Danish: A Comprehensive Grammar

Lundskær-Nielsen, T; Holmes, Philip

doi:10.4324/9780203853023

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Der hvor den funktionelle og den formelle tilgang for alvor går hver sin vej, handler det i virkeligheden ikke om selve den konkrete beskrivelse af sproglige forhold, men om det synspunkt man 1 I denne artikel forholder vi os først og fremmest til Diderichsens (1946) egen analyse, idet vi mener at der er en lang raekke analyser af dansk der ikke blot har deres udspring i men også kan repraesenteres af Diderichsen (1946). Sådanne analyser inkluderer følgende (som der dog også bliver refereret direkte til forskellige steder nedenfor): Becker-Christensen (2010), Blom (2006), Hansen (1977), Hansen & Heltoft (2011), Jørgensen (2000, Lundskaer-Nielsen et al (2010) og Togeby (2003).…”

Section: Indledning: Generative Traeer Og Diderichsens Felterunclassified

En formel vs. en funktionel tilgang til dansk sætningsstruktur

Vikner¹,

Jørgensen

2017

NyS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diderichsen (1946: 186) foreslår to saetningsskemaer til analyse af saetningsstrukturen i dansk. I Diderichsens (1946) hovedsaetningsskema består en dansk hovedsaetning af tre felter som igen består af tilsammen syv pladser. I den generative struktur som vi her vil gå ind for, er der langt flere underinddelinger end der er felter og pladser hos Diderichsen (1946). En anden forskel er at der er mere asymmetri i den generative analyse: Diderichsen (1946) har mange konstituenter på samme niveau hvorimod den generative analyse grundlaeggende opererer med binaere strukturer. Vi vil vise hvorledes det større analytiske apparat tillader interessante generaliseringer og forudsigelser i den generative analyse som ikke er mulige i et saetningsskema. Udover disse forskelle vil vi også beskaeftige os med tre paralleller mellem de to tilgange, nemlig Diderichsens skelnen mellem topologi og syntaks, Diderichsens tre overordnede felter og hvad de svarer til i den generative analyse, og endelig også ideen om flytning af konstituenter i saetningsstrukturen. En del af vores konklusion vil vaere at alle syntaktikere/grammatikere burde vaere parat til at tage både de generative og de funktionelle tilgange alvorligt. Selvom tonen nogle gange kan vaere lidt polemisk, har de forskellige tilgange så meget til faelles at de uden ret stort besvaer kan laere en del af hinandens resultater og erkendelser.

show abstract

Section: Indledning: Generative Traeer Og Diderichsens Felterunclassified

En formel vs. en funktionel tilgang til dansk sætningsstruktur

Vikner¹,

Jørgensen

2017

NyS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Introduction

Coussé,

Höder,

Lyngfelt

et al. 2023

Constructional Approaches to Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why Are There No Directionality Parameters?

Kayne¹

2013

Theoretical Approaches to Disharmonic Word Order

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Such movement differences will in turn be related, under a familiar view, to differences in the properties of functional heads. 2 A strong position, but one that is not central to what follows and that I will not pursue here, would be: 3 (1) Movement differences exhaust the universe both of word order differences and of morpheme order differences. 2. Movement leading to OV order Let us take OV as a test case. Antisymmetry as in AS has the following immediate consequence: (2) OV can never be associated with a structure in which O is sitting in the complement position of V. 4 It seems completely clear and undeniable that there exist languages or subparts of languages in which OV-order is produced by movement. It is hard to see how anybody could disagree with that, if it is stated as an existential. One easy example in English would be: (3) They're having their car washed. in which object their car comes to precede via movement (of the sort found in passives) the verb wash that it is the object of. Even more telling are examples of OV order involving movement of O where OV order is 'canonical' or 'neutral', 5 i.e. does not involve what one might think of as 'special' movements like the one found in (3). One such type of case is found in languages of a sort studied by Dryer (1992), with SONegV as a possible canonical order (as in Korean). As argued by Whitman (2005), on the assumption that Neg is merged outside VP, and therefore above O, the pre-Neg position of O in SONegV sentences must have been produced by movement. 6 In a SONegV sentence, O can clearly not be occupying the complement position of the pronounced V. Whitman argues more specifically that SONegV is produced by remnant VP-movement. The verb moves out of the VP by head movement; subsequently the entire (verbless) VP containing O moves past Neg, much as in Nkemnji's (1992; 1995) analysis of one word order pattern in Nweh. 7 A similar argument in favor of remnant movement carrying an object to the left of V is made by Baker (2005) for Lokạạ. One such case in Lokạạ is that of SONegV, matching Whitman, but Baker's 2 See, for example, Borer (1984, 29). 3 Cf. Cinque (1999). 4 More specifically this follows from the claim in AS and in Kayne (2003a) that specifier, head and complement are always found in the order S-H-C. (In bare phrase structure, this translates into the order 'second-mergedphrase H first-merged phrase'.) A number of authors have jumped from S-H-C to SVO. This follows only if what we call objects are invariably complements of their verbs, which is certainly not always the case-see Kayne (1981a) and Larson (1988). 5 Erdocia et al. (2009) argue that canonical SOV order in Basque is processed faster and more easily than noncanonical orders. They plausibly relate that to the canonical order involving less syntactic computation than noncanonical orders. At certain points, though, they seem to draw the further conclusion that canonical order involves no movement at all, which does not follow. In addition to the text discussion of canonical SOXV orde...

show abstract

Danish: A Comprehensive Grammar

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

En formel vs. en funktionel tilgang til dansk sætningsstruktur

En formel vs. en funktionel tilgang til dansk sætningsstruktur

Introduction

Why Are There No Directionality Parameters?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About