sentence from a language other than English, an idiomatic translation is provided alongside a literal (interlinear ‘morpheme-by-morpheme’) one. The interlinear abbreviations given below largely conform to the Leipzig Glossing Rules, but also contain a number of modifications and particularly additions. I would like to thank two student assistants, Antonia Hülsebeck and Julia Kossiski, for their help in glossing the examples and synchronizing interlinear abbreviations across the sample languages. Abbreviations for interlinear morpheme translation 1, 2, 3, 4 1st, 2nd, 3rd,, 4th person COP copula I, II, III, IV, V morphological classes CORE non-nominative core A transitive agent (agent-like case/article (Tukang Besi) argument of canonical transitive CR current relevance verb) CTP contemporative mood (West ABL ablative Greenlandic) ABS absolutive DAT dative ACC accusative DEB debitive ACT action (nominalizer), active DECL declarative ADD additive DEF definite ADESS adessive DEM demonstrative AF A-form (inflectional form in DEP dependent Urarina) DESID desiderative AFF affirmative DETR detransitivizer AFR aforementioned DF D-form (inflectional form in AGT agent(ive) Urarina) ALL allative DIR directional, directive, AN animate directed; direct (evidential) ANT anterior DIST distal, distance ANTIP antipassive DO direct object AOR aorist DS different subject (switch- APPAR apparential (evidentiality) reference) APPL applicative DU dual ART article DUR durative ASSOC associative EF E-form (inflectional form in AUX auxiliary Urarina) BARE bare pronoun (Lao) EFM Euchee female (Yuchi) BEN benefactive EM Euchee male (Yuchi) CAU causal EMPH emphatic CAUS causative ENC encouragement (Yuchi) CERT certainty ERG ergative CLF classifier EXCES excessive CLIT clitic EXP experiential (aspect) CNTR contrast(ive) EXT extent of action COBL oblique complementizing EZ Ezafe (Persian) case (Kayardild) F feminine COM comitative FACT factitive COMP complementizer FOC focus COMPL completive FUT future CONN connector, connective GEN genitive CONT continuous GL goal CONV converb HAB habitual | iv HOD hodiernal (past, future) PCL paucal HON honorific PL plural HRS hearsay (evidentiality) PNCT punctual HUM human POEL postelative IMAG imaginative POL polite IMP imperative POSS possessive IMPF imperfect PREVRB preverb(al) marker IMPS impersonal PRF perfect INAN inanimate PRFV perfective INCH inchoative PROG progressive aspect INCL inclusive PROX proximal, proximate IND indicative PRS present INDEF indefinite PSNV presentative INESS inessive PST past INF infinitive PTCP participle INFL inflectional complex PURP purpose, purposive INFR inferential Q question/interrogative INS instrumental QUOT quotative INT intentional (mood, aspect) RECP reciprocal INTR intransitive, intransitivizer REDUP reduplication INTS intensifier REFL reflexive INVOL involuntary REL relative clause marker IO indirect object REM remote (past, future) IPFV imperfective REP reportative, reported IRR irrealis RES resultative ITER iterative RL realis L low tone S intransitive subject (single LG local gender (Motuna) argument of canonical intransitive verb) LGR L-grade (aspectual class) SBJ subject LINK linker SBJV subjunctive LOC locative SBST substantivizer LOCUT locutor marker (Awa Pit) SEQ sequential, consecutive LOG logophoric SG singular M masculine SHRT short MID middle voice SIT sitting position (Yuchi) MSD masdar (gerund) SPAC spacer (Barasano) N neuter SS same subject (switch- N- non- (e.g. NSG non-singular, NPST non-past, NF non-feminine) reference) NEG negative, negation STAT stative NGR N-grade (aspectual class) SUB subordinate, subordinator NOM nominative SUP supine NOMFUT nominal future TEMP temporal NMLZ nominalizer TERM terminative NR near (tense or aspect) TH thematic vowel or consonant NV neutral version (Georgian) TNS tense OBJ object TOD today (past tense) OBL oblique TOP topic OPT optative TR transitive, transitivizer P transitive patient (patient-like UG undergoer argument of canonical transitive V verb verb) VAL valency increaser PASS passive VEN ventive PAUS pausal VIS visual (evidential) | v Symbols In both original language and interlinear morpheme translation: x y word boundary between x and y x-y morpheme boundary between x and y x+y x and y form a compound or a derivative stem x=y x and y are joined by clisis xi…yi x and y are coreferential elements In original language only: ø null expression of meaning [x] x is a syntactic constituent (complement clauses are generally bracketed this way) In interlinear morpheme translation only: (x) x is not overtly marked in the original (i.e. null expression of meaning) x.y x and y are grammatical (sub-)categories of one original language morpheme Notational conventions In example sentences, structures to be highlighted are printed in boldface. Language-particular lexemes or grammatical markers are generally given in italics. The meaning of linguistic elements is usually given in ‘inverted commas’. The names of linguistic categories are capitalized when reference is being made to a language-specific category (e.g. ‘the German Infinitive’), but appear in non-capitalized form when the category is being used in a cross-linguistic sense (e.g. ‘infinitives commonly derive from purposive action nominals’). Ungrammaticality is indicated by an *asterisk, and semantically odd sentences carry a ?question mark. Spelling conventions The present manuscript uses British English spelling throughout. Where variation in regard to the usage of <s> and <z> is found even within British English (e.g. organise/organize), the spelling with <z> is given preference. 1 Introduction The present study is a cross-linguistic investigation into the grammar of complement clauses and the organization of complementation systems. It originated in the context of a larger research project on the typology of complex sentences, conducted from November 2007 onwards at the University of Jena. I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Holger Diessel for offering me to collaborate in this project over an extended period. It is this long-term support which has made it possible to collect the amount of data that underlies the present study, to see it in the larger context of the entire subordination systems of the languages to be investigated, and to thoroughly develop the theoretical ideas that will be brought to bear on the interpretation of the data. The primary goal of the larger project is to provide a comprehensive typological analysis of the linear structure of complex sentences, i.e.