Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Monograph/Edited Volume (47) (remove)
Language
- English (47) (remove)
Keywords
- Syntax (2)
- information structure (2)
- prosody (2)
- syntax (2)
- Adverbial Quantification (1)
- Adverbs of Frequency (1)
- Adverbs of Quantity (1)
- Experimentelle Linguisitk (1)
- Festschrift (1)
- Hebrew (1)
Institute
- Department Linguistik (47) (remove)
Adverbs and Adjunction
(2000)
The papers collected in this volume were all presented at the workshop on Adverbs and Adjunction, held at the University of Tromsoe, in April 17-18, 1999. The presentations by Kristin M. Eide &Inghild Flaate, Henriette de Swart, Artemis Alexiadou and Adam Wyner could not be included here.
The articles deal with the syntax, semantics and morpbology of adverbs and their interaction with other syntactic phenomena. A number of tbe contributions is concerned with an evaluation of the hypothesis that adverbs are specifiers of functional heads, which are universally ordered. Specifically, Adger &Tsoulas argue that locative adverbials are licensed by an aspectual head that encodes telicity, while manner adverbials are licensed by a light verb that encodes agentivity, both being situated low in the VP structure. According to the authors, the prime function of these heads is to license aspects of the featural composition of the object, and the licensing of these low adverbials is a by-product of the way that the EPP features of these heads functions. Costa presents data from European Portuguese in support of the traditional analysis of adverbs as adjuncts. Ernst shows that manner, measure, and domain adverbs, and more generally, adverbs and other adjuncts such as participant PPs and adjunct secondary predicates (depictives), are not rigidly ordered. Hence the paper supports theories where linear order is largely a function of the interaction of compositional rules for the various adjuncts, plus their lexico-semantic requirements.
For Haider, adverbials are adjoined or embedded, depending on the relation to the head of the containing phrase: they are adjoined if they precede the head of the containing phrase. They are embedded if they follow the head of tbe containing phrase. But the relative order of adverbials is a reflex of an interface condition. Moreover, the order pattern of adverbials in the extraposition domain is a function of linear incrementality in a non-compositional subdomain. Laenzlinger, on the other hand, claims that adverbs occupy the A'-specifier of their semantically related functional projection. They are formally licensed via the mechanism of feature checking, which links their distribution to their interpretation. He also considers adverb placement and its interaction with Verb/Argument Movement, fronting and extraposition. The interaction between A-scrambling and adverb placement crosslinguistically is also investigated by Hoffman in a minimalist framework. He claims that adverbs can be pronounced in any set of syntactic positions, but the choice among the various positions is made on non syntactic grounds.
Two papers are concerned with adverbial case. Pereltsvaig examines nominal adverbials marked with Accusative Case, with particular focus on Russian and Finnish. She shows that Accusative adverbials exhibit object-like behavior. She argues that Accusative Case is related to aspectual properties of the VP, and it is thus argued that Structural Accusative Case is checked in [Spec, AspP]. But not all occurrences of morphological accusative case derive from Structural Accusative Case. Thus, the contrasts between Russian and Finnish are explained by the claim that Russian uses accusative case marking for NPs in default objective Case position, whereas Finnish uses partitive in the same position. Manninen shows that in Finnish- adverbs can be analyzed as a sub-category of adjectives and nouns, as they are really case-inflected adjectives and nouns. Manninen proposes that these bear lexical 'adverb' case, i. e. that is they have the form of K(asus;Kase)Ps.
Finally, Vegnaduzzo investigates the polysemy of the ltalian adverb ancora showing that this is only apperent. She argues that all the different readings depend upon the context where it is inserted: each reading is derived by compositionality of ancora basic meaning and the semantic properties of the argument structure of the verb.
Der vorliegende dritte Band der Serie "Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure" enthält sieben Beiträge aus verschiedenen Projekten des Sonderforschungsbereiches "Informationsstruktur: Die sprachlichen Mittel der Gliederung von Äußerung, Satz und Text" (SFB 632). Der Titel "Approaches and Findings in Oral, Written and Gestural Language" reflektiert die Bandbreite der Untersuchungen zum Thema Informationsstruktur. In ihrem Artikel hinterfragt Elke Kasimir die Zuverlässigkeit des sog. Frage-Antwort-Tests zur Bestimmung des fokussierten Elementes in Sätzen. Ihr alternativer Lösungsvorschlag wird in dem Kommentar von Thomas Weskott kritisch diskutiert. Der Artikel von Paul Elbourne befasst sich mit Phänomenen der Ellipse und bietet eine neue semantische Analyse an. Spezielle morphologisch stark markierte Fokuskonstruktionen aus fünf verschiedenen afrikanischen Sprachen der Gur- und Kwa-Sprachgruppe werden von Ines Fiedler und Anne Schwarz analysiert und diachronisch interpretiert. Ebenfalls sprachhistorisch ausgerichtet ist der Artikel von Roland Hinterhölzl, Svetlana Petrova und Michael Solf, die Belege für die Interaktion von Wortstellung und Informationsstruktur bereits in der althochdeutschen Tatian-Übersetzung fanden. Anke Sennema, Ruben van de Vijver, Susanne E. Carroll und Anne Zimmer-Stahl diskutieren anhand einer Serie von Experimenten die Nutzung von Prosodie, Wortlänge und –Stellung für die semantischen Interpretation in der Erst- und Zweitsprache. Die besondere Rolle von Gestik in Verbindung mit Intonation für die Strukturierung des sprachlichen Diskurses wird von Stefanie Jannedy und Norma Mendoza-Denton hervorgehoben.
This is the first issue of a series in which affiliates of the Institute of Linguistics report the results of their experimental work. Generative linguistics usually rely on the method of native speaker judgements in order to test their hypotheses. If a hypothesis rules out a set of sentences, linguistics can ask native speakers whether they feel these sentences are indeed ungrammatical in their language. There are, however, circumstances where this method is unreliable. In such cases a more elaborate method to test a hypothesis is called. All papes in this series, and hence, all papers in this volume deal with issues that cannot be reliably tested with native speaker judgements. This volume contains 7 papers, all using different methods and finding answers to very different questions. This heterogenity, by the way, reflects the various interests and research programs of the institute. The paper, by Trutkowski, Zugck, Blaszczak, Fanselow, Fischer and Vogel deals with superiority in 10 Indo-European languages. The paper by Schlesewsky, Fanselow and Frisch and by Schlesewsky and Frisch, deal with the role of case in processing German sentences. The paper by Vogel and Frisch deals with resolving case conflicts, as does the paper by Vogel and Zugck. The nature of partitive case is the topic of the paper by Fischer. The paper by K?gler deals with the realization of question intonation in two German dialects. We hope that you enjoy reading the papers!
The papers in this volume were presented at the workshop Heterogeneity in Linguistic Databases', which took place on July 9, 2004 at the University of Potsdam. The workshop was organized by project D1: Linguistic Database for Information Structure: Annotation and Retrieval', a member project of the SFB 632, a collaborative research center entitled Information Structure: the Linguistic Means for Structuring Utterances, Sentences and Texts'. The workshop brought together both developers and users of linguistic databases from a number of research projects which work on an empirical basis, all of which have to cope with different sorts of heterogeneity: primary linguistic data and annotated information may be heterogeneous, as well as the data structures representing them. The first four papers (by Wagner, Schmidt, Lüdeling, and Witt) address aspects of heterogeneous data from the point of view of database developers; the remaining three papers (by Meyer, Smith, and Teich/Fankhauser) focus on data exploitation by the users.