Non-finite complements and modality in de-na allow in Hindi-Urdu

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Non-finite complements and modality in de-na allow in Hindi-Urdu"

Transcription

1 Non-finite complements and modality in de-na allow in Hindi-Urdu Alice Davison Abstract The meaning to allow is expressed in Hindi-Urdu by the verb de-na give with an oblique infinitive complement, which I argue is syntactically as well as semantically ambiguous. It has a biclausal control analysis, meaning allow X to do A, as well as an Exceptional Case Marking (ECM) complement with the meaning allow A to happen. The complements are smaller than finite CP and larger than the non-clausal causative complement, and the ECM complement is smaller than the control complement. I offer syntactic arguments for the syntactic ambiguity associated with the two meanings; where the control reading is unavailable, the ECM structure and meaning are available, sometimes by coercion by the context. The modal meaning associated with the control structure suggests that modals do not occur only in ECM/Raising constructions. The arguments are couched in minimalist syntactic terms, opening up a crosstheoretical dialogue with Butt s (1995) analysis in Lexical-Functional Grammar (LFG) terms of the permissive as a complex predicate in argument structure. Keywords Hindi-Urdu - Permission - Modality - Argument structure - Control - ECM/Raising - Coercion - Complex Predicates - Lexical Case - Structural Case - Causatives 1 Introduction This paper discusses the permissive construction, the term used by Butt (1995) for the combination of the verb de-na give with an infinitive form but without a postposition. The combination has the meaning allow. Two examples are given below, one with a dative indirect object (1), one without (2): (1) mã =ne bɑccõ=ko kıtab-ẽ pɑṛ h - ne dĩ mother=erg child.m.pl=dat book-f.pl.nom read-inf. give.pf.f.pl Mother allowed/let (the) children to read (the) books. 1 1 Abbreviations: ABL - Ablative, ACC - accusative, CP - Conjunctive participle, DAT - dative, ERG - ergative, GEN - genitive, F - feminine, IMPER - imperative, IMPF - imperfective, INF - infinitive, M - masculine, NOM - 1

2 (2) pıta=ne peṛ kɑṭ-ne di-e father=erg tree.m.pl[nom] be.cut-inf.obl give-pf.mpl Father allowed the trees to be cut. (Bhatt 2005) I propose that the permissive is biclausal and actually has two distinct and coexisting sentence structures with non-finite complement clauses of different sizes, namely an object control TP/CP and an Exceptional Case Marking AspP/TP. The arguments for control are based on valence, lexical case marking, constraints on lexical case, and conditions on anaphor binding. The arguments for ECM are based on valence, structural case marking, the absence of a condition on lexical case and, most strikingly, on a semantic contrast with the control structure. The control version refers to a locus of permission, an individual, while the ECM version refers to an event; this version is preferred under conditions inconsistent with a locus of permission. These differences are correlated with some differences of modality with a circumstantial modal base. The syntactic and meaning properties of the permissive expressed here represent a different view from the monoclausal complex predicate analysis in Butt (1995), which is based on a different set of data from the data offered here. Nevertheless, the monoclausal analysis is consistent with some of the otherwise unexplained properties of the permissive. So one of the issues discussed here is whether a non-finite complement can be a separate clausal domain or not. 2 Is the de-na allow construction syntactically ambiguous? A major question that I will discuss in this paper is whether the permissive is syntactically ambiguous for example, are (1) and (2) syntactically different? Various possibilities for structure have been discussed, which are summarized in (3) and (4). The crucial differences are in the position of DP2, and the boundaries of the constituent containing the oblique infinitive. (3) Biclausal structures a. Object control DP1 DP2(i) [PRO(i) DP3 V-inf] DE b. ECM/Raising to Object DP1 [DP2 (DP3) V-inf] DE (Bhatt 2005) (4) Complex predicate (Butt 1995; 1998) a. C-structures: DP1 DP2 DP3 [V-inf + DE] (Butt 1995:87) DP1 DP2 [DP3 V-inf] DE (Miriam Butt, p.c.) b. Argument (a) structure (Miriam Butt, p.c.) <give AG GO EVt> read <AG TH> (matrix GO is identified with embedded AG) The LFG monoclausal argument structure (4 a and b) is proposed by Butt nominative, OBL - oblique, PF - perfective, PL - plural. 2

3 (1995); the verb de- and the infinitive form a complex predicate, whose arguments are the subject, indirect object DP2, and a direct object DP3, as in (1). This flat structure is achieved by argument identification at a-structure, whereas the c-structure can be realized as a complex predicate with an embedded verb (Miriam Butt, p.c.; see Butt, this volume, section 4). In minimalist syntactic terms, the structure (3a) is an instance of object control, in which the indirect object DP2 is a matrix constituent, controlling the null PRO subject of an embedded clause. This structure is similar to other clearly defined object control structures, such as tell DP to do something, force DP to do something, compel, demand, require, etc. 2 The structure (3b) is also biclausal, an instance of an ECM structure (or Raising to Object) assumed for the permissive in Bhatt (2005). DP2 represents the subject of the embedded infinitive. The evidence for Butt s LFG analysis of the permissive (4) includes agreement, adjunct control and reflexive versus pronoun interpretations (Butt 1995: 37-43); there are some speaker differences in these interpretations, as a reviewer points out. Butt s LFG argument structure coindexes the matrix goal or indirect object with the embedded clause subject; see further discussion in section 7. Butt notes some syntactic similarities in c-structure between the complex predicate permissive described above and the instructive tell, which involves object control (3a). The similarities include scrambling, negation and coordination (Butt 1995: 44-51, Butt An anonymous reviewer, however, finds some differences in the construal of negation and negative polarity items, suggesting that there are differences of structure. The ECM structure (3b) is proposed in Bhatt (2005). DP2 is the subject of the embedded infinitive rather than the indirect object of the matrix verb. In my discussion of this structure, I will call it ECM rather than Raising to Object, in order to contrast the control/ecm structures in the clearest possible way, and also to avoid the controversy over the representation of control as raising (Hornstein 1999), which is not relevant to the issues of this paper. The proposal I will make in this paper is the following. The permissive is biclausal and has both the control structure (3a) as in (5) below and the ECM 2 The permissive differs from other control complements because there is no postposition on the infinitive clause (see the following note). Postpositions are known to block agreement in HU. So the permissive construction also allows optional long distance agreement with the embedded clause nominative argument (cf. Bhatt 2005). Agreement is one of Butt s (1995) arguments for monoclausality. Bhatt (2005) argues that this kind of agreement is associated with a reduced or restructured embedded clause, so the combination of infinitive and matrix is in effect one clause for the purposes of agreement. But note that the ECM structure (4b) has a projected subject, and is not a reduced clause. So I will represent (4b) ECM clauses as fully biclausal, pace Bhatt (2005), with a subject in the embedded clause, and optional agreement. 3

4 structure (3b) as in (6) below. I propose that the permissive structure is syntactically ambiguous between control and ECM, but the control analysis is the default choice, reflecting the ditransitive argument structure of de-na give. The ECM analysis requires special factors to be present. In addition, the meaning associated with the control structure implies the meaning associated with the ECM structure, but not the reverse. The control structure has the meaning allow to do, which implies allow to happen. The ECM analysis only conveys allow to happen. The ECM analysis comes to the fore under specific lexical and pragmatic circumstances, to be defined below. (5) mã =ne bɑccõ i =ko [PRO i kıtab-ẽ pɑṛ h -ne] dĩ mother=erg child.m.pl=dat book-f.pl read-inf.obl give.pf.f.pl Mother allowed (the) children to read (the) books. [Control] (6) pıta=ne [peṛ kɑṭ-ne ] di-e father=erg tree.m.pl[nom] be.cut-inf.obl give-pf.mpl Father allowed [the trees to be cut]. (Bhatt 2005) [Exceptional Case Marking] The difference is that DP2 is a matrix indirect object coindexed with PRO in (5) (Control), and a structurally cased embedded subject in (6) (ECM). I will first argue for the control structure, then for the ECM structure, and then discuss various facets of the relationship between the two structures. I will return at the end of the paper to discuss some data that support Butt s monoclausal complex predicate analysis (4) because they are not explained by the biclausal control analysis, perhaps because of the specific lexical properties of de-na give. 3 De-na allow as a control construction In this section, I will make the case that the permissive is an object control construction. I will use three syntactic arguments, one based on the similarity of thematic roles and case to other object control predicates, another based on lexical case in control contexts, and the third argument based on reflexive binding, which is constrained by syntactic factors such as clause structure and grammatical functions (Gurtu 1992). I begin by showing the similarities of the permissive to a clear case of obligatory object control (7), the instructive in Butt (1995). (7) mã =ne bɑccõ i =se [PRO i kıtab-ẽ pɑṛ h -ne=ko ] kah-a mother=erg child.m.pl=abl book-f.pl read-inf=dat say.pf.m.s Mother told (the) children to read (the) books. The allow construction syntactically resembles object control sentences in several ways. The matrix clause has an indirect object with lexical postpositional case. The theme is an oblique infinitive, with a null subject PRO, which is coindexed with the matrix indirect object. The differences with the permissive 4

