Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-05T19:32:28.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Survey of Generative Analyses of the Verb Second Phenomenon in Germanic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2008

Christer Platzack
Christer Platzack
Affiliation:
Institutionen för nordiska språk, Stockholms universitet, S-106 91 Stockholm. Sweden
Get access

Abstract

This paper reviews various approaches to describe the verb second phenomenon of Germanic languages within generative transformational grammar. The solution to the descriptive problem seems to be to assume that the finite verb in main clauses has the same position as the complementizer in subordinate clauses. Various ways to explain the presence of this word order in Germanic languages are presented in the final part of the paper.

Type
Research Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , June 1985 , pp. 49 - 73
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

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

REFERENCES

Andersson, E. 1977. Verbfrasens struktur i svenskan. Meddelanden från stiftelsen för Åbo Akademi forskningsinstitut 18. Åbo: Åbo Akademi.Google Scholar
Basbøll, H. 1976. Is an integration of Diderichsen's analysis of Danish sentences in a transformational-generative framework feasible? Papers from the Third Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics, Hanasaari, ed. by F. Karlsson, 27–38.Google Scholar
Besten, H. den 1977/1983. On the interaction of Root Transformations and Lexical Deletive Rules. Published with two appendices in On the Formal Nature of Westgermania, ed. by Abraham, W.. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 47–131.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris Publ.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 1982. Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government and Binding. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. & Lasnik, H. 1977. Filters and Control. Linguistic Inquiry 8, 425–504.Google Scholar
Diderichsen, P. 1941. Sœtningsbygningen i Skaanske Lov. Univ. jub. danske Samf. Skr. Nr. 327. Also in Acta Philologica Scandinavica XV, 1–252.Google Scholar
Diderichsen, P. 1943. Logische und topische Gliederung des germanischen Satzes. Published in Diderichsen (1966).Google Scholar
Diderichsen, P. 1966. Helhed og Struktur. Selected Linguistic Papers with Detailed English Summaries. København: C.E.C. Gads Forlag.Google Scholar
Emonds, J. 1976. A Transformational Approach to English Syntax. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Evers, A. 1981. Two Functional Principles for the rule “Move V”. Groninger Arbeiten zur germanistischen Linguistik 19, 96–110.Google Scholar
Haider, H. 1984. Topic, Focus & V-Second. Groninger Arbeiten zur germanistische Linguistik 25.Google Scholar
Holmberg, A. 1983. The Finite Sentence in Swedish and English. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 3, Department of Linguistics, Trondheim.Google Scholar
Jörgensen, N. 1976. Meningsbyggnaden i talad svenska. Lundastudier i nordisk språkvetenskap C:7. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
Kayne, R. 1982. Predicates and arguments, verbs and nouns. Paper read at the GLOW Conference in Paris.Google Scholar
Koopman, H. 1984. The Syntax of Verbs. Dordrecht: Foris Publ.Google Scholar
Koster, J. 1975. Dutch as an SOV Language. Linguistic Analysis 1, 111–136.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, D. 1983. The Language Lottery. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Maling, J. & Zaenen, A. 1981. Germanic Word Order and the Format of Surface Filters. Binding and Filtering, ed. by Heny, F.. London: Croon-Held, 255–278.Google Scholar
Newmeyer, F. 1980. Linguistic Theory in America: The first quarter-century of transformational generative grammar. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Platzack, C. 1982. Modern grammatisk teori. Lund: Liber.Google Scholar
Platzack, C. 1983, Germanic Word Order and the COMP/INFL Parameter. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 2, Department of Linguistics, Trondheim.Google Scholar
Platzack, C. (to appear a). COMP, INFL, and Germanic Word Order. To appear in Topics in Scandinavian Syntax, ed. by Christensen, K. Koch & Hellan, L.. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Platzack, C. (to appear b). The Position of the Finite Verb in Swedish. To appear in Verb Second Phenomena in Germanic Languages, ed. by Haider, H., Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Rögnvaldsson, Eiríkur 1984. Icelandic Word Order and það-Insertion. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 8, Department of Linguistics, Trondheim.Google Scholar
Ross, J. 1973. The Penthouse Principle and the Order of Constituents. You Take the High Node and I'll Take the Low Node. Papers from the Comparative Syntax Festival, Chicago Linguistic Society, ed. by C. Corum et al, 392–422.Google Scholar
Safir, K. 1982. Inflection-Government and Inversion. The Linguistic Review 1, 417–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherpenisse, W. 1984. Topic, Theme, and the German Initial Field. Groninger Arbeiten zur Germanistischen Linguistic 24.Google Scholar
Thráinsson, Höskuldur 1984. Some Points on Icelandic Word Order. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 8. Department of Linguistics, Trondheim.Google Scholar