This paper discusses constructions such as We'll have two beers and a coffee that are typically used for beverage orders in restaurant contexts. We compare the behavior of nouns in these constructions in three Germanic languages, English, Icelandic, and German, and take a closer look at the correlation of the morphosyntactic and semantic-conceptual changes involved. We show that even within such a restricted linguistic sample in closely related languages one finds three different grammatical options for the expression of the same conceptual transition. Our findings suggest an analysis of coercion as a genuinely semantic phenomenon, located on a level of semantic representations that serves as an interface between the conceptual and the grammatical systems and takes into account inter- and intralinguistic variations.Work on this paper was supported by NSF award BCS-0080377 to Boston University. The material is based in part on work done while the second author was serving as Director of the Linguistics Program at the U.S. National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this material are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. National Science Foundation. For comments on an earlier version, we would like to thank two anonymous JGL reviewers.

German words like Siedl-ung [] ‘settlement’, which contain a sequence of obstruent plus sonorant consonant between vowels, pose two problems assuming the heterosyllabic parse: (a) the first syllable is superheavy, but superheavy syllables are otherwise restricted in their occurrence to word-final position; and (b) the /d/ does not devoice, contrary to what one would expect, since Final Devoicing operates without exception in coda position. The problem in assuming that consonant clusters like [dl] are tautosyllabic is that they are otherwise non-occurring in word-initial position. In the present study, it is argued that the heterosyllabic parse for words like Siedl-ung is correct, and that (a) and (b) derive an explanation by appealing to paradigm uniformity. It is shown in an optimality-theoretic analysis that the canonical patterns capturing the distribution of superheavy syllables and Final Devoicing require the ranking “markedness ” input-output faithfulness.” The paradigm uniformity effects, that is, (a) and (b), require a specific output-output faithfulness constraint to dominate the markedness constraint. The proposed paradigm uniformity approach is compared to earlier treatments in which the notion of paradigm does not play a role. It is also shown that the tautosyllabic parse in examples like Siedl-ung is problematic.This paper was presented at Indiana University in December 2004 and at the Old World Conference in Phonology 2 (OCP-2) at the University of Tromsø in January 2005. Thanks are due to the respective audiences for their comments and suggestions. I would also like to thank two anonymous JGL reviewers for their remarks on an earlier written version. All disclaimers apply.

German impersonal constructions manifest an array of morphosyntactic properties, such as so-called expletive dummy subjects, 3rd person singular verb agreement, and, in some cases, experiencer nominals bearing “quirky” case (usually dative), that have traditionally been regarded as purely accidental, idiosyncratic, or semantically vacuous. This article argues that these properties typically associated with impersonal constructions in German can be semantically motivated and explained within the theoretical framework of Cognitive Grammar (see Langacker 1987a, 1991a, 1991b). Within this framework, it is assumed that morphosyntactic markers are meaningful and polysemous: they are complex conceptual categories with distinct but related senses radiating from a prototypical sense. As a result, impersonal constructions and their component substructures are seen to be meaningful in their own right in reflecting a particular way of construing a scene, rather than as epiphenomena of autonomous syntactic processes.I would like to acknowledge the perceptive and helpful feedback of the anonymous JGL reviewers. I have tried to follow their suggestions wherever possible. Of course, I take full responsibility for any errors or lack of clarity that may remain.

This paper seeks to explain syntactic and structural features that have puzzled earlier scholars and editors of poems composed in kviÐuháttr, one of the oldest attested Old Norse skaldic meters. More precisely, I attempt to answer the following questions: first, why do poems in kviÐuháttr fail to adhere to the stanzaic eight-line division and the four-line helmingr (half-stanza) division, which are so firmly entrenched in the ON skaldic tradition? Second, why does the syntax of kviÐuháttr poetry depart from other patterns of skaldic (and eddic) verb syntax? It will become clear that the metrical innovation that characterizes kviÐuháttr, namely, the introduction of regularized catalectic a-lines of Sievers' Types A, C, and D, imposed significant restrictions on verb syntax. Rather than violating the verb-second constraint in independent clauses, the poets were forced to relax structural rules that are observed strictly in other branches of ON poetry.I am grateful to my colleague, Robert D. Fulk, for helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper. Thanks also to the two anonymous JGL reviewers for valuable suggestions.

This paper discusses the auxiliated posture verb constructions in Dutch (liggen/zitten/staan+te+V ‘sit/lie/stand to V’) that have progressive, durative, or habitual interpretation. My analysis, based on a large corpus of written texts, reveals, first of all, that to a large extent these constructions follow the regular (that is, non-aspectual) use of the three cardinal posture verbs as basic locational verbs. Second, the corpus used for the present study reveals clear experientially based patterns in the type of verbs that occur in the auxiliated posture verb construction. The data suggest that, at least in the written language, the construction has retained a link with the postural (or by extension, the locational) source. This sheds light on some clear semantic differences between the auxiliated posture verb constructions and another common progressive construction in Dutch, aan het V zijn ‘be at the V-inf’. The paper also briefly considers the progressive construction lopen+te+V ‘run to V’, showing that it is less grammaticalized and still predominantly tied to motion events.I would like to thank the anonymous referees of this journal for their comments on a previous version of this paper. Responsibility for any remaining inaccuracies is, of course, mine.

Both Iverson and Salmons 2004 and Voyles 1982 develop viable theories of the Old Norse i-umlaut. It is argued, however, that while Iverson and Salmons' theory posits implausible changes, the changes assumed by Voyles are plausible and well attested.