Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T20:16:35.482Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Adverb extraction, specificity, and structural parallelism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 December 2016

Aida Talić
Aida Talić*
Affiliation:
University of Connecticut
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper investigates adverb extraction out of traditional adjective phrases (TAPs) like “extremely expensive”, in a number of Slavic, Romance, and Germanic languages, and establishes two novel generalizations regarding such extraction out of predicative and attributive TAPs, also showing what the (un)availability of such extraction reveals about the structure of TAPs cross-linguistically and in different constructions in a single language. I argue that attributive TAPs are never bare APs in languages that use only one adjectival form attributively. Languages that use two adjectival forms in the attributive position allow adverb extraction out of predicative and attributive TAPs, which indicates that adverb extraction is possible only if a bare AP is used in this position. More generally, I argue that extended projections of different lexical categories tend to be uniform within a language with respect to how much structure they project.

Résumé

Résumé

Cet article étudie l’extraction adverbiale tirée des syntagmes adjectivaux traditionnels (SAT) tels que « extrêmement cher » dans un certain nombre de langues slaves, romanes et germaniques. Nous proposons deux nouvelles généralisations au sujet de l’extraction adjectivale tirée des SAT prédicatifs et attributifs, et discutons des conséquences de la possibilité ou non possibilité d’extraction dans différentes langues ainsi que dans différentes constructions. L’hypothèse proposée est que les SAT ne sont jamais des SAdv nus dans les langues qui n’utilisent qu’une seule forme adjectivale attributivement. Les langues qui utilisent deux formes adjectivales dans la position attributive permettent l’extraction adjectivale tirée des SAT prédicatifs et attributifs, ce qui indique que l’extraction adverbiale est possible seulement si un SAdv nu est utilisé dans cette position. Plus généralement, il est proposé que les projections étendues de plusieurs catégories lexicales ont tendance à être uniformes dans une langue donnée par rapport à la quantité de structure projetée.

