On Greek VSO again!

Roussou, Anna; Tsimpli, Ianthi Maria

doi:10.1017/s0022226706003914

Cited by 59 publications

(120 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

116

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Rather, it is probably exceptionally assigned a default nominative, along with the relative head in (6a), where one cannot detect this process because it is a SRC. 6 And see also Roussou & Tsimpli (2006) for the view that post-verbal subjects are in a low clitic position.…”

Section: Greek Rcsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intervention effects in the relative clauses of agrammatics: The role of gender and case

Terzi

Nanousi

2018

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals with agrammatic aphasia are known to have difficulties interpreting Object Relative Clauses (ORCs), but not Subject Relative Clauses (SRCs). This asymmetry is recently understood by resorting to locality principles, captured by a featural version of Relativized Minimality (RM). The same principles are held responsible for intervention effects of phi-features with the same value in child language, when these are syntactically active. There are no studies on the intervention effects of phi-features in agrammatism.This work investigates comprehension of headed Relative Clauses (RCs) by Greek-speaking non-fluent Broca's aphasics (agrammatics), focusing on gender and structural case, which the language marks on both the determiner and the noun. Two RC tasks were administered, differing on whether the case of the first (relativized) DP was nominative or accusative, depending on the preceding instruction. The findings established the expected SRC vs. ORC asymmetry, shedding light to earlier misleading results due to side effects of case morphology. Moreover, a strong similarity effect of gender was found in ORCs, although it is not a syntactically active feature in the relevant sense in Greek. We claim that the similarity effects of gender in the ORCs of Greekspeaking agrammatics are not intervention effects anchored to some specific principle of syntactic locality. Support for this claim is also provided by their presence even in the SRCs of the same individuals.As for structural case, neither intervention nor general similarity effects of it were detected. There were, however, additional difficulties for SRCs whose relativized subject had accusative, not patterned by ORCs with nominative relativized objects. We suggest that one has to ensure that relativized subjects end up with nominative case in the RCs tasks of languages with rich case morphology, and conjecture that phi-features are not involved in the computation of locality in agrammatism.

show abstract

Section: Greek Rcsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intervention effects in the relative clauses of agrammatics: The role of gender and case

Terzi

Nanousi

2018

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An important feature in this example is that the post-nuclear part of the sentence, horepse i Elena, is necessarily deaccented and interpreted as old information. In general, for affirmative declaratives, whenever nuclear stress moves leftwards, it causes 3 We follow standard assumptions in the Greek literature, going back to Philippaki-Warburton (1985) that Greek is VSO and that preverbal constituents, including subjects, are either topics or foci (but see Roussou and Tsimpli 2006 who argue for the existence of some cases of "true" preverbal subjects.) An example like (8) has a VP focus with the subject as a topic.…”

Section: Information Structure In Greekmentioning

confidence: 99%

Focus in Greek wh-questions

Alexopoulou¹,

Baltazani²

2012

Contrasts and Positions in Information Structure

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present an analysis of multiple focus sentences in Greek. On an empirical level, we show that the current generalisation in the Greek literature that multiple focus is unavailable in Greek is too strong as it stands. What is unavailable is multiple maximal foci in sentences where one focused item has moved to the left periphery. We view the unavailability of multiple foci in such sentences as an interface mismatch between interpretation and phonology. Roughly, what is unavailable is not multiple focus but multiple sentence nuclei. We couch this intuition in Büring's (2008) analysis which provides a theory of mapping the domain of focus operators to domains of prosodic prominence. We further identify and discuss a set of previously unreported data indicating the availability of 2OF in Greek, also providing experimental data to support our analysis. The empirical data mainly involve multiple wh-questions.

show abstract

“…In Greek, object arguments with specific interpretation are necessarily overt in sentences with transitive verbs, either as an object clitic or as a full DP. 2 The similarity between the clitic and D is that both manifest the verb's transitivity by lexicalising Case (Roussou and Tsimpli, 2006).…”

Section: Types Of Null Objectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…''Cognate'' null objects in structures like (17a) are non-referential and have the internal structure of bare nouns with a null N (see also Cummins and Roberge, 2004). Recall that argument licensing in Greek is mediated by the Case feature realized as a lexicalised D (Roussou and Tsimpli, 2006). In the case of null objects, the Case requirement is relaxed, given that they are empty categories with no D element, and movement of the object to specTransP, is unmotivated.…”

Section: The Syntactic Representation Of Optionally Transitive Verbsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aspect and argument realization: A study on antecedentless null objects in Greek

Tsimpli

Papadopoulou

2006

Lingua

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study is to investigate the interaction between viewpoint aspect and argument realization. More specifically, we examine the correlation of +/Àperfective verb forms in Greek and null objects with indefinite, non-specific interpretation. It is argued that although null objects are possible with both perfective and imperfective verbs, imperfective verbs favour object omission more than perfectives. We claim that this is due to two reasons: first, that there is a difference in the syntactic representation of overt direct objects with perfective and imperfective verbs, which is associated with the notion of economy in their respective derivations, i.e. Merge as opposed to Merge + Move; secondly, that perfective verbs show an interpretive difference at the LF interface depending on the overt versus null nature of the direct object, whereas imperfectives do not. The difference is related to the semantic notion of telicity. This prediction has been tested in an off-line sentence-completion task with two groups of native speakers of Greek, an adult and a child group. The data revealed that native speakers of Greek preferred to use overt DP objects with perfective verbs more than with imperfectives. This finding is interpreted as showing that Aspect is a functional feature with an effect on argument realization. #

show abstract

On Greek VSO again!

Cited by 59 publications

References 39 publications

Intervention effects in the relative clauses of agrammatics: The role of gender and case

Intervention effects in the relative clauses of agrammatics: The role of gender and case

Focus in Greek wh-questions

Aspect and argument realization: A study on antecedentless null objects in Greek

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About