The adjective in Germanic and Romance

Velde, Freek Van de; Sleeman, Petra; Perridon, Harry

doi:10.1075/la.212.01int

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since nationality adjectives do not exist in Latin, they were created following Latin phonotactic and lexical rules (e.g., tidonus, "American") (Table S1). Opposingly, in German, adjectives virtually always precede the noun [61]. The contrast for adjectival position between the three languages investigated in the present experiment is illustrated in (3):…”

Section: Case and Adjective Placement In Italian German And Latinmentioning

confidence: 70%

Testing Potential Transfer Effects in Heritage and Adult L2 Bilinguals Acquiring a Mini Grammar as an Additional Language: An ERP Approach

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Models on L3/Ln acquisition differ with respect to how they envisage degree (holistic vs. selective transfer of the L1, L2 or both) and/or timing (initial stages vs. development) of how the influence of source languages unfolds. This study uses EEG/ERPs to examine these models, bringing together two types of bilinguals: heritage speakers (HSs) (Italian-German, n = 15) compared to adult L2 learners (L1 German, L2 English, n = 28) learning L3/Ln Latin. Participants were trained on a selected Latin lexicon over two sessions and, afterward, on two grammatical properties: case (similar between German and Latin) and adjective–noun order (similar between Italian and Latin). Neurophysiological findings show an N200/N400 deflection for the HSs in case morphology and a P600 effect for the German L2 group in adjectival position. None of the current L3/Ln models predict the observed results, which questions the appropriateness of this methodology. Nevertheless, the results are illustrative of differences in how HSs and L2 learners approach the very initial stages of additional language learning, the implications of which are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Case and Adjective Placement In Italian German And Latinmentioning

confidence: 70%

Testing Potential Transfer Effects in Heritage and Adult L2 Bilinguals Acquiring a Mini Grammar as an Additional Language: An ERP Approach

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, there is no consensus on which form derives from which (cf. Hamann 1991;van de Velde, Sleeman and Perridon 2014;Demonte 2019).…”

Section: The Category "Adjective" In a Comparative Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Adjectival concord in Romance and Germanic

Giusti¹

2021

Continuity and Variation in Germanic and Romance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter provides a unified analysis of adnominal and predicate adjectives in Romance and Germanic by distinguishing three types of feature sharing: agreement, concord and projection, along the lines of Giusti (2015). It claims that in both Romance and Germanic, an uninterpretable feature of N agrees with possessive adjectives, while adnominal adjectives concord with N in a Spec-Head configuration checking an uninterpretable feature bundle on A. Romance and Germanic only differ in how concord is spelled out. Romance adjectives (with the exception of Walloon) are inflected for nominal features and concord with null head. German adjectives are uninflected and concord with an overt N-segment. The proposal argues against a unification of concord and agreement and in favour of an autonomous category, adjective, crosslinguistically.

show abstract

Inflections on pre-nominal adjectives in Germanic: Main types, subtypes, and subset relations

Roehrs

2015

J Comp German Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to contribute to the understanding of the nature of inflection, this paper investigates the endings on pre-nominal adjectives in four Germanic languages: Dutch, Norwegian, German, and Yiddish. Incorporating detailed observations about Yiddish in general and non-canonical nominals in particular, this study confirms Harbert's (The Germanic languages, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2007) classification of the Mainland Scandinavian languages as semantically determining their inflections but of German as encoding case, number, and gender on its endings. The latter is shown to be regulated by lexical factors. Dutch is grouped with Norwegian and Yiddish with German. While all four languages differ in their details, the paper proposes that compared to Dutch, the Norwegian weak inflections require a subset of definiteness (sub-)components and that in comparison to German, the Yiddish weak inflections require a subset of lexical triggers. Whereas weak endings only surface inside DPs, which are necessarily definite in Dutch and Norwegian, strong endings are shown to appear in more diverse contexts. Given the language-specific conditions on the distribution of the weak inflections, the strong endings are interpreted as the elsewhere case in all languages.

show abstract

The adjective in Germanic and Romance

Cited by 4 publications

References 46 publications

Testing Potential Transfer Effects in Heritage and Adult L2 Bilinguals Acquiring a Mini Grammar as an Additional Language: An ERP Approach

Testing Potential Transfer Effects in Heritage and Adult L2 Bilinguals Acquiring a Mini Grammar as an Additional Language: An ERP Approach

Adjectival concord in Romance and Germanic

Inflections on pre-nominal adjectives in Germanic: Main types, subtypes, and subset relations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About