Keywords

adverb extractionspecificitystructural parallelismintensifiers(non)affixal articles.extraction adverbialespécificitéparallélisme structurelintensificateursarticles (non)affixaux
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 60 , Issue 3 , November 2015 , pp. 417 - 454
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association/Association canadienne de linguistique 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abels, Klaus. 2003. Successive cyclicity, anti-locality, and adposition stranding. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Abney, Steven. 1987. The English Noun Phrase in its sentential aspect. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Aguilar-Guevara, Ana. 2014. Weak definiteness: Semantics, lexicon, and pragmatics. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Aljović, Nadira. 2002. Long adjectival inflection and specificity in Serbo-Croatian. Recherches linguistiques de Vìncennes 31:27—42.Google Scholar
Arsenijević, Boban and Stanković, Branimir. 2009. Neodređeni pridevski vid u određenim okruženjima [Indefinite adjectival aspect in definite environments]. In Zborník radova sa hongresa “Srpskijezik, književnost, umetnost”, Knjiga 1, ed. Boskovic, Dragan, 241–252. Kragujevac: FILUM.Google Scholar
Babby, Leonard H. 2010. The syntactic differences between long and short forms of Russian adjectives. In Adjectives: Formal analyses in syntax and semantics, ed. Hofherr, Patricia Cabredo and Matushansky, Ora, 53–84. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bailyn, John. 1994. The syntax and semantics of Russian long and short adjectives: An X’-theoretic account. In Proceedings of Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Ann Arbor Meeting 2, ed. Toman, Jindřich, 1–30. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.Google Scholar
Baker, Mark. 1988. Incorporation: A theory of grammatical function changing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Baker, Mark. 2003. Lexical categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan and Wurmbrand, Susi. 2005. The domain of agreement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 23:809–865.Google Scholar
Boeckx, Cedric. 2005. Some notes on bounding. Ms., Harvard University.Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 1994. D-structure, θ-criterion, and movement into θ-positions. Linguistic Analysis 24:247–286.Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2001. On the nature of the syntax-phonology interface: Cliticization and related phenomena. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2005. On the locality of left branch extraction and the structure of NP. Studia Linguistica 59:1–45.Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2008a. What will you have, DP or NP? In The Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS), ed. Elmer, Emily and Walkow, Martin, 101–114. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2008b. On the operator freezing effect. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26:249–287.Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2011a. On unvalued uninterpretable features. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS), ed. Lima, Suzi, Mullin, Kevin, and Smith, Brian, 109–120. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2011b. Rescue by PF deletion, traces as (non)interveners, and the that-trace effect. Linguistic Inquiry 42:1–44.Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2012. On NPs and clauses. In Discourse and grammar: From sentence types to lexical categories, ed. Grewendorf, Günther and Zimmermann, Thomas Ede, 179–246. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2013a. Phases beyond clauses. In The nominal constructions in Slavic and beyond, ed. Schürcks, Lilla, Giannakidou, Anastasia, and Exteberria, Urtzi, 75–128. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2013b. Adjectival escapades. In Proceedings of Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics (FASL) 21, 1–25. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2013c. Getting really edgy: On the edge of the edge. Ms., University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2014a. Now I’m a phase, now I’m not a phase: On the variability of phases with extraction and ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 45:27–89.Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2014b. From the Complex NP Constraint to everything. Paper presented at Generative Linguistics in the Old World (GLOW) 37, Brussels.Google Scholar
Canac-Marquis, Réjean. 2005. Phases and binding of reflexives and pronouns in English. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar 12, ed. Müller, Stefan, 482–502. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Chierchia, Gennaro. 1998. Reference to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics 6:339–405.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries. In Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, ed. Martin, Roger, Michaels, David, and Uriagereka, Juan, 89–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. Kenstowicz, Michael, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [Originally published In MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 18.] Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 2010. The syntax of adjectives: A comparative study. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Corver, Norbert. 1990. The syntax of left branch constructions. Doctoral dissertation, Tilburg University.Google Scholar
Corver, Norbert. 1992. On deriving certain left branch extraction asymmetries: A case study in parametric syntax. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS), ed. Broderick, Kimberley, 67–84. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Despić, Miloje. 2011. Syntax in the absence of determiner phrase. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Despić, Miloje. 2013. Binding and the structure of NP in Serbo-Croatian. Linguistic Inquiry 44:239–270.Google Scholar
Despić, Miloje. 2015. Phases, reflexives, and definiteness. Syntax 18:201–234.Google Scholar
den Dikken, Marcel. 2007. Phase extension: Contours of a theory of the role of head movement in phrasal extraction. Theoretical Linguistics 33:1–41.Google Scholar
Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen and Giurgea, Ion. 2006. The suffixation of definite articles in the Balkan languages. Revenue Roumaine de Linguistique 51:73–14.Google Scholar
Dubinsky, Stanley and Tasseva-Kurktchieva, Mila. 2014. On the NP/DP languages frontier: Bulgarian as a transitional case. Poster presented at the 89th Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Portland, OR.Google Scholar
Embick, David and Halle, Morris. 2005. On the status of stems in morphological theory. In Romance languages and linguistic theory: Selected papers from Going Romance 2003., ed. Geerts, Twan, van Ginneken, Ivo, and Jacobs, Haike, 37–62. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Enç, Mürvet. 1991. The semantics of specificity. Linguistic Inquiry 22:1–25.Google Scholar
Espinal, M. Teresa and McNally, Louise. 2011. Bare nominals and incorporating verbs in Spanish and Catalan. Journal of Linguistics 47:87–128.Google Scholar
Frampton, John and Gutmann, Sam. 2000. Agreement is feature sharing. Ms., Northeastern University.Google Scholar
Franks, Steven and King, Tracy H.. 2000. A handbook of Slavic clitics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fukui, Naoki. 1988. Deriving the differences between English and Japanese. English Linguistics 5:249–270.Google Scholar
