Topicalization and Other Puzzles of German Syntax (original) (raw)

Verb movement and topicalization in German

In: Horst Lohnstein & Antonios Tsiknakis (eds): Verb Second - Grammar Internal and Grammar External Interface. De Gruyter Mouton, 2020

This paper deals with the contribution of finite verb movement and topicalization to the meaning (sentence mood) of declarative and interrogative clause types in German. Assuming a CP/IP clause structure, I will argue that verb movement to C is triggered by a clause type feature [F1] which relates the descriptive content of the clause to the common information represented in a doxastic conversational background of the discourse context. Relying on the concept of decidedness from Farkas (2003) and the related concept of openness, I will claim that [F1] presupposes that the descriptive content of the clause is undecided/open relative to the relevant conversational background in the given context and that it is supposed to become decided/closed relative to the relevant background in a future context following the context which is projected through the anchoring of the clause in the given context. I will also argue that topicalization is triggered by a feature [F2] which modifies the interpretation of [F1] such that the combination of [F1] and [F2] presupposes that the descriptive content is undecided relative to the relevant conversational background of the given context and that it is supposed to become positively decided relative to that background in the context which is projected through the anchoring of the clause. The proposed theory maintains a balanced position between a maximalist approach to sentence mood presented in Altmann (1987, 1993) and a minimalist approach presented in Portner (2005). It also shows how the use potential of the discussed clause types in German can be derived from the interpretation of the involved linguistic means in a compositional manner.

Phrasal typology and the interaction of topicalization, wh-movement, and extraposition

Ever since Chomsky's "On Wh-Movement" it has been assumed that topicalization and wh-question formation can be analyzed as instances of the same operation. Leaving certain features aside, this proposal carries over to the analysis of unbounded dependency constructions in HPSG since structurally, topicalization does not differ from wh-question formation in the analysis suggested in Pollard & Sag (1994:157-163). 1 In the present paper, we challenge this assumption and suggest an alternative analysis of unbounded dependency constructions. Here, topicalization and wh-question formation are considered as structurally different at least in certain languages. They may, however, be structurally identical in other languages. This difference is empirically reflected in patterns of relative clause extraposition. As has been pointed out by Culicover & Rochemont (1990:28), an extraposed relative clause must not take an antecedent contained in a VP if the VP is topicalized but the relative clause is not. 2 1 It must be made explicit, though, that Pollard/Sag (1994) assume that these operations involve different combinations of attributes of the sign. Moreover, Pollard/Sag (1994) illustrate unbounded dependency constructions with topicalization cases and leave a detailed analysis of wh-question formation open. It is still a tacit assumption of this work that both wh-question formation and topicalization are syntactically realized through the Head-Filler Schema (Pollard/Sag 1994:164).

Discourse, sentence grammar and the left periphery of the clause

Further Advances in Pragmatics and Philosophy

The term left periphery refers to that area on the left of the subject, in the syntactic representation of a clause, where the relationships with the context are encoded. In this work I propose a syntactic analysis that goes beyond mere sentence grammar and integrates prosodic and discourse features as well. On the one hand, this move accounts for some observations previously not fully understood, such as the anomalous syntactic properties of Clitic Left Dislocation and Hanging Topic, their differences with respect to Focus and their similarities with parentheticals. On the other, it aims at providing a theory of grammar able to encode the relationships between sentence grammar, context and bigger units such as discourses. prosody. In section 5, I contrast Clitic Left Dislocation with another kind of topic, the so-called Hanging Topic, and propose a syntactic representation extending the boundaries of syntax to include features connected to the discourse. 2 The syntax of the left periphery of the clause According to the Government and Binding paradigm developed by Chomsky (1981), a sentence is a predicative structure, where subject and predicate are connected by means of so-called functional projections. A typical sentence has the following structure, where I stands for Inflection, i.e. the temporal, modal, and agreement properties connected with the verb: 2 (1) [ IP NP [ I [ VP V ]]] The subject-in representation (1) a Noun Phrase, NP-is connected to the predicate-in this case a Verb Phrase, VP-by means of Inflection. Hence, according to X-bar theory, the subject is the specifier of the Inflection and the predicate is its complement. 3 In the Government and Binding framework, only one head position is available on the left of the subject and only one maximal projection position, i.e. only one position where a phrase can appear. The structure available in this framework is therefore the following: (2) [ CP XP [ C [ IP NP [ I … C is a head position, occupied in subordinate clauses by the complementizer head, for instance that, as in the following example: 2 These are to be understood as abstract properties, universally represented, even if languages might differ in the way they realize them. 3 X-bar theory was firstly proposed in the 70's, see among the others Chomsky (1970) and Jackendoff (1977). In this work I will not discuss the arguments in favor, or against, this syntactic representation. Let me just point out that more recently, several aspects of X-bar theory have been deeply revised, to account for further empirical observations, see the anti-symmetrical proposal by Kayne (1994). (3) John thinks that Mary is a genius That occupies the C position in the subordinate clause. The specifier position of C can be occupied by embedded wh-phrases, as in the following case: (4) John wonders which boy Mary met In English, C is also the landing site of Verbs and auxiliaries in interrogative inversion, as in the following example: (5) What did you eat? Did occupies the C position and what its specifier. The specifier position is the landing site of the XP in V2 languages, where again, the verb occupies the C position: (6) Den Apfel hat der Hans gegessen The apple has Hans eaten 'Hans ate an apple' In V2 languages, such as most Germanic ones, the inflected verb occupies the head position on the left of the subject; a phrase, in this case the object, obligatorily precedes it. 4 These analyses represented a very big step forward with respect to preceding proposals, but there are several facts that could not be accounted for in this framework. For instance, more than one position can appear in the left periphery. Consider for instance the following example: (7) A Gianni, QUESTO, domani, gli dovrete dire (from Rizzi, 1997, ex. 23) 'I believe that they would appreciate very much your book' (12) *Credo di, il tuo libro, apprezzarlo molto (Rizzi, 1997, ex. 11a) (I) believe (of) your book-top to appreciate-it very much 'I believe I appreciate your book very much' (13) Credo, il tuo libro, di apprezzarlo molto (Rizzi, 1997, ex. 11b) (I) believe your book-top (of) to appreciate-it very much 'I believe I appreciate your book very much' These examples show that the topicalized phrase follows che and precedes di. The same happens with a corrective focus: (14) Credo che MARIA tu abbia visto (non Luisa) (I) believe that Maria-foc you have seen (not Luisa) 'I believe that you have seen Maria (not Luisa)' (15) *Credo MARIA che tu abbia visto (non Luisa) (I) believe Maria-foc that you have seen (not Luisa) 'I believe that you have seen Maria (not Luisa)' (16) *Credo di MARIA aver visto (non Luisa) (I) believe (of) Maria-foc to have seen (not Luisa) 'I believe you saw Maria (not Luisa)' (17) Credo MARIA di aver visto (non Luisa) I believe Maria-foc (of) to have seen (not Luisa) 'I believe you saw Maria (not Luisa)'

