Adjectival Modification and Multiple Determiners

Αλεξιαδου, Αρτεμισ; Wilder, Chris

doi:10.1075/la.22.11ale

Cited by 58 publications

(107 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

101

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Concord also requires definiteness spreading, as Androutsopoulou (1994) has termed a similar phenomenon in Modern Greek, namely, the repetition of the definite article in front of every adjective. However, Greek determiner spreading is restricted to predicative adjectives, as shown in Alexiadou and Wilder (1998) and Alexiadou (2001). In Arabic and Hebrew, on the other hand, there is no such restriction; determiner spreading is obligatory with the nonpredicative adjectives in (i), so that Alexiadou's (2001) proposals for Greek and Romance cannot be extended to Semitic.…”

Section: Agreement Inside the Noun Phrasementioning

confidence: 99%

The form of Semitic noun phrases

Shlonsky

2004

Lingua

252

176

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I propose a phrasal-movement analysis of word order in Hebrew and Arabic noun phrases. I argue that the positioning of nominal modifiers with respect to the head of simple nouns cannot be adequately handled by an N-raising derivation. This is so because nouns fail to move as heads in the grammars of Hebrew and Arabic. The only heads that seem to be able to move are those which do not assign genitive case. When modifiers (adjectives, numerals, demonstratives, etc.) appear to the right of the noun, it is the noun phrase itself which has raised to the left of the modifier, moving from specifier to specifier and pied piping all the material on its right. In this manner, inverse or mirror image ordering of post-nominal material is accounted for.Some modifiers have the option of appearing pre-nominally as well as post-nominally. I argue that these elements can be merged either as heads governing their complement and assigning genitive case to their sister or to the specifier of their sister, or as specifiers of projections containing a phonetically null head. In the former case, the modifier's sister is frozen in position, being licensed by genitive case. In the latter case, XP-movement of the sister of the null head is triggered, and agreement or concord is manifested on the modifier. I develop a configurational theory of agreement, which accounts for these phenomena. Many of the signature properties of the Semitic Construct-state fall out from the phrasal movement analysis.Finally, action nominalizations are dealt with. I provide arguments for a syntactic derivation in which a VP is associated with a nominalizing head configured in the clausal hierarchy as a functional head. I show that the position of the nominalizing head is above certain aspectual projections and lower than others. This explains why some adverbials, but not others, may occur inside a derived nominal. #

show abstract

Section: Agreement Inside the Noun Phrasementioning

confidence: 99%

The form of Semitic noun phrases

Shlonsky

2004

Lingua

252

176

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…11 It is also interesting to point out that determiner spreading can be total or partial. This is illustrated by the examples in (29) taken from Alexiadou and Wilder [55] and Leu [57 On the basis of these facts we propose that determiner spreading is a phenomenon of the left periphery involving Ddet-to-Ddeix movement (see (31)) through the head of Modifier Projections whose specifier is occupied by the prenominal fronted adjective (see (32)). Such movement may leave possible spelt-out copies of the raised determiner and the chain of copies cannot be broken, as shown by the ungrammaticality of (30) The analysis of the example (29b) is quite complex: the adjective of size moves to the left-peripheral ModifP, the noun to a topic position within DP and the adjective of color to a focus or Modif position.…”

Section: Ha-rabanimmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Ha-rabanimmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Determiner spreading in Greek is a much debated topic in Generative Grammar, especially within the framework of the DP-hypothesis (Alexiadou [46], Alexiadou and Wilder [55], Panagiotidis and Marinis [56]). The split-DP analysis sheds new light on this phenomenon.…”

Section: Ha-rabanimmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…55. Once the arguments evacuated from vP, the verb alone can undergo remnant (possibly extended) vP-movement.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A View of the CP/DP-(non)parallelism from the Cartographic Perspective

Laenzlinger

2017

Languages

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The aim of this paper is to reconsider some aspects of the so-called clause/noun-phrase (non-)parallelism (Abney 1987 and much subsequent work). The question that arises is to find out what is common and what is different between the clause as a Complementizer Phrase (CP)-structure and the noun as a Determiner Phrase (DP)-structure in terms of structure and derivation. An example of structural parallelism lies in the division of the clause and the noun phrase into three domains: (i) the Nachfeld (right periphery), which is the thematic domain; (ii) the Mittelfeld (midfield), which is the inflection, agreement, Case and modification domain and (iii) the Vorfeld (left periphery), which is the discourse-and operator-related domain. However, we will show following Giusti (2002Giusti ( , 2006, Payne (1993), Bruening (2009), Cinque (2011), Laenzlinger (2011, 2015 among others that the inner structure of the Vorfeld and of the Mittelfeld of the clause is not strictly parallel to that of the noun phrase. Although derivational parallelism also lies in the possible types of movement occurring in the CP and DP domains (short head/X-movement, simple XP-movement, remnant XP-movement and pied-piping XP-movement), we will see that there is non-parallelism in the application of these sorts of movement within the clause and the noun phrase. In addition, we will test the respective orders among adverbs/adjectives, DP/Prepositional Phrase (PP)-arguments and DP/PP-adjuncts in the Mittelfeld of the clause/noun phrase and show that Cinque's (2013) left-right asymmetry holds crosslinguistically for the possible neutral order (without focus effects) in post-verbal/nominal positions with respect to the prenominal/preverbal base order and its impossible reverse order.

show abstract

Deixis, demonstratives, and definite descriptions

Hughes

2020

Thought: A Journal of Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Definite articles and demonstratives share many features in common including a related etymology and a number of parallel communicative functions. The following paper is concerned with developing a novel proposal on how to distinguish the two types of expression. First, crosslinguistic evidence is presented to argue that demonstratives contain locational markers that are employed in deictic uses to force contrastive focus and accentuate an intended referent against a contextual background. Conversely, definite articles lack such markers. Demonstratives are thus more likely to force referential interpretations, whereas definite descriptions are more open to attributive ones. Second, an analysis of determiner phrases is provided to illustrate that certain syntactic projections capture deictic differences between the two expressions. Semantic correlates of the proposal are then considered before it is situated with respect to contemporary work distinguishing the two categories on the basis of a non-redundancy condition (that the overt noun phrase complement of a demonstrative may not denote a singleton set), which I suggest is derivative on the presence of contrastive deictic markers in demonstratives.

show abstract

Adjectival Modification and Multiple Determiners

Cited by 58 publications

References 10 publications

The form of Semitic noun phrases

The form of Semitic noun phrases

A View of the CP/DP-(non)parallelism from the Cartographic Perspective

Deixis, demonstratives, and definite descriptions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About