Of late, a controversy has arisen over the internal structure of Korean syllables. While there is general agreement that non-phonotactic criteria argue for left-branching, Lee & Goldrick's (2008) left-branching phonotactic analysis is contradicted by Berg & Koops's (2010) claim as to a phonotactically symmetrical syllable structure. A comparison of the methodologies of the two studies, a revisit of the previous data and a new analysis cement the conclusion that there is neither a left-branching nor a right-branching phonotactic effect in Korean syllables. An investigation of the phonotactic structure of Finnish CVC syllables, which exhibit a psycholinguistic left-branching bias much like Korean, reveals that word-initial syllables possess a largely symmetrical organization whereas word-final syllables tend to show a right-branching slant. This curious set of results is consistent with the following three hypotheses: (i) The phonotactic criterion has an inherent VC bias. (ii) Symmetrical syllable structures represent a compromise between left- and right-branching effects. (iii) The strength of phonotactic constraints increases from earlier to later portions of words. The bottom line of this analysis is that, contra all previous claims, phonotactic constraints cannot be used as an argument for sub-syllabic constituency. We discuss the proposal that the basis of the left-branching bias in Korean syllables is instead to be found in the high degree of coarticulation between the onset consonant and the following vowel.

English binominal NPs (BNPs) (e.g., a giant of a man, a skullcracker of a headache) are of empirical and theoretical interest due to their complex syntactic and semantic properties. In this paper, we review some basic properties of the BNP construction, focusing on its headedness, semantic relations, and the role of the preposition of. We argue that these properties suggest an account in the spirit of construction grammar. In particular, we argue that the English BNP is a nominal juxtaposition construction with particular special syntactic constraints, linked to a semantic interpretation reminiscent of the subject–predicate relation.

Formal models of syntax typically accord the structural position external to the verb's domain a privileged status in the overall syntactic makeup of a language, either by assuming that external arguments are always S or A, or by linking external argument position to syntactic pivothood. This paper demonstrates that the Oceanic language Äiwoo has an ergative verb phrase – i.e. A as the VP-internal argument and S/O as external arguments – but no corresponding S/O pivot. That is, the ergative structure of the verb phrase in Äiwoo does not entail any syntactically privileged status of the VP-external arguments; rather, it is simply a by-product of various diachronic developments. This situation shows that what has traditionally been perceived as fundamental differences in grammatical organisation – the difference between an accusative and an ergative pattern of VP structure – need not in fact be associated with any broader differences in syntactic or pragmatic structure. More importantly, it goes against the assumption that it is possible to assign universal functions to syntactic configurations. Instead, it can be seen as providing support for the view argued for by Evans & Levinson (2009: 444) that ‘most linguistic diversity is the product of historical cultural evolution operating on relatively independent traits’.

Russian has a family of reflexive constructions that have non-canonical syntax and express a variety of meanings that range from disposition (‘I feel like working’) to ability (‘I cannot work here’) and generic assessment of quality (‘I work well here’). Previous analyses assume that these constructions are derived by a regular syntactic rule and postulate a null modal in the structure to account for their semantics (Benedicto 1995, Franks 1995, Rivero & Arregui 2012). Focusing on the ‘feel like’ construction, I show that derivational analyses have difficulty explaining its idiosyncratic properties, including non-canonical agreement (independent of the structural subject), as well as the interpretation of aspect. Moreover, derivational analyses overgeneralize, since only a subset of predicates occur in the ‘feel like’ construction in Russian, as the data from the Russian National Corpus indicate. In order to account for their idiosyncratic properties and semi-productivity, I propose that the ‘feel like’ construction and its kin are stored in the lexicon as constructions (Goldberg 1995; Jackendoff 1997, 2008). The proposed analysis clarifies the status of reflexive constructions in Russian and establishes the scope of cross-linguistic semantic variation by comparing reflexives in Russian to that in other Slavic languages.

One issue in the analysis of degree achievements is whether or not what are called degree achievements are in fact achievements (Hay, Kennedy & Levin 1999, Kearns 2007, Rothstein 2008a). In this paper, we offer evidence from Malay that they are. Our evidence involves findings about the aspectual effect of the verbal prefix meN- in degree achievement sentences, which may receive a natural account under an approach where degree achievements are lexically specified as achievements, but are difficult to explain if they are not. We propose that meN- merges with a verbal projection (VP) that describes eventualities with stages, in the sense of Landman (1992, 2008). This requirement explains meN-'s apparent effect on telicity in degree achievement sentences and the absence of such an effect in non-degree achievement sentences. It also accounts for the restricted distribution of meN- in stative sentences (Soh & Nomoto 2009) and regular achievement sentences. While certain aspectual parallels exist between the verbal prefix meN- and the English progressive, we argue that meN- is not a progressive marker, and that the parallels with the English progressive are due to the subcategorization requirement of meN-, which makes event stages more prominent in sentences with meN- compared to ones without. Our analysis supports the treatment of meN- as a light verb (v) (Aldridge 2008; Nomoto 2008, 2011; Sato 2012), rather than a marker of voice (Voice) (Cole, Hermon & Yanti 2008).

This paper considers data from Niuean, a Polynesian language with VSO word order and an extensive range of grammatical particles. We focus on three question particles, nakai, ka and kia, examining their possible historical origins. In related languages the preferred means of forming a yes–no question is by intonation alone, while in the Polynesian languages that have yes–no question particles, the forms are lexically distinct from those found in Niuean. We argue that the Niuean unmarked question particle nakai is derived from the negative, the pragmatically marked kia construction from the polite form of the imperative, and the ka construction from a lexical item which signals confirmation. In all three cases, the question particles do not replace their original grammatical or lexical source words but rather co-exist with them in new contexts. The three question particles have all undergone a process of semantic bleaching, increased syntactic bonding, and in some cases, phonetic reduction. While two of the processes have occurred early in Niuean, one is a very recent development.

At first glance, the variety of possible denotations of a given prefix in Russian might appear a chaotic set of idiomatic meanings, e.g. the prefix za- may refer to the beginning of an action, movement to a position behind an object, a brief deviation from a path, or completion of an action. I propose a unified analysis of Russian prefixes, where the differences in meaning are claimed to arise from different syntactic positions, while the lexical entry of a prefix remains the same. The main focus is on the verbs of motion due to the consistent duality displayed by the prefix meanings when added to directional and non-directional motion verbs. It turns out that prefixes modify path when added onto a directional motion verb and refer to movement in time with non-directional motion verbs. This semantic distinction corresponds to distinct sets of syntactic properties, characteristic of the lexical and superlexical prefixes. Furthermore, a tripartite division emerges in each set of prefixes, corresponding to goal, source and route of motion (TO, FROM, VIA, respectively) for lexical prefixes and to beginning, completion and duration for superlexical prefixes. This leads to the suggestion that the same prefix with a consistent conceptual meaning, shared with the corresponding preposition receives part of its denotation from its position in the syntactic representation. The separation of conceptual meaning from the structural meaning allows the polysemy to arise from position, rather than from arbitrary homophony. Thus, conceptual structure is unified with syntax.