Non-canonical postverbal subjects (original) (raw)
2019, The Italian Journal of Linguistics
AI-generated Abstract
This paper investigates non-canonical postverbal subjects, focusing on how various languages exhibit different syntactic and pragmatic constraints. It highlights the significance of the role of subject canonicality and its effects on syntactic behavior across languages. The research includes insights gathered from a workshop and aims to enhance understanding of non-canonical subjects in relation to alignment, focus structure, and subject coding, encouraging further exploration into unresolved aspects of subject canonicality.
Sign up for access to the world's latest research.
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Related papers
In this paper I have examined several instances in which an oblique constituent acquires canonical subject marking, i.e. nominative case and verbal agreement (in an accusative language). ese instances show that an oblique constituent may acquire subject coding properties without being beforehand endowed with subject behavioural properties, if two requirements are met: (i) this oblique constituent must exhibit a considerable functional overlap with the prototypical subject in the given language and, (ii) there must be either no canonically case-marked subject in the construction at all, or the coding subject properties must be assigned to a constituent that has less functional-semantic overlap with the prototypical subject than the oblique constituent. Furthermore, I claim that there is oen some minor semantic change concomitant with the acquisition of subject coding properties. I have also introduced the control over the pre-stage property (CoP) which is a weaker entailment than Dowty's (1991) volitional involvement in event or state. It only denotes whether or not the experiencer had the choice to resist the experience to come about. Diierently from Dowty's (1991) approach, which presupposes that the proto-role entailments are lexical and provided primarily by the predicate, it is assumed that some of the proto-role entailments may also stem from the case frame. is becomes especially obvious with the labile predicates that allow for more than one case frame, each resulting in diierent sets of the proto-role entailments.
Subjecthood and the notion of instantiation [Taverniers 2005]
Language Sciences, 2005
This paper deals with the concept of grammatical subjecthood, and focuses on different perspectives from which this grammatical function has been defined and described in a number of linguistic schools. Properties that have been assigned to the Subject function are grouped into four dimensions (i.e. predication, mood, voice/diathesis, and theme), and it is argued that each of these Subject dimensions can be explained on the basis of the notion of instantiation, as understood in cognitive grammar. The cornerstone of this argument is Davidse’s cognitive-functional definition of the Subject as Instantiator. By realigning Davidse’s interpersonal characterization of the Instantiator with Halliday’s triad of interpersonal, ideational and textual metafunctions of language, I argue that the Subject/Instantiator is the primary syntagm-forming element for realizing processual meanings.
Subjecthood and the notion of instantiation
Language Sciences, 2005
This paper deals with the concept of grammatical subjecthood, and focuses on different perspectives from which this grammatical function has been defined and described in a number of linguistic schools. Properties that have been assigned to the Subject function are grouped into four dimensions (i.e. predication, mood, voice/diathesis, and theme), and it is argued that each of these Subject dimensions can be explained on the basis of the notion of instantiation, as understood in cognitive grammar. The cornerstone of this argument is Davidse's cognitive-functional definition of the Subject as Instantiator. By realigning Davidse's interpersonal characterization of the Instantiator with Halliday's triad of interpersonal, ideational and textual metafunctions of language, I argue that the Subject/Instantiator is the primary syntagm-forming element for realizing processual meanings.
The role of non-canonical subjects in the overall grammar of a language
Constructional Approaches to Language, 2015
Where a licence is displayed above, please note the terms and conditions of the licence govern your use of this document. When citing, please reference the published version. Take down policy While the University of Birmingham exercises care and attention in making items available there are rare occasions when an item has been uploaded in error or has been deemed to be commercially or otherwise sensitive.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.