5 are that the indirect object is marked with the postposition =se from, with, and the infinitive complement has the postposition =ko dative. Both the indirect object and clausal direct object case marking are selected by the matrix predicate. 3 The instructive (7) has certain syntactic similarities to the permissive, noted in detail in Butt (1995:44-54), and summarized here briefly. One is in scrambling possibilities. The infinitive and matrix verb can move as a unit in both the permissive and the instructive (6) (Butt 1995: 44-47). In both the permissive and instructive, negation in the infinitive clause negates the infinitive verb, but also may negate the finite verb (Butt 1995:47-49). Both the permissive and the instructive allow coordinated infinitive complements (Butt 1995:49-51). I take these data to show that the permissive has control properties, though this is not what Butt herself concludes. In this section, I will argue that the permissive is an obligatory object control construction. My first argument is based on argument structure, the association of thematic roles with sentence constituents. The matrix indirect object and PRO may have distinct theta roles in (1), (4), (6). The indirect object marked by =ko or =se is the goal of permission or telling. The embedded subject PRO is the agent of read. The infinitive itself is the theme of de- allow. The second argument is based on the nature of the =ko case marker on the indirect object in the permissive. In a control structure, the goal DP in the matrix has lexical, not structural case. The HU postposition =ko has a dual nature: it is a lexical case selected for the goal by the ditransitive de-na give, and it will be glossed dative in the examples. It can also be the accusative differential object marker on a direct object, and as such it can be suppressed by the passive form of the sentences (Mohanan 1994:92, 94, 123). There are several arguments that the matrix indirect object has lexical case, not structural object case. A transitive sentence such as (8) requires the differential object accusative marker on a pronoun referring to a human. It has the passive counterpart (9), in which the theme may have either dative object case or nominative case. (8) mɛ =ne ʊs=ko bula liy-a [Active] I =ERG 3s =ACC call take-pf.m.s I called/ invited him. (9) ʊs=ko/ vo bula-ya gɑ-ya [Passive] 3s.=ACC 3.s[NOM] call-pf.m.s go.pf.m.s 3 For example, the complex predicate mazbur kɑr-na force selects =ke liye for or =pɑr on for the infinitive complement, while vivɑsh kɑr-na oblige, force, put the screws on selects =ko dative on both the indirect object and the complement clause (Bahl 1979:34-35); see also Bahl (1974: ) for razi kɑr-na prevail on someone (=ko dative ) to do something (=pɑr/ke liye on/for ). 5

6 He was invited. But in the permissive (10a), the passive counterpart (10b) does not allow the nominative on what I am calling the indirect object mʊj h e I-DAT ; see Mohanan (1994:92, 94, 123). (10) a. unhõ=ne mʊj h e ja-ne nɑhĩ di-ya [Active] they=erg I.DAT go-inf.obl not give-pf.m.s They did not allow me to go. b. mʊj h e/*mɛ ja-ne nɑhĩ di-ya gɑ.-ya [Passive] I.DAT/I.NOM go-inf.obl not give-pf.m.s go-pf.m.s I was not allowed to go. In (9) and in many examples below, the =ko postposition is ambiguous between dative and accusative case. The contrast of DOM accusative with the goal dative is even clearer in Kashmiri, a language related to Hindi-Urdu and similar in case marking. The Kashmiri and Hindi-Urdu permissives are very similar in composition, as in accusative marking. Unlike Hindi-Urdu, however, Kashmiri does not require the accusative case on direct objects which are personal pronouns with human reference (11a). But the dative is required on the goal of the permissive (11b). These two constructions show a distinction which is often absent in Hindi-Urdu between direct object and indirect object case marking. See more detailed discussion in section 4, examples (30)-(32). (11) Comparison with Kashmiri a. temy suuzu-s ni bi toor [Nominative direct object] he.erg send-1sg.nom not I.NOM there 'He didn't send me there.' b. temy dyutu-m ni mye tatyi rooz-ni [Dative indirect object] he.er gave-1s not 1s.DAT there stay-inf 'He didn't let me stay there.' (Peter Hook, p.c.) In Kashmiri, the permissive requires a dative indirect object, distinct in form from a direct object. My conclusion is that the permissive requires lexical dative case on the goal of permission, and this lexical case is similar to the lexical -se postpositional case selected by the instructivee verb kɑh-na tell. So the permissive has a matrix indirect object that has lexical case, like the instructive. It is invariant, compared with the accusative DOM (Aissen 2003); the DOM can be suppressed in the passive form of the sentence. The next argument for obligatory object control is based on a mysterious and ill-understood condition: in Hindi-Urdu, controlled PRO may not have lexically determined dative case (Davison 2004; 2008). This condition is found in a number of languages with lexical, or quirky, case on subjects, 6

7 though not in Icelandic. 4 Hindi-Urdu has many predicates, both single lexical verbs and complex predicates, that require dative or other lexical case on the subject (Davison 2004). The specific case of the subject is a property of the predicate. Some predicates which value dative case on the subject are shown in (12a,b). These predicates are either stative or change of state predicates, and resemble unaccusatives in certain respects. (12) a. mʊj h e cay =ki ek pyali b h i nɑhĩ mıl-i (Goal) I.DAT tea-=gen-f one cup.fs emph not get.-pf.f.s I did not get even one cup of tea. b. shyam i =ko ɑpne-ap i/*j /ʊs *i/j =pɑr krod h a-ya (Experiencer) Shyam=DAT self s-self /3s=on anger.m.s come-pf.ms Shyam got angry with himself. The constructions in (12) have counterparts without a dative subject. They are close synonyms, but instead have nominative or ergative subjects, valued by T, perfective aspect (and V features). (13) a. mɛ =ne cay =ki ek pyali b h i nɑhĩ pii (Agent) I=ERG tea=gen.f one cup.fs emph not drink-pf.f.s I did not drink even one cup of tea. b. ʊs i =ne ɑpne i -b h ai=pɑr krod h ki-ya (Experiencer) 3s=ERG self s brother=on anger do-pf He got angry at his (own) brother. Verbs of the type in (12) may not be embedded in control contexts (14), though the counterparts in (13) may be embedded in control sentences (15): (14) a. *vo i [PRO i pɛsa mıl-na ] cah-ta hɛ 3s.NOM money get-inf want-impf.ms is He wants [PRO to get money]. b. *vo i [PRO i ɑpne-b h ai i/*j =pɑr krod h a-na] nɑhĩ cah-ta hɛ 3s.NOM self s-brother=on anger come-inf not want-impf is He doesn t want [PRO to get angry at his brother]. (15) a. vo i [PRO i pɛsa le-na ] cah-ta hɛ 3.s,NOM money take-inf want-impf.ms is He wants [PRO to take money. b. mɛ i [PRO i ɑpne-ap i/*j =pɑr krod h kɑr-na] nɑhĩ cah-ti I.NOM self s-self=on anger do-inf not want-impf I don t want [PRO to get angry at (my)self]. The complements of cah-na want that have dative subject predicates are 4 Evidence for grammatical dative-marked PRO in Icelandic is found in Sigurðsson (2008), along with some examples which are not fully grammatical. Icelandic may not be a clear exception to the *(PRO-Dat) condition. 7

8 robustly ungrammatical; the predicates include mıl-na get and krod h a-na become angry. 5 Embedded predicates with structurally cased subjects like lena take and krod h kɑr-na feel/show anger are perfectly grammatical. This contrast is one of the strongest effects I have encountered in questioning speakers of Hindi and Urdu; speakers consistently reject (14a,b), often spontaneously substituting (15a,b). The restriction *PRO-lexical case has not found a satisfactory explanation. But it can be noted what the restriction is not (Davison 2008). In particular, it is not a clash between the case of PRO and the case of the controller, nor is it a clash of volitionality between the theta/semantic role of PRO and the semantic role of the matrix controller (contra Butt, this volume section 3.2.4). In (16a), the sentence is well formed, but there is a difference of case and semantic role between the nominative PRO and the dative controller in the matrix clause, if knowing how is a non-agentive state. In (16b), the case of PRO and the case of the controller are both dative, so that both subjects are nonvolitional. The semantic role of the matrix subject is experiencer know how, while the role of PRO is a non-volitional goal, the subject of mıl-na to get without special effort, in contrast with le-na to take (deliberately), so there is no clash of volitionality between the matrix and embedded predicates. Yet (16b) is ungrammatical; in my terms, it is because the embedded PRO has dative case, violating the lexical case on PRO condition. Compare the ungrammatical verbs in (16a) and (16b) with the grammatical verbs in (16a,b). (16) a. ʊse [PRO[NOM] saikɑl cala-na ] a-ta hɛ 3s[DAT] bicycle drive-inf come-impf is He/she knows how [PRO to ride a bicycle]. b. *ʊse [PRO[DAT] pɛsa mıl-na ] a-ta hɛ 3.s.m.[DAT] money [NOM] get-inf come-impf.m.s is He knows [(how) to get money]. The restriction *PRO-lexical case applies as well to object-control structures, such as force in (17a,b) and the de-na construction in (17c,d). The ungrammatical verbs in (17a,b) require dative case on PRO, while the 5 Butt (this volume, section 3.2.4) interprets cah-na want as a volitional kind of wanting, which takes a =ne ergative subject in the perfective. There is an important difference between my assumptions about =ne and hers (Butt and King 2004); I agree with Montaut (1991:103) that non-volitional subjects may be marked with =ne, while Butt and King associate the semantic role of agent with =ne. (i) berɑng zındɑgi=ke ehsas=ne ʊse hıl-a di-ya colorless life =GEN feeling=erg 3[DAT] shake-caus give-pf The feeling of a colorless life shook her. (Montaut 1991:103) 8

9 grammatical verbs in (17a,b) require nominative case. The permissive sentence in (17c) violates *PRO[Dat]. In contrast, the non-dative subject verb in (17d) makes the sentence grammatical. 6 (17) a. mɛ =ne ap i =ko [PRO i ɛsa pɛsa *mıl-ne/le-ne=ke liye I=ERG you=dat such money get-inf/take-inf=for mɑzbur nɑhĩ kiya forced not do-pf I didn t force you i [PRO i to *get/take such money]. b. mɛ =ne ap i =se [PRO i ʊs=pɑr krod h *a-ne I=ERG you=abl 3s=on anger come-inf /kɑr-ne=ko mɑzbur nɑhĩ ki.ya /do-inf=dat forced not do-pf I didn t force you i [PRO i to feel angry at 3s.]. *with a-ne come c. *mã i =ne bɑccõ j =ko [PRO[DAT] *i/j mıṭ h aiyã mother=erg children=dat sweets.f.pl mıl-ne] nɑhĩ dĩ/diya get-inf.obl not give.pf.fpl/msg Mother did not allow the children [PRO to get sweets]. [PRO-Dat] d. mã i =ne bɑccõ j =ko [PRO[NOM] *i/j mıṭ h aiyã mother=erg children=dat sweets.f.pl le-ne] nɑhĩ dĩ/diya take-inf.obl not give.pf.fpl/msg Mother did not allow the children [PRO to take sweets]. In the default context, the permissive sentence (17c) is ungrammatical because its complement subject has the lexical case required by the verb mıl-na get, in contrast to the grammatical (17d), with a non-dative subject verb. The lexical case condition has applied in (17c), as it did to subject control sentences. I take this restriction to indicate the presence of controlled PRO, to which the lexical case condition applies in the permissive construction. See section 5 below for the factors which can make (17d) and similar sentences grammatical. These 6 Another syntactic environment in which the *PRO-Dat condition is found is participle modifiers. The participles have a null argument corresponding to the modified head. If the dative condition holds, this null category must be PRO. This structure bears on arguments for a clausal complement for the ECM structure in section 3. (i) [[PRO i g h ɑr a-ya hu-a] admi i House come-pf be-pf man The man i [who i came home] (ii) *[[PRO i krod h a-ya hu-a] admi i anger come-pf be-pf man The man i [who i got angry] See Subbarao (2012:292-4 and Appendix 8.3) for examples of South Asian languages which do or do not have participles like (ii). 9

10 judgments are found with a default context. Below, I will note exceptions to the *PRO(Dat) condition. By contrast, in raising to subject sentences such as (18) and ECM sentences with participial complements (19), the dative DP is expressed and grammatical. There is no restriction on lexical case on the embedded subject, which is overtly expressed. The dative -ko is grammatical. (18) ʊs=ko i [ e i b h ai=pɑr krod h a-ne] lɑg-a 3s=DAT brother=on anger.m.s come-inf.obl begin-pf.m.s He/she began to get angry at his/her brother. (19) mã=ne [bɑcce=ko buxar a-te hue ] dek h -a mother=erg child=dat fever come-impf be-pf see-pf The mother saw [the child getting a fever]. (Awadhesh Misra, p.c.) A final argument for an embedded clause with a controlled PRO subject is based on the syntactic conditions for binding reflexives. In Hindi-Urdu, anaphors are subject oriented. As the late Madhu Gurtu noted (1992: 30), the simplex reflexive ɑpna can be long-distance subject bound across a non-finite clause boundary, and also locally bound within the embedded clause. But the complex reflexive ɑpne ap can only be locally bound, within the same simplex clause. It is hard to find a single clause in which there are two possible (animate) antecedents, but (19) is a possible example. The subject is the only antecedent, though in some science fiction or metaphysical context, the direct object could have been another antecedent. But it is not; the only antecedent is the subject, not the direct object (20). 7 (20) mã i bɑcce j =ko ɑpne ap i/*j =se kɛse ɑlɑg mother child=acc self s self=from how separate kɑr sɑk-e? do be.able-subjunctive How could the mother i separate the child j from herself i /*himself j? (Davison 2001:53) The contrast of simplex and complex reflexive is found in the permissive (21a,b). 7 The conditions for anaphoric binding are complicated by several factors. The simplex anaphor may be used logophorically, especially in the first and second person. Also, as Butt points out (this volume, section 3.2.1), there is an emphatic use, but it is without case and thus not to be confused with the anaphor. There are disagreements in speakers judgments about whether the causee can bind a possessive reflexive, summarized from several different sources in Davison (1999:415). But the default interpretation is that there is a c-commanding subject antecedent. 10

11 (21) a. mã i =ne radha j =ko [PRO *i/j ɑpne i/j =ko aine=mẽ Mother=ERG Radha=DAT self =ACC mirror=in dek h -ne nɑhĩ di-ya see-inf.obl not give-pf.m.s Mother i did not allow Radha j [PRO *i/j to look at self i/j in the mirror]. b. mã i =ne radha j =ko [PRO *i/j ɑpne ap *i/j =ko aine=mẽ Mother=ERG Radha=DAT self self =ACC mirror=in dek h -ne nɑhĩ di-ya see-inf.obl not give-pf.ms Mother i did not allow Radha j [PRO *i/j to look at self *i/j in the mirror]. The simplex reflexive ɑpne has two possible antecedents, local and long distance (21a). The complex reflexive ɑpne ap in (21b) has only one reading (R. Bhatt, p.c.). It cannot be bound by the matrix subject mã, but only by the local subject PRO, which is controlled by the indirect object radha. This fact cannot be explained except by assuming the presence of controlled PRO as the subject antecedent. The dative indirect object is not the subject antecedent required by an anaphor in Hindi-Urdu (in all but a few exceptional cases; see discussion in Davison 1999, 2001), but see Butt (this volume, for a contrary view). I have offered four arguments that the permissive has the properties of obligatory object control, which are a matrix indirect object, and an oblique theme complement with a null PRO subject identified by the matrix indirect object. The arguments are a) the nature of the DP of permission, which is invariantly dative and has a distinct theta role from the subject of the embedded clause, b) the invariant dative case on the locus of permission, c) the restriction on dative case on PRO, typical of control, and finally d) the local binding of the subject oriented complex reflexive ɑpne ap with local PRO. The presence of PRO argues for a fairly large clause projection, at least TP, with PRO as its specifier due to the EPP feature of T. The presence of the infinitive suffix na 'to' indicates the presence of the functional head T, because it contrasts with the presence of aspect suffixes, indicating the presence of AsP. The infinitive forms of German verbs may be VP projections, because the infinitive en combines in German with auxiliary verbs as the required form of the lexical verb. The case of PRO could be due to C, arguing for a non-finite CP. I have noted the distinct thematic roles, the lexical case of the indirect object, the lexical case condition on the matrix goal of permission, and the local binding by the PRO subject for the complex reflexive. I think this evidence makes a strong case for the permissive as object control with at least TP. But in the next section, I will argue just as vigorously that the permissive has ECM structure. 4 Allow as Exceptional Case Marking 11

12 In this section, I will offer arguments that de-na allow is also an ECM construction, which differs in structure and other properties from the control version of the permissive. 8 For example, some allow sentences do not have a dative indirect object, a locus of permission. If there is one, it is in the discourse context (Bhatt 1998), and not syntactically projected. Work is done by unspecified people (22), trees are cut by unspecified gardeners (23) and darkness arrives of its own accord (24). In (25), the specific moment also changes of its own accord, as the subject of an unaccusative verb. (22) yah kam ho-ne dijiye this work[nom] be-inf.ob give.imper. FORMAL Allow this work to be done/let this work be done. (Bahri 1992:320) (23) pıta=ne peṛ kɑṭ-ne di-e father=erg tree.m.pl[nom] be.cut-inf.obl give-pf.mpl Father allowed [the trees to be cut]. (Bhatt 2005) (24) age b h i e i ho-ne de ãd h era i ahead also be-inf.obl give-imper.familiar darkness[nom] Let there be darkness ahead. (song, Majrooh Sultanpuri, translation by Philip Lutgendorf) (25) kɑcce lɑmhe=ko zɑra ʃak h =pe pɑk-ne de-te? unripe moment=acc a.bit branch=on ripen-inf.obl give-impf.pl That tender moment, couldn t you have at least let it ripen on the bough? (song, S.S. Gulzar, translation by Philip Lutgendorf) Note the minimal pair in (24) and (25) of DOM. In (24), the non-specific inanimate ãd h era darkness has unmarked nominative case. In (25), the specific though inanimate kɑcce lɑmhe tender moment has the =ko accusative marker. In all these examples the inanimate or non-referential DP embedded subjects do not refer to individuals who are given permission to do something. Rather, the matrix subject refers to someone who allows an event to happen. The event may include an agent which is incidental to the permission given, and not syntactically projected (Bhatt 1998). The ECM clausal complement is an infinitive or TP, but T has no case marking properties, as the matrix verb values DOM accusative/nominative. Below I will note a similarity to ECM sentences with perfective and imperfective aspectual participles, suggesting that the embedded clause is an AspP. Both types of ECM constructions are smaller and less rich in features to 8 This structure could have been represented as Raising to Object, without changing my arguments. The differences between the ECM and Raising to Object analyses are not relevant to the issues discussed here. 12

13 check than the control complement CP or TP with a subject case. The control and ECM structures differ in their interpretations, which are contrasted schematically in (26): (26) a. Control modality: There is a DP which is allowed to VP b. ECM modality: It is allowed to be the case [for DP to VP]; nothing prevents the event [DP VP] from happening. Note that the (26a) interpretation entails the (26b) interpretation, but not the other way around. The control structure has a syntactically projected DP which is interpreted as the locus of permission, while in the ECM structure, a locus of permission may be part of the context, or it may be absent. 9 The modality is circumstantial, involving conditions which are part of the context; it does not involve obligation (deontic) or knowledge (epistemic). See Portner (2009: ) and Hacquard (2011). I discuss the modal properties of the permissive in 6.1 below. Here I outline my syntactic assumptions about ECM/Raising to Object. The construction has been part of the analysis of English and other languages since the earliest era of generative grammar. It was characterized as a raising transformation in Rosenbaum (1967) and Postal (1974); the embedded subject is raised to the matrix clause, in which it has the syntactic properties of a direct object, including object case; Lasnik and Saito (1991) returned to this analysis. Chomsky (1981) derived the accusative case on the embedded subject without movement; the matrix verb values case across a TP clause boundary, as ECM. I extend this analysis to Hindi-Urdu, which has a small number of verbs that take a propositional complement. 10 In ECM subordinate clauses the DP subject gets direct object case, as in (27): (27) XP [ DP-[Nom]/=ko VP-oblique participial/ oblique infinitive] Following Bhatt (2005), I am broadening the definition of ECM to include the oblique infinitive in addition to participles, as in (28)-(29). These sentences 9 Bhatt (1998) argues on the basis of sentences like (i) that there need not be a projected locus of obligation, which is syntactically the subject of a deontic modal have to. (i) We are expecting 50 guests tonight. There have to be 50 chairs in the living room by 5 p.m. (Bhatt 1998) The caterer in this case is the locus of obligation. 10 Subbarao (1984:167), discusses sentences like (28) which have three syntactic analyses, a propositional complement, which I am assuming here, and two participle modifier constructions, controlled by the matrix and embedded subjects. I=ERG Ram =ACC /[NOM] book[nom] read-impf be-pf-obl 13

14 represent the productive ECM construction associated with dek h -na see, pa-na find, see and sʊn-na hear. (28) mɛ =ne [ram=ko/*0 kıtab pɑṛ h -te hu-e] dek h -a see-pf.m I saw [Ram read(ing) a book]. (Event/proposition as direct object of see ) (29) mɛ =ne [bariʃ-0 /=ko pɑṛ-ti hu-i] dek h -i I=ERG rain. F. [NOM]/ACC fall-impf.f be-pf-f. see-pf 11 I saw [rain falling ]. (Event as direct object of see ) The embedded subject in (28)-(29) is marked with the DOM accusative case, associated with the verbal projection of the matrix clause. We see that the accusative =ko is obligatory for DPs with specific or human reference, while it is optional for inanimate, non-specific referents, such as bariʃ rain. Compare the contrasting pair for inanimates in (24)-(25). The same pattern is found in the simple transitive sentences (30) and (31): (30) mɛ =ne ram[*nom] /=ko dek h -a I=ERG Ram [NOM] ACC see-pf I saw Ram. (31) mɛ =ne bariʃ[nom] /=ko dek h -ii/aa I=erg rain.f. [NOM] =ACC see-pf.f/ms I saw rain. (Peter Hook, p.c., Google search) 12 The conditions on DOM =ko are summed up in (32), reflecting the standard view in Aissen (2003). See Dayal (2010) for further more fine-grained discussion of Hindi-Urdu in particular. (32c) is revised in the light of (31). (32) Case of direct objects: a. Animate/human/specific DPs must get accusative case as direct objects. b. Specific, referential DP direct object may have accusative or nominative case. c. Non-specific, non-referential DPs are usually nominative. I conclude that the subject of the embedded non-finite clause of an ECM complement receives structural nominative or accusative case, because in ECM sentences (25)-(26) the same factors for the choice of accusative over nominative (31) are at work, just as in simplex clauses (30)-(31). By contrast, 11 The feminine agreement is required with the nominative option on bariʃ rain ; with =ko, there is default masculine singular agreement. 12 The version of rain with accusative case has a kind of specific reading, referring perhaps to the monsoon rather than ordinary rain (Rajesh Bhatt, p.c.). 14

15 the matrix locus of permission in the control structure has only lexical, not structural, case by the passive test in (9)-(11). There is, however, a situation in which the embedded ECM subject may have lexical case. As I mentioned above, experiencer dative subjects can appear overtly in ECM contexts, and are grammatical: (33) bɑcce=ne [dusre bɑcce=ko kek mıl-te hu-e] dek h -a child=erg other child=dat cake get-impf.obl be-pf.obl see-pf A child saw [another child getting cake]. 13 (Awadhesh Misra, p.c.) This sentence is interesting for the main point I am making, that ECM (or Raising to Object) is different from control sentences, which disallow dative case on the embedded subject. Here the embedded subject gets lexical dative case from the embedded predicate. But there is also an argument for the propositional nature of the ECM complement (33), especially if it is a participle. An alternative analysis is (34), in which a controlled participle modifies a direct object. (34) bɑcce=ne [dusre bɑcce i =ko [PRO[DAT] i kek mıl-te child=erg other child=acc cake get-impf.obl hu-e]] dek h -a be-pf.obl see-pf A child saw [another child i [PRO i getting cake]]. If this were the structure, the controlled PRO would get dative case because of the verb mıl- get, and the *PRO[Dat] condition would be violated. But this sentence is grammatical, and for that reason I conclude that (34) is not the structure, and instead there is a non-finite complement as in (33). In this section, I have argued that some instances of the permissive have ECM structure. There is oblique case on the complement infinitive, just as there is in participle ECM complements (28)-(29). There is no locus of permission which is syntactically projected as an indirect object. There is no violation of the condition barring lexical case on null experiencer subjects. The embedded subject has structural case, which follows the same principles as DOM in simplex clauses. Compared with the control structure in section 4, the ECM has a smaller complement functional projection, TP or AspP. It has no independent case feature for the embedded subject, and the ECM modal interpretation is a subset of the control construction s interpretation. See further discussion in section This is a curious case of multiple case valuing: the matrix predicate values structural accusative (direct object case), while the embedded predicate requires lexical dative on the experiencer. This could be case overwriting, in which the lexical case of the embedded predicate overwrites the structural case of the matrix verb. I am assuming that this dative persists under passivization. 15

16 5 Exceptions to the lexical case condition The dual analysis of the permissive raises some questions. If two different structures exist simultaneously, how do the permissive sentences show distinct behavior? For example, how can a sentence such as (17c) be perceived as ungrammatical, as shown earlier in the paper? The explanation was that it has PRO with a lexical dative case. There should be another analysis of the sentence which is grammatical because of the coercing context, on the order of (37). In this section, I will discuss permissive and obligation sentences in which the lexical case condition does not hold. 5.1 Preferences for the ECM analysis In some situations, there is a preference for the ECM analysis, which lacks a matrix locus of permission. The dative experiencer predicate buxar a-na to get a fever (35) can be embedded under the permissive de-na (36a), as well as the must, ought modal cahiye (36b). The dative =ko is valued by the embedded verb on its subject, rather than by the matrix vp. Note, however, what the sentences in (36a,b) mean. (35) mɑriz=ko buxar a ga-ya hɛ patient=dat fever.m[nom] come go-pf.m. is The patient has gotten a fever. (36) a. ḍakṭar=ne [mɑriz=ko buxar a-ne] nɑhĩ diya doctor=erg patient=dat fever come-inf.obl not give.pf The doctor did not allow the patient to get a fever. [The doctor did everything he could to make sure the patient did not get a fever.] (Event reading) (K.V. Subbarao, p.c.) b. [mɑriz=ko buxar a-na] nɑhĩ cahiye patient=dat fever.m come-inf not ought The patient must not get a fever; it must not happen that the patient gets a fever. (Event reading) The sense of (36a,b) is that the patient is not the locus of permission or obligation. These sentences do not say that the patient is forbidden to get a fever; rather they say that it ought not to happen that the patient gets a fever. Grammatical sentences with lexical case on the embedded subject are not unique to the examples above. Compare mıl-ne in the ungrammatical (16b), (17c with mıl-ne in (37) and cahiye in (38): (37) is=se ciṛ h -kɑr mɑhalıngɑm=ne [monika=ko 3s=ABL be.irritated-cp Mahalingam=ERG Monika=DAT ɛmbibies=ki ḍıgri hi nɑhĩ mıl-ne ] di MBBS=GEN degree.f. emph not get-inf.obl give.pf.f. 16

17 Irritated by her, Mahalingam did not allow Monika to receive the MBBS degree. (Peter Hook, p.c; Google search) Speakers judging (37) as grammatical comment that Mahalingam must have done something behind the scenes to prevent Monika from getting the degree; the sentence does not mean that Monika was not given permission to get the degree. I have placed the internal brackets to reflect an ECM analysis. Even the ungrammatical (17a) can be coerced into a grammatical sentence with ECM structure and the allow to happen meaning, in the right discourse context. For example, it could be assumed in the context that the mother removed all the candy in the house, forbade the children to go to a shop to buy candy, and so on (Rajesh Bhatt, p.c.). The same kind of meaning is found with the modal in (38): (38) [bariʃ ho-na] cahiye rain[nom] be-inf ought There ought/is likely to be rain; it is needed that there be rain. In (38), the rain is not required to fall. Rather, the event of raining is necessary or imminent. The choice of dative or nominative seems to obey the same principle (31) for ECM embedded subjects, so that DPs with inanimate or nonspecific reference may have nominative rather than dative case. The sentence would have a control structure and interpretation if there were a locus of obligation with dative case. We can go further with the ECM construction, which seems to favor non-volitional embedded predicates, unaccusatives or passives. The ECM analysis predicts that the embedded animate subject of an unaccusative verb can be given direct object accusative marking by the matrix verb, in the event sense: 14 (39) maalık i =ne [ ɑpne(i) b h ai=ko lʊṭ-ne ] nɑhĩ di-ya boss =ERG self s brother=acc be.robbed-inf.obl not give-pf The (gang) boss didn t allow [his own brother to be robbed/made bankrupt]. Here the sense is that the boss prevented others from robbing his brother, not that he did not give his brother permission to be robbed. In the positive sentence (40), the event of becoming a millionaire was allowed to happen (40); the meaning is not that the millionaire was given permission to make money. 14 Additional evidence that this dative marking is the effect of the ECM verb, and not the complement verb, can be seen in a version of (23) that projects the optional agent with =se ablative, not =ko dative. The sentence is ungrammatical: (i) ) *pıta=ne mali=se peṛ kɑṭ-ne di-e father=erg gardener=abl tree.m.pl[nom] be.cut-inf.obl give-pf.mpl Father allowed [the trees to be cut by the gardener]. 17

18 (40) ap=ne [mʊj h e kɑroṛ-pɑti bɑn-ne] di-ya you=erg I=ACC millionaire be.made-inf give-pf You allowed [me to become a millionaire]. [you made it possible/??you gave permission] The accusative DP in (39) and (40) does not represent a locus of obligation: it is the theme of the embedded unaccusative verb. Conversely, there may be sentences like (41), in which the context suggests that the =ko marked DP is actually a locus of control, even though the infinitive verb pit-ne be beaten is unaccusative. Here the event is not just allowed to happen, but volitionally sought. (41) gand h i-ji =ke sɑmay=mẽ, [logõ=ne ɑpne-ap=ko [PRO Gandhi-HON=GEN time=in people=erg self s-self=dat pulis=se pıṭ-ne] di-ya police=with be.beaten-inf give-pf In the era of Gandhi, people allowed themselves to be beaten by the police. (as an act of peaceful resistance) There are sentences which have only the ECM analysis, as I have shown in this section. The two features of the examples of this preference are that the sentences lack a locus of permission and are not constrained by the condition on lexical case. The two permissive structures coexist but there are factors which I will talk about in section 6.2 which favor one structure over the other. It is, however, possible to get a control reading for a sentence with an unaccusative embedded verb, given the right circumstances (41). 6 The two structures for de-na allow 6.1 The nature of the modal meanings of de-na allow. Here I briefly sketch an account of de-na allow as a single modal with two senses, allow to do and allow to happen, following Hacquard (2011) and sources cited in Portner 2009). Allow as a modal is often associated with deontic modality, having to do with laws and obligations. But this not the case with de-na, which has to do with circumstances, propositions which are true in a given world. The modal base consists of a function from propositions to worlds, specifying the propositions which are true in a given world. In the preceding examples, we have seen how the meaning and grammaticality of sentences may vary according to default assumptions or special context specified by certain circumstances. So we may say that the modal base of de-na is circumstantial, based on what circumstances hold, rather than deontic, based on laws, or epistemic, based what is known. Allow in general is not normally deontic, in 18

19 that it does not impose an obligation to do something. Rather it seems to mean something like not require that A not happen, for a given act A. I am proposing that the modal de-na is associated with two structures, a control structure with the modal flavor allow to do, and an ECM/Raising structure associated with the modal flavor allow to happen. 15 The association of two syntactic structures with a single verb recalls Perlmutter s (1970) proposal for begin, as both a control verb and a raising to subject verb. It is also consistent with McCawley s proposal (1993:397-88) that (syntactic) scope differences of modals and quantifiers represent natural language meanings. Further, the hierarchy of heads in Cinque (1999) places epistemic modals higher than root/deontic modals, which are low. This difference suggests at least that the two modalities are separate entities, not aspects of the same concept, and that ambiguity would be possible. The prevailing view following Kratzer s proposals (such as Kratzer 1991 and others summarized in Portner 2009: 48ff) is that modals are not semantically ambiguous, and the various interpretations are relative to different conversational backgrounds. It is proposed by Bhatt (1998; 2006) and others that modals are not syntactically ambiguous either; modals are raising verbs. Bhatt (1998) notes that the deontic sentences may have an expletive subject rather than a subject of a control verb in the sentence (42); the locus of obligation is in the context. (42) There must be 50 chairs in the living room by 5 p.m. As Portner (2009:188) remarks, arguments based on sentences like (42) for raising show that the subject argument of the modal need not be in subject position, as in a control structure. But he argues against the stronger position (Bhatt 1998; Wurmbrand 1999) that modals cannot sometimes have a control structure. Portner argues (2009:197) that it is possible to add an individual variable, corresponding to the locus of obligation, to the Kratzer statement of worlds and accessibility relations. This variable would be necessary if it was needed to show that two distinct individuals were obliged to do something for different reasons. In the proposal made in this paper, the modal allow in Hindi-Urdu is derived from the lexical verb de-na give, which selects three arguments: an agent, a theme, and a goal. When the theme is an infinitive complement, the goal is the locus of permission, coindexed with the subject of the embedded infinitive (see Butt s 1995 argument structure in section 7). The allow modal therefore does have an argument with a thematic role which represents the locus of permission, providing strong evidence for a control structure. 6.2 How are the two structures related? 15 See Rivero et al (2010) for a discussion of two different languages which have different syntactic structures to express circumstantial necessity. 19

20 In the control structure, a locus of permission is present, as a dative DP in the matrix clause. I define the locus of permission as in (43): (43) Locus of permission: an individual capable of doing A who is not forbidden to do A (Not necessary that x not do A) In this clausal structure, the case restriction on PRO applies to the PRO subject of the oblique complement infinitive. The structure is associated with the following modal flavor : There is someone who is allowed to do something. This sense is often associated with deontic modality, and does implicate that an event was allowed to occur. Nevertheless, it crucially includes a locus of obligation. In the ECM structure, there is no locus of permission argument in the matrix clause, and the case restriction on PRO does not apply, and it is usually assumed that the oblique complement is a defective TP or AspP. The modal flavor is that there is an event which is allowed to occur. The ECM structure may be compared with the control structure in the following ways. First, de-na has lost an argument, the dative DP with its goal theta role; recall that the principal difference between control and ECM/Raising is the number of theta roles in the matrix clause in the Movement Theory of Control (Hornstein 1999). Second, the size of the clausal complement is reduced in the ECM structure. In examples like (35), the embedded proposition is clearly an AspP. In a sentence like (2), the complement is an infinitive without case-valuing properties for its (subject) specifier. So in some sense it is smaller or at least less specified than the infinitive complement in the control construction. The difference between the structures could be purely lexical, so that there are two c-selection properties for de-na with a clausal complement. The existence of the ECM structure could be the product of a historical change, resulting in two structures lexically represented for the verb give. 16 The ECM structure could be derived by the loss of the matrix locus of permission, which in turn removes the antecedent for PRO; so the embedded subject must be pronounced and cannot be PRO. This change in structure seems to be connected with a smaller size of the complement. It has been claimed that the epistemic sense of modals is derived from the root sense historically and developmentally, even metaphorically (sources summed up in Hacquard 2011, such as Sweetser 1990: 50ff). 6.3 How are modal flavors and syntactic structure associated with permission sentences? Sentences with de-na allow seem to sort themselves out very naturally into the 16 The Sanskrit verb dā give has the meaning allow with an infinitive complement and a dative locus of permission. Unfortunately the example which is cited in Apte (1958, Vol. II: 507) lacks an overt indirect object. It is understood, and would be dative if overt (Frederick Smith, p.c.). 20

Movement and Binding

Movement and Binding Movement and Binding Gereon Müller Institut für Linguistik Universität Leipzig SoSe 2008 www.uni-leipzig.de/ muellerg Gereon Müller (Institut für Linguistik) Constraints in Syntax 4 SoSe 2008 1 / 35 Principles

More information

Semantics and Generative Grammar. Quantificational DPs, Part 3: Covert Movement vs. Type Shifting 1

Semantics and Generative Grammar. Quantificational DPs, Part 3: Covert Movement vs. Type Shifting 1 Quantificational DPs, Part 3: Covert Movement vs. Type Shifting 1 1. Introduction Thus far, we ve considered two competing analyses of sentences like those in (1). (1) Sentences Where a Quantificational

More information

19. Morphosyntax in L2A

19. Morphosyntax in L2A Spring 2012, April 5 Missing morphology Variability in acquisition Morphology and functional structure Morphosyntax in acquisition In L1A, we observe that kids don t always provide all the morphology that

More information

THE ENGLISH SENTENCE

THE ENGLISH SENTENCE THE ENGLISH SENTENCE (Materials based on: Huddleston, R. & Pullum, G.K. (Eds.)., 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. London: CUP and Greenbaum, S., & Quirk, R. 1990. A Student's Grammar

More information

Chapter 13, Sections 13.1-13.2. Auxiliary Verbs. 2003 CSLI Publications

Chapter 13, Sections 13.1-13.2. Auxiliary Verbs. 2003 CSLI Publications Chapter 13, Sections 13.1-13.2 Auxiliary Verbs What Auxiliaries Are Sometimes called helping verbs, auxiliaries are little words that come before the main verb of a sentence, including forms of be, have,

More information

The compositional semantics of same

The compositional semantics of same The compositional semantics of same Mike Solomon Amherst College Abstract Barker (2007) proposes the first strictly compositional semantic analysis of internal same. I show that Barker s analysis fails

More information

5th Week. Ways of making a phrase, clause, and sentence

5th Week. Ways of making a phrase, clause, and sentence 5th Week Ways of making a phrase, clause, and sentence 1. Ways of making Phrase Before explaining the way of making phrase, we need to understand the basic concepts in advance. Words are the most basic

More information

Sounds Like Like. Peter Lasersohn. University of Rochester. Abstract: It is argued that the verb sound is ambiguous between

Sounds Like Like. Peter Lasersohn. University of Rochester. Abstract: It is argued that the verb sound is ambiguous between Sounds Like Like Peter Lasersohn University of Rochester Abstract: It is argued that the verb sound is ambiguous between one reading where it denotes a two-place relation between individuals and properties,

More information

CONTENTS. page(s) Figures & tables

CONTENTS. page(s) Figures & tables page(s) Contents v-viii Figures & tables ix Sources cited x-xxvi Abbreviations & Introduction 1 The Egyptian language 33-36 2 The writing System: its principles 36-40 3 One-consonant signs as phonograms,

More information

Index. 344 Grammar and Language Workbook, Grade 8

Index. 344 Grammar and Language Workbook, Grade 8 Index Index 343 Index A A, an (usage), 8, 123 A, an, the (articles), 8, 123 diagraming, 205 Abbreviations, correct use of, 18 19, 273 Abstract nouns, defined, 4, 63 Accept, except, 12, 227 Action verbs,

More information

Honors German 3/ German 3 Curriculum

Honors German 3/ German 3 Curriculum Honors German 3/ German 3 Curriculum Timeline Unit 1 Standards Objectives Content Additional Resources Performance Tasks Assessments 3 weeks Die ACTFL Students will be able Vocabulary: Handouts Students

More information

Quick Introduction to APA Style For Use in Speech-Language Pathology

Quick Introduction to APA Style For Use in Speech-Language Pathology Quick Introduction to APA Style For Use in Speech-Language Pathology NOTE: All text is taken from: American Psychological Association (1997). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association.

More information

Non-nominal Which-Relatives

Non-nominal Which-Relatives Non-nominal Which-Relatives Doug Arnold, Robert D. Borsley University of Essex The properties of non-restrictive relatives All non-restrictive relative clauses include a wh-word. There are no that or zero

More information

Chapter 1. Introduction. 1.1. Topic of the dissertation

Chapter 1. Introduction. 1.1. Topic of the dissertation Chapter 1. Introduction 1.1. Topic of the dissertation The topic of the dissertation is the relations between transitive verbs, aspect, and case marking in Estonian. Aspectual particles, verbs, and case

More information

Structure of Clauses. March 9, 2004

Structure of Clauses. March 9, 2004 Structure of Clauses March 9, 2004 Preview Comments on HW 6 Schedule review session Finite and non-finite clauses Constituent structure of clauses Structure of Main Clauses Discuss HW #7 Course Evals Comments

More information

Constraints in Phrase Structure Grammar

Constraints in Phrase Structure Grammar Constraints in Phrase Structure Grammar Phrase Structure Grammar no movement, no transformations, context-free rules X/Y = X is a category which dominates a missing category Y Let G be the set of basic

More information

CAS LX 500 A1 Language Acquisition

CAS LX 500 A1 Language Acquisition CAS LX 500 A1 Language Acquisition Week 4a. Root infinitives, null subjects and the UCC Root infinitives vs. time Here are those Danish graphs again. Ooo. Consistent. Syntax at age two Root infinitives

More information

3.1 Grammatical Units

3.1 Grammatical Units Lengua Inglesa II 2009-2010 Topic 3: Grammatical Units Subtopic 1: Units and Boundaries Subtopic 2: The Noun Phrase Mick O Donnell VI-bis 302 michael.odonnell@uam.es 1. Units and rank scale Unit: any stretch

More information

Online Tutoring System For Essay Writing

Online Tutoring System For Essay Writing Online Tutoring System For Essay Writing 2 Online Tutoring System for Essay Writing Unit 4 Infinitive Phrases Review Units 1 and 2 introduced some of the building blocks of sentences, including noun phrases

More information

English auxiliary verbs

English auxiliary verbs 1. Auxiliary verbs Auxiliary verbs serve grammatical functions, for this reason they are said to belong to the functional category of words. The main auxiliary verbs in English are DO, BE and HAVE. Others,

More information

Appendix to Chapter 3 Clitics

Appendix to Chapter 3 Clitics Appendix to Chapter 3 Clitics 1 Clitics and the EPP The analysis of LOC as a clitic has two advantages: it makes it natural to assume that LOC bears a D-feature (clitics are Ds), and it provides an independent

More information

Sentence Structure/Sentence Types HANDOUT

Sentence Structure/Sentence Types HANDOUT Sentence Structure/Sentence Types HANDOUT This handout is designed to give you a very brief (and, of necessity, incomplete) overview of the different types of sentence structure and how the elements of

More information

Cross-linguistic differences in the interpretation of sentences with more than one QP: German (Frey 1993) and Hungarian (É Kiss 1991)

Cross-linguistic differences in the interpretation of sentences with more than one QP: German (Frey 1993) and Hungarian (É Kiss 1991) Cross-linguistic differences in the interpretation of sentences with more than one QP: German (Frey 1993) and Hungarian (É Kiss 1991) 1. Quantifier Scope in English (May 1977, 1985) Predictions of May

More information

研究ノート Binary Structure of English Preterit Subjunctive Shigehiro Hasegawa Ⅰ English is a simplified European language

研究ノート Binary Structure of English Preterit Subjunctive Shigehiro Hasegawa Ⅰ English is a simplified European language English is a European language of which the grammatical structure is considerably simplified. It has lost much of its former complicated structures consisting of declensions and conjugations, which are

More information

The Structure of English Language - Clause Functions

The Structure of English Language - Clause Functions Coordinate The Structure of English Language - Clause Functions Coordinate subordinate adverbial adjectival The simplest sentences may contain a single clause. (Simple is a standard description of one

More information

Double Genitives in English

Double Genitives in English Karlos Arregui-Urbina Department Linguistics and Philosophy MIT 1. Introduction Double Genitives in English MIT, 29 January 1998 Double genitives are postnominal genitive phrases which are marked with

More information

I have eaten. The plums that were in the ice box

I have eaten. The plums that were in the ice box in the Sentence 2 What is a grammatical category? A word with little meaning, e.g., Determiner, Quantifier, Auxiliary, Cood Coordinator, ato,a and dco Complementizer pe e e What is a lexical category?

More information

One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them One Ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them In the Land of Mordor where shadows lie

One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them One Ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them In the Land of Mordor where shadows lie One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them One Ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them In the Land of Mordor where shadows lie OR, THE RING POEM IN OLD CHURCH SLAVIC by Jussi Halla-aho

More information

Phrase Structure Rules, Tree Rewriting, and other sources of Recursion Structure within the NP

Phrase Structure Rules, Tree Rewriting, and other sources of Recursion Structure within the NP Introduction to Transformational Grammar, LINGUIST 601 September 14, 2006 Phrase Structure Rules, Tree Rewriting, and other sources of Recursion Structure within the 1 Trees (1) a tree for the brown fox

More information

GMAT.cz www.gmat.cz info@gmat.cz. GMAT.cz KET (Key English Test) Preparating Course Syllabus

GMAT.cz www.gmat.cz info@gmat.cz. GMAT.cz KET (Key English Test) Preparating Course Syllabus Lesson Overview of Lesson Plan Numbers 1&2 Introduction to Cambridge KET Handing Over of GMAT.cz KET General Preparation Package Introduce Methodology for Vocabulary Log Introduce Methodology for Grammar

More information

FLST08-09 Linguistic Foundations. Exercise of week 1 of Linguistic Foundations ( ) Ambiguity

FLST08-09 Linguistic Foundations. Exercise of week 1 of Linguistic Foundations ( ) Ambiguity FLST08-09 Linguistic Foundations Exercise of week 1 of Linguistic Foundations (31.10.2008) Ambiguity Ambiguity is the quality or state of being ambiguous. When a sentence is ambiguous, it has two or more

More information

EAP 1161 1660 Grammar Competencies Levels 1 6

EAP 1161 1660 Grammar Competencies Levels 1 6 EAP 1161 1660 Grammar Competencies Levels 1 6 Grammar Committee Representatives: Marcia Captan, Maria Fallon, Ira Fernandez, Myra Redman, Geraldine Walker Developmental Editor: Cynthia M. Schuemann Approved:

More information

Bound and referential pronouns

Bound and referential pronouns Bound and referential pronouns *with thanks to Birgit Bärnreuther, Christina Bergmann, Dominique Goltz, Stefan Hinterwimmer, MaikeKleemeyer, Peter König, Florian Krause, Marlene Meyer Peter Bosch Institute

More information

Free reflexives: Reflexives without

Free reflexives: Reflexives without Nordic Atlas of Language Structures (NALS) Journal, Vol. 1, 522 526 C opyright Björn Lundquist 2014 Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License Free reflexives: Reflexives without a sentence

More information

Curso académico 2015/2016 INFORMACIÓN GENERAL ESTRUCTURA Y CONTENIDOS HABILIDADES: INGLÉS

Curso académico 2015/2016 INFORMACIÓN GENERAL ESTRUCTURA Y CONTENIDOS HABILIDADES: INGLÉS Curso académico 2015/2016 INFORMACIÓN GENERAL ESTRUCTURA Y CONTENIDOS HABILIDADES: INGLÉS Objetivos de Habilidades: inglés El objetivo de la prueba es comprobar que el alumno ha adquirido un nivel B1 (dentro

More information

Syntax & Morphology: A Summary (or: Everything in 12 pages) 1

Syntax & Morphology: A Summary (or: Everything in 12 pages) 1 Syntax & Morphology: A Summary (or: Everything in 12 pages) 1 Ken Ramshøj Christensen Dept. of English, Inst. for Language, Literature & Culture, Aarhus University, DK-8000 Århus http://www.hum.au.dk/engelsk/engkrc/

More information

Pronouns. Their different types and roles. Devised by Jo Killmister, Skills Enhancement Program, Newcastle Business School

Pronouns. Their different types and roles. Devised by Jo Killmister, Skills Enhancement Program, Newcastle Business School Pronouns Their different types and roles Definition and role of pronouns Definition of a pronoun: a pronoun is a word that replaces a noun or noun phrase. If we only used nouns to refer to people, animals

More information

Rethinking the relationship between transitive and intransitive verbs

Rethinking the relationship between transitive and intransitive verbs Rethinking the relationship between transitive and intransitive verbs Students with whom I have studied grammar will remember my frustration at the idea that linking verbs can be intransitive. Nonsense!

More information

Methodological Issues for Interdisciplinary Research

Methodological Issues for Interdisciplinary Research J. T. M. Miller, Department of Philosophy, University of Durham 1 Methodological Issues for Interdisciplinary Research Much of the apparent difficulty of interdisciplinary research stems from the nature

More information

Using Language Stage Research** and CCEE ELA Language Domain, Standard 1, to Develop Conventions of Standard English

Using Language Stage Research** and CCEE ELA Language Domain, Standard 1, to Develop Conventions of Standard English Using Language Stage Research** and CCEE ELA Language Domain, Standard, to Develop Conventions of Standard English Language Stage CCSS* Supporting Speaking and Writing for Students with Complex Communication

More information

MARY. V NP NP Subject Formation WANT BILL S

MARY. V NP NP Subject Formation WANT BILL S In the Logic tudy Guide, we ended with a logical tree diagram for WANT (BILL, LEAVE (MARY)), in both unlabelled: tudy Guide WANT BILL and labelled versions: P LEAVE MARY WANT BILL P LEAVE MARY We remarked

More information

UNBOUND ANAPHORIC PRONOUNS: E-TYPE, DYNAMIC, AND STRUCTURED-PROPOSITIONS APPROACHES

UNBOUND ANAPHORIC PRONOUNS: E-TYPE, DYNAMIC, AND STRUCTURED-PROPOSITIONS APPROACHES FRIEDERIKE MOLTMANN UNBOUND ANAPHORIC PRONOUNS: E-TYPE, DYNAMIC, AND STRUCTURED-PROPOSITIONS APPROACHES ABSTRACT. Unbound anaphoric pronouns or E-type pronouns have presented notorious problems for semantic

More information

the subject called the voice. A sentence that begin with the subject or the

the subject called the voice. A sentence that begin with the subject or the 2. ACTIVE AND PASSIVE VOICE In English, the verb form which indicates whether the subject (person or object) of a sentence do something or something has been done on the subject called the voice. A sentence

More information

In Defense of Kantian Moral Theory Nader Shoaibi University of California, Berkeley

In Defense of Kantian Moral Theory Nader Shoaibi University of California, Berkeley In Defense of Kantian Moral Theory University of California, Berkeley In this paper, I will argue that Kant provides us with a plausible account of morality. To show that, I will first offer a major criticism

More information

A Minimalist View on the Syntax of BECOME *

A Minimalist View on the Syntax of BECOME * A Minimalist View on the Syntax of BECOME * Sze-Wing Tang The Hong Kong Polytechnic University 301 1. Introduction In his seminal study of lexical decomposition of English verbs, McCawley (1968) proposes

More information

MODALVERBS: STRUCTURE& USE

MODALVERBS: STRUCTURE& USE MODALVERBS: STRUCTURE& USE What are modal verbs? Can Could May Might Must Shall Should Ought to Will Would They are Auxiliary verbsthat provide additional and specific meaning to the main verb of the sentence

More information

Syntactic Structure Clause Structure: Clause Pattern: Lexical Pattern:

Syntactic Structure Clause Structure: Clause Pattern: Lexical Pattern: SEMANTIC ROLES Syntactic Structure The thief killed husband and wife with a gun. Clause Structure: SVO(A) Clause Pattern: SVO Lexical Pattern: kill Semantic Structure The specification

More information

Ling 201 Syntax 1. Jirka Hana April 10, 2006

Ling 201 Syntax 1. Jirka Hana April 10, 2006 Overview of topics What is Syntax? Word Classes What to remember and understand: Ling 201 Syntax 1 Jirka Hana April 10, 2006 Syntax, difference between syntax and semantics, open/closed class words, all

More information

REPORTED SPEECH. Reported speech is used to retell or report what other person has actually said. It is a very usual function in everyday language.

REPORTED SPEECH. Reported speech is used to retell or report what other person has actually said. It is a very usual function in everyday language. REPORTED SPEECH USE Reported speech is used to retell or report what other person has actually said. It is a very usual function in everyday language. STRUCTURE Formal aspects We can find different ways

More information

Examining domain widening and NPI any 1 Ana Arregui University of Ottawa

Examining domain widening and NPI any 1 Ana Arregui University of Ottawa Examining domain widening and NPI any 1 Ana Arregui University of Ottawa 1. Introduction This squib examines domain widening (DW) as used in the analysis of NPI any. Since Kadmon and Landman s (1993) influential

More information

What s in a Lexicon. The Lexicon. Lexicon vs. Dictionary. What kind of Information should a Lexicon contain?

What s in a Lexicon. The Lexicon. Lexicon vs. Dictionary. What kind of Information should a Lexicon contain? What s in a Lexicon What kind of Information should a Lexicon contain? The Lexicon Miriam Butt November 2002 Semantic: information about lexical meaning and relations (thematic roles, selectional restrictions,

More information

Where Does Binding Theory Apply?

Where Does Binding Theory Apply? Where Does Binding Theory Apply? David Lebeaux The MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England 6 2009 Massachusetts Institute of Technology All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced

More information

English Grammar Passive Voice and Other Items

English Grammar Passive Voice and Other Items English Grammar Passive Voice and Other Items In this unit we will finish our look at English grammar. Please be aware that you will have only covered the essential basic grammar that is commonly taught

More information

English prepositional passive constructions

English prepositional passive constructions English prepositional constructions An empirical overview of the properties of English prepositional s is presented, followed by a discussion of formal approaches to the analysis of the various types of

More information

According to the Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges, in the Celestial Emporium of Benevolent Knowledge, animals are divided

According to the Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges, in the Celestial Emporium of Benevolent Knowledge, animals are divided Categories Categories According to the Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges, in the Celestial Emporium of Benevolent Knowledge, animals are divided into 1 2 Categories those that belong to the Emperor embalmed

More information

Hi-tech. Language focus. First conditional. Second conditional. eat. 'd give / wouldn t

Hi-tech. Language focus. First conditional. Second conditional. eat. 'd give / wouldn t 9 Hi-tech Language focus First conditional 1a Complete the sentences with the correct form of the verb in brackets. Use the Present Simple or will + infinitive. eat 1 If you (eat) cheese late at night,

More information

Obligation/necessity

Obligation/necessity Modal verbs Modal verbs (also called modal auxiliary verbs) express a variety of attitudes ( moods ) towards a possible action or state the lexical verb refers to. They are used to express meaning connected

More information

PS I TAM-TAM Aspect [20/11/09] 1

PS I TAM-TAM Aspect [20/11/09] 1 PS I TAM-TAM Aspect [20/11/09] 1 Binnick, Robert I. (2006): "Aspect and Aspectuality". In: Bas Aarts & April McMahon (eds). The Handbook of English Linguistics. Malden, MA et al.: Blackwell Publishing,

More information

GREEK COURSEPACK TABLE OF CONTENTS

GREEK COURSEPACK TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 GREEK COURSEPACK TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Title of Handout 1 Table of Contents 2 Greek Memory Help Songs 3 Primary & Secondary Verb Suffixes / Contract Verb Chart 4 The Meaning of the Greek Tenses in the

More information

Adjective, Adverb, Noun Clauses. Gerund,Participial and Infinitive Phrases. English Department

Adjective, Adverb, Noun Clauses. Gerund,Participial and Infinitive Phrases. English Department Adjective, Adverb, Noun Clauses Gerund,Participial and Infinitive Phrases Jafar Asgari English Department Kashan University of Medical Sciences Structure of Complex Sentences Every Complex sentence is

More information

The Double Lives of Objects: An Essay in the Metaphysics of the Ordinary World

The Double Lives of Objects: An Essay in the Metaphysics of the Ordinary World 252 The Double Lives of Objects: An Essay in the Metaphysics of the Ordinary World, by Thomas Sattig. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015, 288 pages, ISBN 9780199683017 (hbk). In The Double Lives of

More information

The syntactic positions of adverbs and the Second Language Acquisition

The syntactic positions of adverbs and the Second Language Acquisition September 2010, Volume 7, No.9 (Serial No.81) Sino-US English Teaching, ISSN 1539-8072, USA The syntactic positions of adverbs and the Second Language Acquisition ZHANG Zi-hong (Department of Foreign Language

More information

The Passive Voice. Forms and Functions. Noelia Malla García. Complutense University of Madrid Spain

The Passive Voice. Forms and Functions. Noelia Malla García. Complutense University of Madrid Spain The Passive Voice Forms and Functions The 3 rd Global Virtual Conference Noelia Malla García Complutense University of Madrid Spain Abstract Quirk defines voice as a grammatical category which makes it

More information

Structurally ambiguous sentences

Structurally ambiguous sentences Language and Mind HONR 218L Recap: entences have structure In speaking and writing we string words together linearly (we have no choice) But in our minds, we represent sentences as hierarchical structures

More information

REASONS FOR HOLDING THIS VIEW

REASONS FOR HOLDING THIS VIEW Michael Lacewing Substance dualism A substance is traditionally understood as an entity, a thing, that does not depend on another entity in order to exist. Substance dualism holds that there are two fundamentally

More information

CHAPTER 5: Tense in Conditional Constructions

CHAPTER 5: Tense in Conditional Constructions CHAPTER 5: Tense in Conditional Constructions 5.0 Introduction This chapter examines the behavior of tense in the protasis ('if clause') and apodosis ('then clause') of hypothetical and counterfactual

More information

Below is a suggested thirteen-week schedule for completing this course.

Below is a suggested thirteen-week schedule for completing this course. Grammar and Style of the Sentence Course Overview Grammar and Style of the Sentence is an online course designed to teach basic principles of grammar and style to improve your writing. New topics are introduced

More information

1. The more idioms you know how to use correctly, the more natural your speech will sound

1. The more idioms you know how to use correctly, the more natural your speech will sound What are idioms? Idioms are words, phrases, or expressions which are often grammatically strange and are not meant to be understood literally. Idioms are a very important part of any language, so learning

More information

Structure of the talk. The semantics of event nominalisation. Event nominalisations and verbal arguments 2

Structure of the talk. The semantics of event nominalisation. Event nominalisations and verbal arguments 2 Structure of the talk Sebastian Bücking 1 and Markus Egg 2 1 Universität Tübingen sebastian.buecking@uni-tuebingen.de 2 Rijksuniversiteit Groningen egg@let.rug.nl 12 December 2008 two challenges for a

More information

MODERN WRITTEN ARABIC. Volume I. Hosted for free on livelingua.com

MODERN WRITTEN ARABIC. Volume I. Hosted for free on livelingua.com MODERN WRITTEN ARABIC Volume I Hosted for free on livelingua.com TABLE OF CcmmTs PREFACE. Page iii INTRODUCTICN vi Lesson 1 1 2.6 3 14 4 5 6 22 30.45 7 55 8 61 9 69 10 11 12 13 96 107 118 14 134 15 16

More information

Lecture 5. Verbs and Verb Phrases I

Lecture 5. Verbs and Verb Phrases I Lecture 5. Verbs and Verb Phrases I 1 Finite and Nonfinite Verb Forms Finite verb forms: o Finite verb forms express tense and/or mood (see Lecture 6 for details on mood). They may also express number

More information

Estudios de Asia y Africa Idiomas Modernas I What you should have learnt from Face2Face

