Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T20:19:05.591Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Syntactic Position and the Interpretation of Temporal Adjectives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Luis Silva-Villar  and
Javier Gutiérrez-Rexach
Luis Silva-Villar
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles
Javier Gutiérrez-Rexach
Affiliation:
Ohio State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The analysis of the syntactic and interpretive properties of Spanish temporal adjectives poses an interesting problem for the theory of syntax since [+temporal] interpretation and Noun-Adjective linearizations are not univocal. The minimalist account of the position of temporal adjectives argued for here is based on the hypothesis that DPs contain a TP projection in which the feature [+temp] is checked: the TP within DP hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, all nouns are associated with an optional temporal feature when entering the computational component. When they enter into a syntactic relation with a term carrying a [+temp] value, the temporal feature they are associated with must be checked. Attraction of the adjective can take place overtly or covertly. In the first case, the adjective is in prenominal position checking the [+temp] feature at Spell-Out and, in the second case, it appears postnominally checking the [+temp] feature at the LF interface.

Résumé

Résumé

L’analyse des propriétés syntaxiques et interprétatives des adjectifs temporels de l’espagnol pose un problème intéressant compte tenu que l’interprétation [+temporel] et l’ordre nom-adjectif ne sont pas univocaux. L’analyse minimaliste de la position de l’adjectif temporel proposée dans cet article se base sur l’hypothèse que DP contient une projection TP à l’intérieur de laquelle le trait [+temp] peut être vérifié. D’après cette hypothèse, tous les noms sont associés à un trait optionnel temporel à leur entrée dans la composante computationnelle. Lorsqu’ils entrent dans une relation syntaxique avec un terme ayant une valeur [+temp], le trait temporel auquel ils sont associés doit être vérifié. Le déplacement de l’adjectif peut avoir lieu de façon manifeste, auquel cas celui-ci se retrouve en position pré-nominale vérifiant le trait [+temp] à Spell-Out, ou de façon non manifeste, l’adjectif apparaissant alors en position post-nominale vérifiant le trait [+temp] à I'interface LF.

Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 43 , Special Issue 01 1: Grammaire et variation , March 1998 , pp. 97 - 120
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 1998

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

Amiot, Daniel. 1995. De la construction du sens des adjectifs préfixés par pré. French Language Studies 5:1–16.Google Scholar
Barwise, John, and Cooper, Robin. 1981. Generalized quantifiers and natural language. Linguistics and Philosophy 4:159–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, Judy. 1993a. Topics in the syntax of nominal structure across Romance. Doctoral dissertation, City University of New York.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Judy. 1993b. The syntactic role of wordmarkers in null nominal constructions. Probus 5:5–38.Google Scholar
Bosque, Ignacio. 1993. Sobre la diferencia entre los adjetivos relacionales y los calificativos. Revista Argentina de Lingüística 9:10–48.Google Scholar
Bosque, Ignacio. 1994. Degree quantification and modal operators in Spanish. In Selected Papers from the XXIV Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, ed. Parodi, Claudia et al., 87–106. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Bosque, Ignacio, and Picallo, Carmen. 1996. Postnominal adjectives in Spanish DPs. Journal of Linguistics 32:1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1990. Agreement and head-to-head movement in the Romance noun phrase. Paper read at the 20th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, University of Ottawa.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1994. On the evidence for partial N movement in the Romance DP. In Paths towards universal grammar: Studies in honor of Richard Kayne, ed. Cinque, Guglielmo, Koster, Jan, Pollock, Jean-Yves, Rizzi, Luigi, and Zanuttini, Raffaella, 85–110. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1997. Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. Ms., Università di Venezia.Google Scholar
Crisma, Paola. 1991. Functional categories inside the noun phrase: A study on the distribution of nominal modifiers. Graduation Thesis, Università di Venezia.Google Scholar
Di Sciullo, Anne-Marie. 1994. Prefixes and suffixes. In Selected Papers from the XXIV Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, ed. Parodi, Claudia et al., 177–194. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Enç, Mürvet. 1991. The semantics of specificity. Linguistic Inquiry 22:1–26.Google Scholar
Giorgi, Alessandra, and Longobardi, Giuseppe. 1991. The syntax of noun phrases: Configuration, parameters and empty categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, Jane. 1990. Argument structure. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gutiérrez-Rexach, Javier, and Silva-Villar, Luis. 1994. Prosodie and morphological focus in Spanish bare plurals. In Perspectives on Spanish Linguistics, vol. 1, ed. Gutiérrez, Javier and Silva, Luis, 85–108. University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Higginbotham, James. 1985. On semantics. Linguistic Inquiry 16:547–593.Google Scholar
Higginbotham, James. 1997. On events in linguistic semantics. Ms., Sommerville College, Oxford.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1972. Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kamp, Hans. 1975. Two theories about adjectives. In Formal semantics of natural language, ed. Keenan, Edward, 123–155. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Longobardi, Giuseppe. 1994. Reference and proper names. Linguistic Inquiry 25:609–665.Google Scholar
Milsark, Gary. 1977. Towards an explanation of certain peculiarities in the existential construction in English. Linguistic Analysis 3:1–30.Google Scholar
Picallo, Carmen. 1991. Nominals and nominalizations in Catalan. Probus 3:279–316.Google Scholar
Picallo, Carmen. 1994. A mark of specificity in indefinite nominals. Catalan Working Papers in Linguistics 4:143–167.Google Scholar
Pollock, Jean-Yves. 1989. Verb movement, universal grammar and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20:365–424.Google Scholar
Ritter, Elizabeth. 1991. Two functional categories in noun phrases: Evidence from Modern Hebrew. In Syntax and semantics 25: Perspectives on phrase structure, ed. Rothstein, Susan, 37–62. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Sadler, Luise, and Arnold, Doug. 1994. Prenominai adjectives and the phrasal/lexical distinction. Journal of Linguistics 30:187–226.Google Scholar
Silva-Villar, Luis. 1996. Enclisis in Northwestern Iberian Languages: A diachronic theory. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Stowell, Tim. 1981. Origins of phrase structure. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Szabolcsi, Anna. 1994. The noun phrase. In Syntax and semantics 27: The syntax of Hungarian, ed. Kiefer, Ferenc and Kiss, Katalin, 197–274. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Uriagereka, Juan. 1996. Determiner clitic placement. In Current issues in comparative grammar, ed. Freidin, Robert, 257–295. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Valois, Daniel. 1991. The internal structure of DP. Doctoral Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Valois, Daniel. 1997. On the structure of the French DP. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 41:349–375.Google Scholar
Zamparelli, Roberto. 1993. On the spec vs. head status of quantifiers and adjectives. Glow Newsletter 30:72–73.Google Scholar
Zamparelli, Roberto. 1994. Aspects of a ADJP = DP = CP hypothesis. Ms., University of Rochester.Google Scholar
Zec, Draga, and Inkelas, Sharon. 1990. Prosodically constrained syntax. In The phonology-syntax connection, ed. Inkelas, Sharon and Zec, Draga, 365–378. Chicago University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar