On extraction and extraposition in German. Edited by Uli Lutz and Jürgen Pafel (original) (raw)
Related papers
Freywald, Ulrike. 2020. Notes on the left periphery of V2 complement clauses in German: Complementiser drop and complementiser doubling. In: Horst Lohnstein & Antonios Tsiknakis (eds.), Verb Second – Grammar Internal and Grammar External Interfaces. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. 123-146, 2020
This contribution deals with verb second (V2) in subordinative contexts, in particular in complementiserless complement clauses. As V2 is considered as a main clause phenomenon in German (and several other Germanic languages) the question arises how much alike to main clauses such embedded V2 clauses actually are. Focussing on German, I will address the syntactic problem whether the domain in front of the finite verb (the "prefield") in V2 complement clauses exhibits the same properties and the same structural layout as in V2 main clauses. Evidently, the prefield of V2 complement clauses is restricted in certain ways, for dislocation processes to the left are very limited. This can be seen as indication of a structurally reduced left periphery comparable to the reduced size of subordinate clauses in general. As a first step to address these issues I discuss a piece of indirect evidence in the present paper: complement clauses with a doubled, or resumptive, complementiser dass 'that' as in er meint, dass, wenn er das erreicht, dass sich dann auch die Erfolge wieder einstellen 'he thinks that if he manages this the successes will ensue again'. Since such clauses display a structurally richer left periphery than complement clauses with a single complementiser they shed light on the syntactic structure of the left edge of complement clauses in general and, by implication, on V2 complement clauses. Relying on data from large written and spoken text corpora I argue that the doubling of complementisers involves recursion of FinP (containing the complementisers) together with the topmost topic position(s) of the middle-field. This analysis is supported by the fact that complementiser doubling is not always a repair strategy to solve processing difficulties. It typically involves a specific type of sandwiched material in-between the two complementisers, namely delimitative expressions, or more precisely: framesetting and contrastive topics. Hence,
Topicalization and Other Puzzles of German Syntax
In: G. Grewendorf & W.Sternefeld eds. Scrambling and Barriers. Amsterdam: Benjamins (p. 93-112), 1990
This paper analyzes the syntactic properties of sentences with a V-projection in clause initial position, so-called VP-topicalization. The analysis pursues two theoretic claims. First, it will be claimed that this construction provides an argument for a representational conception of Generative Grammar (cf. Koster 1987) and against the standard GB-model with derivation by movement. It will be shown that VP-topicalization defies a derivational analysis. Secondly, this construction provides evidence for the claim that in German the subject is internal to V-max. In section 2, the relevant syntactic aspects of the construction are introduced. Section 3 provides arguments that a movement analysis cannot capture the relevant generalizations. A representational account is presented in section 4, together with an explanation of the syntactic behavior described in section 2. Section 5 discusses some consequences of the representational account. Key words: VP-internal subject; movement paradox; VP topicalization, representational versus derivational accounts.
No escape from the island: On extraction from complement wh-clauses in English
The Sign of the V: Papers in Honour of Sten Vikner
In theoretical syntax, English complement wh-clause are considered syntactic islands which block extraction in an asymmetric way: Argument extraction is more acceptable than adjunct extraction. Though this pattern is often assumed to be universal, studies have shown that Danish (and other Mainland Scandinavian languages) may be exceptions. It has also been argued that the patterns of (un)acceptability are biased by expert intuitions. We present data from 100 native speakers of English which confi rms (i) that English complement wh-clauses are islands, (ii) that there is a (subtle) argumentadjunct asymmetry, and (iii) that this acceptability pattern is not due to participant bias. Together with earlier fi ndings on Danish, these results are compatible with an island account that relies on parametric variation in the possibility of CP-recursion. 1 We would like to thank Sten Vikner for many years of interesting discussions on comparative generative syntax, movement and islands, and on the nature of language in general. It has been our pleasure and privilege to have him fi rst as our teacher, then as our supervisor, and eventually as our colleague and friend. Many thanks to Hubert Haider for his constructive review and to the participants at the
Verbal Derivatives and Process Types in Transitivity Configurations of English and German Clauses
Facta Universitatis Series: Linguistics and Literature, 2016
At the level of the clause as representation we reconsider the proposition of Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) that there exists continuity between grammar and lexis. In English and German clauses, we shall examine verbal derivatives formed through prefixation with regard to the process types they actualize in the clauses. Prefixation involves the modification of the semantic properties of the base, which requires different configurations of semantic roles in a clause in functional terms. The idea that lexicogrammar is a core of the wording of the clause will be examined in relation to morphologically induced semantic modification resulting in the change in Transitivity configurations with different process types actualized by the base and the verbal derivative.
On Case and clauses: Subordination and the Spell-Out of non-terminals
Proceedings of the First Central European …, 2012
The main idea suggested in this paper is that subordinate clauses need to be Case licensed (namely embedded under KPs) and that various patterns of "fusion" within a layered functional skeleton obliterate that process. I will provide two types of empirical support for this proposal. First, I will show that this proposal correctly allows for nominal elements to stand in for a whole embedded clause (using the mechanism of Phrasal Spell-Out, Starke 2009; Neeleman & Szendroi 2007). Second, I will show that a wide range of typologically unrelated languages overtly exhibit Case marking on complementizers. Also, direct evidence against the identity of relative pronouns and complementizers / subordinators, possibly suggested -prima facie- by the layered model proposed here, will be provided here with the aid of data from Akkadian, Germanic languages and West Iranian languages.