Estudios de Asia y Africa Idiomas Modernas I What you should have learnt from Face2Face Estudios de Asia y Africa Idiomas Modernas I What you should have learnt from Face2Face 1A Question Forms 1.1 Yes-No Questions 1. If the first verb is an auxiliary verb, just move it in front of the Subject:

More information

Last time we had arrived at the following provisional interpretation of Aquinas second way:

Last time we had arrived at the following provisional interpretation of Aquinas second way: Aquinas Third Way Last time we had arrived at the following provisional interpretation of Aquinas second way: 1. 2. 3. 4. At least one thing has an efficient cause. Every causal chain must either be circular,

More information

How real is future? The case of futurates in Polish. Joanna Błaszczak and Dorota Klimek-Jankowska

How real is future? The case of futurates in Polish. Joanna Błaszczak and Dorota Klimek-Jankowska How real is future? The case of futurates in Polish Joanna Błaszczak and Dorota Klimek-Jankowska 1 The issue Polish has two real future forms: a simple future form, and a periphrastic future form. 2 Two

More information

Overview of the TACITUS Project

Overview of the TACITUS Project Overview of the TACITUS Project Jerry R. Hobbs Artificial Intelligence Center SRI International 1 Aims of the Project The specific aim of the TACITUS project is to develop interpretation processes for

More information

Glossary of literacy terms

Glossary of literacy terms Glossary of literacy terms These terms are used in literacy. You can use them as part of your preparation for the literacy professional skills test. You will not be assessed on definitions of terms during

More information

UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON EXAMINATION FOR INTERNAL STUDENTS

UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON EXAMINATION FOR INTERNAL STUDENTS UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON University of London EXAMINATION FOR INTERNAL STUDENTS For the following qualifications :- B.A. Italian X255: Issues in Italian Syntax COURSE CODE : ITALX255 UNIT VALUE : 0.50

More information

The parts of speech: the basic labels

The parts of speech: the basic labels CHAPTER 1 The parts of speech: the basic labels The Western traditional parts of speech began with the works of the Greeks and then the Romans. The Greek tradition culminated in the first century B.C.

More information

Doctoral School of Historical Sciences Dr. Székely Gábor professor Program of Assyiriology Dr. Dezső Tamás habilitate docent

Doctoral School of Historical Sciences Dr. Székely Gábor professor Program of Assyiriology Dr. Dezső Tamás habilitate docent Doctoral School of Historical Sciences Dr. Székely Gábor professor Program of Assyiriology Dr. Dezső Tamás habilitate docent The theses of the Dissertation Nominal and Verbal Plurality in Sumerian: A Morphosemantic

More information

Noam Chomsky: Aspects of the Theory of Syntax notes

Noam Chomsky: Aspects of the Theory of Syntax notes Noam Chomsky: Aspects of the Theory of Syntax notes Julia Krysztofiak May 16, 2006 1 Methodological preliminaries 1.1 Generative grammars as theories of linguistic competence The study is concerned with

More information

Points of Interference in Learning English as a Second Language

Points of Interference in Learning English as a Second Language Points of Interference in Learning English as a Second Language Tone Spanish: In both English and Spanish there are four tone levels, but Spanish speaker use only the three lower pitch tones, except when

More information

Syntactic Theory. Background and Transformational Grammar. Dr. Dan Flickinger & PD Dr. Valia Kordoni

Syntactic Theory. Background and Transformational Grammar. Dr. Dan Flickinger & PD Dr. Valia Kordoni Syntactic Theory Background and Transformational Grammar Dr. Dan Flickinger & PD Dr. Valia Kordoni Department of Computational Linguistics Saarland University October 28, 2011 Early work on grammar There

More information

How to form the Present Perfect

How to form the Present Perfect The present perfect verb tense is a little difficult in English it is used in several different ways, and there are lots of rules to remember. This lesson will teach you everything you ever wanted to know

More information

Correlation: ELLIS. English language Learning and Instruction System. and the TOEFL. Test Of English as a Foreign Language

Correlation: ELLIS. English language Learning and Instruction System. and the TOEFL. Test Of English as a Foreign Language Correlation: English language Learning and Instruction System and the TOEFL Test Of English as a Foreign Language Structure (Grammar) A major aspect of the ability to succeed on the TOEFL examination is

More information

Paraphrasing controlled English texts

Paraphrasing controlled English texts Paraphrasing controlled English texts Kaarel Kaljurand Institute of Computational Linguistics, University of Zurich kaljurand@gmail.com Abstract. We discuss paraphrasing controlled English texts, by defining

More information

Linguistics & Cognitive Science

Linguistics & Cognitive Science Linguistics & Cognitive Science 07.201* History of Cognitive Science Fall term 2000 formal account of pivotal role of linguistics in the development of cognitive science relation to psychology, AI, & philosophy

More information

Differences in linguistic and discourse features of narrative writing performance. Dr. Bilal Genç 1 Dr. Kağan Büyükkarcı 2 Ali Göksu 3

Differences in linguistic and discourse features of narrative writing performance. Dr. Bilal Genç 1 Dr. Kağan Büyükkarcı 2 Ali Göksu 3 Yıl/Year: 2012 Cilt/Volume: 1 Sayı/Issue:2 Sayfalar/Pages: 40-47 Differences in linguistic and discourse features of narrative writing performance Abstract Dr. Bilal Genç 1 Dr. Kağan Büyükkarcı 2 Ali Göksu

More information

Do we need Structured Question Meanings? Two Approaches to Questions

Do we need Structured Question Meanings? Two Approaches to Questions Do we need Structured Question Meanings? Manfred Krifka Humboldt-Universität & Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft (ZAS) Berlin http://amor.rz.hu-berlin.de/~h2816i3x Two Approaches to Questions The

More information

Invalidity in Predicate Logic

Invalidity in Predicate Logic Invalidity in Predicate Logic So far we ve got a method for establishing that a predicate logic argument is valid: do a derivation. But we ve got no method for establishing invalidity. In propositional

More information

Refer to: Present & future If-clause Main clause. ZERO Present + Present. If you can meet me at the car, that s easiest for me.

Refer to: Present & future If-clause Main clause. ZERO Present + Present. If you can meet me at the car, that s easiest for me. 1 CONDITIONALS Refer to: Present & future If-clause Main clause ZERO Present + Present If you press this button, the engine stops. If you can meet me at the car, that s easiest for me. Present + If you

More information

COURSE OBJECTIVES SPAN 100/101 ELEMENTARY SPANISH LISTENING. SPEAKING/FUNCTIONAl KNOWLEDGE

COURSE OBJECTIVES SPAN 100/101 ELEMENTARY SPANISH LISTENING. SPEAKING/FUNCTIONAl KNOWLEDGE SPAN 100/101 ELEMENTARY SPANISH COURSE OBJECTIVES This Spanish course pays equal attention to developing all four language skills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing), with a special emphasis on

More information

GOD S BIG STORY Week 1: Creation God Saw That It Was Good 1. LEADER PREPARATION

GOD S BIG STORY Week 1: Creation God Saw That It Was Good 1. LEADER PREPARATION This includes: 1. Leader Preparation 2. Lesson Guide GOD S BIG STORY Week 1: Creation God Saw That It Was Good 1. LEADER PREPARATION LESSON OVERVIEW Exploring the first two chapters of Genesis provides

More information

CELC Benchmark Essays Set 3 Prompt:

CELC Benchmark Essays Set 3 Prompt: CELC Benchmark Essays Set 3 Prompt: Recently, one of your friends fell behind in several of his/her homework assignments and asked you for help. You agreed, but then you found out that your friend was

More information

A Comparative Analysis of Standard American English and British English. with respect to the Auxiliary Verbs

A Comparative Analysis of Standard American English and British English. with respect to the Auxiliary Verbs A Comparative Analysis of Standard American English and British English with respect to the Auxiliary Verbs Andrea Muru Texas Tech University 1. Introduction Within any given language variations exist

More information

BURSTED WOOD PRIMARY SCHOOL

BURSTED WOOD PRIMARY SCHOOL BURSTED WOOD PRIMARY SCHOOL Year 6 English Medium Term Plans Reading Word Objectives apply their growing knowledge of root words prefixes and suffixes (morphology and etymology), as listed under the spelling

More information

Modal concord Conditionals Disjunction Superlative and comparative quantifiers. At least et al. Bart Geurts. Bart Geurts: At least et al.

Modal concord Conditionals Disjunction Superlative and comparative quantifiers. At least et al. Bart Geurts. Bart Geurts: At least et al. At least et al. Bart Geurts The story in a nutshell Superlative quantifiers ( at least 7 wombats ) are quite different from comparative ones ( more than 6 opossums ). Superlative quantifiers are modal

More information

Constituency. The basic units of sentence structure

Constituency. The basic units of sentence structure Constituency The basic units of sentence structure Meaning of a sentence is more than the sum of its words. Meaning of a sentence is more than the sum of its words. a. The puppy hit the rock Meaning of

More information

Annotation Guidelines for Dutch-English Word Alignment

Annotation Guidelines for Dutch-English Word Alignment Annotation Guidelines for Dutch-English Word Alignment version 1.0 LT3 Technical Report LT3 10-01 Lieve Macken LT3 Language and Translation Technology Team Faculty of Translation Studies University College

More information

Grammar Unit: Pronouns

Grammar Unit: Pronouns Name: Miss Phillips Period: Grammar Unit: Pronouns Unit Objectives: 1. Students will identify personal, indefinite, and possessive pronouns and recognize antecedents of pronouns. 2. Students will demonstrate

More information

COMPUTATIONAL DATA ANALYSIS FOR SYNTAX

COMPUTATIONAL DATA ANALYSIS FOR SYNTAX COLING 82, J. Horeck~ (ed.j North-Holland Publishing Compa~y Academia, 1982 COMPUTATIONAL DATA ANALYSIS FOR SYNTAX Ludmila UhliFova - Zva Nebeska - Jan Kralik Czech Language Institute Czechoslovak Academy

More information