Focus structure and Q-word questions in Hittite

Goedegebuure, Petra

doi:10.1515/ling.2009.033

Cited by 17 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Secondly, even though one of the functions of imma is to mark focus, in my corpus there are no cases when this function of imma is attested in the unambiguously immediately preverbal position. But even if this were the case, synchronically in the case of the immediately preverbal free choice pronoun kui-imma kui-it is not obvious that the free choice phrase receives the contrastive focus reading, which is the preferred reading of the immediately preverbal position in Hittite (Goedegebuure 2009;Goedegebuure 2014). It is easy to understand why imma so consistently follows the negation marker in the immediately preverbal position, because negation is frequently associated with focus, e.g., in Georgian where negation markers are in the same position as focus; see Skopeteas and Fanselow 2010.…”

Section: A Common Account For Left Edge and Immediately Preverbal Pos...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Syntax of Hittite imma

Sideltsev¹

2021

JAOS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: A Common Account For Left Edge and Immediately Preverbal Pos...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Syntax of Hittite imma

Sideltsev¹

2021

JAOS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cf. Goedegebuure (2009). 37 At the same time the adverb QĀTAMMA QĀTAMMA/apeniššan cataphorically introduces a syntactically heavy constituent, as it simultaneously refers forward to clause 5.…”

Section: Verb Raising Into Clause Internal Positionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clause Internal and Clause Leftmost Verbs in Hittite

Sideltsev

2014

Altorientalische Forschungen

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The object of the paper is non-canonical, non-final verb position within the clause in genuine Hittite texts. It is demonstrated that, contrary to current standard descriptions, two such positions can be delimited in a Hittite clause: clause internal position and clause leftmost position. Both positions are defined structurally: clause internal position is to the left of the immediately preverbal position and to the right of a direct object. Clause leftmost position is in the left periphery. The difference correlates with two other syntactic features. First, it is the position the verb moves around: when the verb moves into the left periphery, it moves around subject and object; when the verb moves into clause internal position, it moves around the immediately preverbal position. The verb may move into the left periphery around the immediately preverbal position, but only if the subject and object are not fully stressed in the clause. The second difference is in the information structure status: whereas verb fronting into the left periphery is information structure motivated (as contrastive focus etc.), verb movement into clause internal position is not homogeneous: it may be evacuational or unconditioned.The object of the paper is non-canonical verb positions in the clause in genuine Hittite texts 1 of all periods of the history of the language. 2 In canonical word order the verb is rigidly clause final/rightmost. In a very small percentage of cases 3 the verb is not clause final. Non-canonical verb position is standardly described as verb fronting. 4 In movement terms 5 it involves verb raising into the left periphery: 6

show abstract

Anaphora in Ossetic correlatives and the typology of clause combining

Belyaev

2014

Studies in Language Companion Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ossetic, an Iranian language of the North Caucasus, makes extensive use of correlatives in its system of subordination. I argue that most subordinate clause types in Ossetic belong to this construction, with their function being derived from the combination of the meaning of the subordinating element and the form of the demonstrative correlate. I further argue that the link between the relative phrase and the correlate may involve indirect relations such as bridging and split antecedence. They must therefore be viewed as involving obligatory pronominal coreference, where correlates are semantically no different from ordinary anaphoric pronouns or definite descriptions.

show abstract

Focus structure and Q-word questions in Hittite

Cited by 17 publications

References 5 publications

Syntax of Hittite imma

Syntax of Hittite imma

Clause Internal and Clause Leftmost Verbs in Hittite

Anaphora in Ossetic correlatives and the typology of clause combining

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About