By Cathal Doherty
First released in 2000. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa corporation.
Read or Download Clauses Without 'That': The Case for Bare Sentential Complementation in English PDF
Best language & grammar books
Proposing linguistic and old sketches of lesser-known touch languages, this paintings goals to give a contribution to a extra balanced view of the main dramatic result of language touch. The 12 case experiences supply testimony opposed to the view that each one touch languages are pidgins and creoles with maximally uncomplicated and primarily exact grammars.
In dating pondering, N. J. Enfield outlines a framework for reading social interplay and its linguistic, cultural, and cognitive underpinnings by way of concentrating on human relationships. this can be a naturalistic method of human sociality, grounded within the systematic learn of real-time facts from social interplay in lifestyle.
First released in 1986. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa corporation.
This quantity describes and evaluates the newest theories, empirical findings, and purposes within the box of pragmalinguistics built in a few socialist states of Europe – regularly in Czechoslovakia, Poland, the German Democratic Republic, and the USSR. the result of the author’s personal examine in pragmatically orientated psycholinguistics are integrated besides.
- Modelling and Assessing Second Language Acquisition
- Linguistics inside out: Roy Harris and his critics
- New Zealand English: Its Origins and Evolution (Studies in English Language)
- Research Methods in Sign Language Studies: A Practical Guide
Additional resources for Clauses Without 'That': The Case for Bare Sentential Complementation in English
21 (61)a. b. [CP Who, [ c - 0 [ip r, left ]]]? the man [cp who i [c- 0 [ ti left ]]] These complementizers cannot be properly governed under the definitions of Rizzi 1990. In the case of matrix interrogatives, there is no potential proper governor for the complementizer at all. In the case of relative clauses, there is also no proper governor for CO, as relative clauses are barriers to government from without, being non-a-marked, non-L-marked adjuncts. 22 One possible line of analysis is to assume that null complementizers in complement clauses are derived through a syntactic deletion process, the output of which is subject to the ECP (or visible at PF in Hornstein and Lightfoot's terms).
Argument Clauses (12)a. 15 *1 think [IP this book [IP you should read. ]] b. *He said [IP beer hp he likes but whiskey he hates. ]] c. *He says [IP Cinque [IP he'd read but Rizzi he hadn't. ]] Therefore, I conclude that there is positive evidence in favor of the IPhypothesis. Unlike the CP-hypothesis, it provides the basis for an explanation of the failure of embedded Topicalization in that-less complements. 2. Adverbial Adjunction In the general case, adverbial adjunction follows the same pattern as Topicalization: sentential adverbs must appear to the right of the complementizer, presumably adjoined to the IP-Ievel.
Clauses without that 36 (75)a. It was objected that John was unqualified. b. *It was objected DP. c. *That John was unqualified was objected [oP t]. If moved sentences obligatorily leave nominal (DP) traces, then raising the clausal argument to subject position necessarily leads to a violation of the selectional requirements of these verbs. Note that verbs like expect take both nominal and clausal complements and permit their argument clause to externalize under passive, as illustrated below. (76)a.