Multiple Subject Positions: A Case ofPerfect Match between Syntax and Prosody

2011

The question of where in the sentence nominative arguments can appear has been well studied within the fields of syntax (e.g. Heycock 1993; Tateishi 1994; Ura 1996 for Japanese) and semantics (e.g. Diesing 1992; Kratzer 1996 for English and German). Most of the debate has centered around the issue of whether a nominative phrase has to be licensed in SpecTP (e.g. Chomsky 1991) or if it may remain in its base position (i.e. internal to vP/VP, Agree model in Chomsky 2000). In particular, it has been suggested, for several languages such as German, Greek, Japanese and Turkish, that, in these languages, certain subjects might be vP/VP-internal, never raising to SpecTP (see e.g. Haider 2005 and Wurmbrand 2006 for German; Alexiadou & Anagnostopoulou 2001 for Greek; Tateishi 1994 for Japanese; Kornfilt 1984 and Öztürk 2004, 2005 for Turkish). In this paper, we provide, for the first time, prosodic evidence in support of this position: We show, focusing on Turkish, that, in this language, tw...

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.

A Lexical-Functional Analysis of Predicate Topicalization in German

American Journal of Germanic Linguistics and Literatures, 1999

In this paper we examine the topicalization paradigm for ten different verbal constructions in German. We argue that a uniform explanation for the observed behaviors follows from the interpretation of the relevant expressions as (parts of) lexical representations. To this end we motivate a revision of Functional Uncertainty as proposed in to account for filler/gap relations in long distance dependencies. We assume with the original formulation of this principle that topicalized elements share values with the (grammatical) function status of an entity an indeterminate distance away. We appeal to the inventory of functions posited within LEXICAL FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR inclusive of the frequently neglected PREDICATE function, which we argue is associated with both simple and complex predicates. In addition we show that topicalization, given this function-based proposal, should not be limited to maximal categories. We argue that the need to posit a PREDICATE function for German topicalization is supported by an independent line of research within LFG concerning the analysis of complex predicates. For this purpose we employ the proposals of T. which argue for the independence of the construct PREDICATE from its categorial realization. We show that this type of proposal extends to provide a uniform account of the German topicalization paradigm. This permits us to explain the similarities and differences in the behaviors of various sorts of predicators as well as certain idiomatic expressions interpreted as complex predicates.

The logical-semantic content of subject: A configurational view from syntax and LF

Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 2015

The paper raises the topic of what the functional and logical notion of subject is. It examines the syntax-semantic nature of Icelandic and Polish quirky subject constructions (subjectless clauses in which the initial DP bears oblique Case) with psych-verbs. Of main interest is the full vs. default agreement on V which nominative DPs and quirky subjects always trigger, respectively. We attempt to define the primitive notion of subject from two standpoints – its LF representation and how it is mirrored syntactically by the predication relation of the subject with respect to vP/VP and the proposition of the sentence in TP between the subject and T′. We discuss the semantic and configurational dependencies between quirky subjects and nominative DPs and vP and TP/CP. The paper investigates also the landing site for non-nominative initial DPs and argues for the Topic Phrase in the Left Periphery (Rizzi 1997) as a most natural candidate to host quirky subjects. Hopefully, the conclusions ...