Gallego, Angel and Uriagereka, Juan. 2007. A critique of phase extension, with a comparison to phase sliding. Theoretical Lingusitics 33:65–74.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, Jane. 1991. Extended projection. Ms., Brandeis University.Google Scholar
Grohmann, Kleanthes K. 2003. Prolific domains: On the anti-locality of movement dependencies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Guillemin, Diana. 2011. The syntax and semantics of a determiner system: A case study of Mauritian Creole. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris and Marantz, Alec. 1993. Some key features of Distributed Morphology. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 21:275–288.Google Scholar
Halpern, Aaron. 1992. The Balkan definite article and the pseudo-second position. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, ed. Buszard-Welcher, Laura A, Wee, Lionel, and Weigel, William, 338–349. Berkeley Linguistics Society, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Haroarson, Gísli Rúnar. 2014. Tumbling down the Icelandic noun phrase. Ms., University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Heim, Irene. 1999. Notes on superlatives. Ms., MIT.Google Scholar
von Heusinger, Klaus. 2002. Specificity and definiteness in sentence and discourse structure. Journal of Semantics 19:245–274.Google Scholar
Hicks, Glyn. 2006. The derivation of anaphoric relations. Doctoral dissertation, University of York.Google Scholar
Hiraiwa, Ken. 2005. Dimensions of symmetry in syntax: Agreement and clausal structure. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Ionin, Tania. 2006. This is definitely specific: Specificity and definiteness in article systems. Natural Language Semantics 14:175–234.Google Scholar
Ishane, Tabea and Puskás, Genoveva. 2001. Specific is not definite. Generative Grammar in Geneva 2:39–54.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher. 1999. Projecting the adjective: The syntax and semantics of gradability and comparison. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher and Merchant, Jason. 2000. Attributive comparative deletion. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18:89–146.Google Scholar
Larson, Richard. 1998. Events and modification in nominals. In Proceedings of the 8th Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT), ed. Strolovitch, Devon and Lawson, Aaron, 145–168. Department of Lingustics, MIT.Google Scholar
Larson, Richard and Marasie, Franc. 2004. On indefinite pronouns with APs: Reply to Kishimoto. Linguistic Inquiry 35:268–287.Google Scholar
Lee-Schoenfeld, Vera. 2004. Binding by phase: (Non-)complementarity in German. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 16:111–173.Google Scholar
Leko, Nedžad. 1999. Functional categories and the structure of DP in Bosnian. In Topics in South Slavic syntax and semantics, ed. Dimitrova-Vulchanova, Mila and Hellan, Lars, 229–252. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 1995. A late note on late insertion. In Explorations in Generative grammar, ed. Kim, Young-Sun, Lee, Byung-Choon, Lee, Kyoung-Choon, Yang, Hyun-Kwon, and Yoon, Jong-Yuri, 396—413. Seoul: Hankuk Publishing Co. Google Scholar
Marchis, Mihaela and Alexiadou, Artemis. 2009. On the distribution of adjectives in Romanian: The eel construction. Romance languages and linguistic theory: Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’ Amsterdam 2007., ed. Aboh, Enoch, van der Linden, Elisabeth, Quer, Josep, and Sleeman, Petra, 161–178. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Marelj, Marijana. 2011. Bound-variable anaphora and left branch condition. Syntax 14:205–229.Google Scholar
Pancheva, Roumyana and Tomaszewicz, Barbara. 2012. Cross-linguistic differences in superlative movement out of nominal phrases. In Proceedings of the 30th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL), ed. Arnett, Nathan and Bennett, Ryan, 292–302.Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Pereltsvaig, Asya. 2000. Short and long adjectives in Russian: Against the null № analysis. Ms., McGill University.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David and Torrego, Esther. 2007. The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features. In Phrasal and clausal architecture, ed. Karimi, Simin, Samiian, Vida, and Wilkins, Wendy, 262–294. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Petroj, Vanessa. 2014. On code-switching within the TNP: Romanian and Serbo-Croatian interaction. Ms., University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Progovac, Ljiljana. 1998. Determiner phrase in a language without determiners. Journal of Linguistics 34:165–179.Google Scholar
Quicoli A., Carlos. 2008. Anaphora by phase. Syntax 11:299–329.Google Scholar
Reuland, Eric. 2011. Anaphora and language design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Richards, Marc. 2007. On feature inheritance: An argument from the Phase Impenetrability Condition. Linguistic Inquiry 38:563–572.Google Scholar
Riqueros, José. 2013. Spanish nominal(ization) patterns. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Ross, John R. 1967./1986. Infinite syntax! Norwood: Ablex Publishing.Google Scholar
Rubin, Edward. 1991. The syntax and semantics of prepositional phrases in Romanian. Ms., Cornell University.Google Scholar
Sadler, Louisa and Arnold, Douglas J.. 1994. Prenominai adjectives and the phrasal/lexical distinction. Journal of Linguistics 30:187–226.Google Scholar
Saito, Mámora and Murasugi, Keiko. 1999. Subject predication within IP and DP. In Beyond principles and parameters, ed. Johnson, Kyle and Roberts, Ian, 167–188. Dodrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Schenker, Alexander. 1993. Proto-Slavonic. In The Slavonic languages, ed. Comrie, Bernard and Corbett, Greville G., 60–123. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Scholten, Jolién. 2010. Weak definites and bare singulars: Their syntactic peculiarities. Master’s thesis, Utrecht University.Google Scholar
Shen, Zheng. 2014. Locality and the superlative conspiracy. Ms., University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Sharvit, Yael and Stateva, Penka. 2002. Superlative expressions, context, and focus. Linguistics and Philosophy 25:453–505.Google Scholar
Stjepanović, Sandra. 1998. Extraction of adjuncts out of NPs. Presented at the Comparative Slavic Morphosyntax Workshop, Spencer, IN.Google Scholar
Szabolcsi, Anna. 1986. Comparative superlatives. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 8:245–265.Google Scholar
Takahashi, Masahiko. 2011. Some consequences of Case-marking in Japanese. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Ticio, Emma. 2003. On the structure of the DPs. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Thráinsson, Höskuldur. 2007. The syntax of Icelandic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Todorović, Neda. 2014. Aspectual tenses in Serbian and parallelism with the nominal domain. Paper presented at the 23rd Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics (FASL) 23.Google Scholar
Uriagereka, Juan. 1988. On government. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susi. 2012. The syntax of valuation in auxiliary-participle constructions. Coyote Papers 20:154–162.Google Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susi. 2014. Tense and aspect in English infinitives. Linguistic Inquiry 45:403–447.Google Scholar
Zlatić, Larisa. 1997. The structure of the Serbian noun phrase. Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Zwicky, Arnold M. and Pullum, Geoffrey K.. 1983. Cliticization vs. inflection: English n ‘t. Language 59:502–513.Google Scholar