No abstract

Adverb positions vary within a single language as well as across diverse languages. Based on the study of adverbs in English, French and German, this monograph shows that the distribution of adverbs is influenced by various factors at distinct levels of linguistic representation – comprising semantics, syntax, phonology and information structure –, which interact in determining adverb positions. The results of the investigation are formulated within the theoretical framework of Optimality Theory, which captures the complex interaction of these factors by hierarchically ranked constraints, deriving cross-linguistic variation of adverb positions by differences in the language-specific constraint hierarchies. The book is divided into two parts: While Part I examines adverb positions in general, Part II investigates under which circumstances an adverb may attach to a phonetically empty constituent in the languages under discussion. The book appeals to a linguistic audience interested in Germanic and Romance languages as well as in theoretical syntax in general.

On the basis of an examination of remnant VP-topicalisation constructions, this paper argues for an order preservation analysis of Scandinavian Object Shift. Extending the empirical database, we account for the phenomena in an Optimality Theoretic framework. The paper focusses on two particular constructions in Danish and Swedish, namely particle verb constructions and causative constructions with Danish lade and Swedish låta ‘let’. It is shown how differences in the VP-internal object position give rise to mirror image sequences concerning Object Shift in connection with verb second (V°-to-I°-to-C° movement) and with remnant VP-topicalisation.

Abstract.  In the Scandinavian languages, a [+negative] phrase must be licensed by Spec‐head agreement in overt syntax, necessitating leftward movement of negative objects, Negative Shift (NegS). Although string‐vacuous NegS is possible in all Scandinavian varieties, there is a considerable amount of crosslinguistic variation as to non‐string‐vacuous NegS. In particular, the varieties differ with regard to which constituents may be crossed by NegS and whether crossing depends on the position of the main verb. Under the cyclic linearization approach (Fox & Pesetsky 2003, 2005a), non‐string‐vacuous movement must proceed via intermediate positions. The variation as to the distribution of negative objects in the Scandinavian languages can thus be accounted for by differences in the availability of these intermediate positions, which is taken here to be determined by a mechanism of feature transmission. The relevance of intermediate positions is corroborated as neither the intervening constituents nor the object’s base position nor its target position (to the left/right of the matrix main verb) can capture the observed variation by themselves.

No abstract