The Ergative Hypothesis and Free Word Order in Dutch and German

Besten, Hans den; Toman, Jindřich

doi:10.1515/9783110882711-004

Cited by 83 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A similar type inversion can be found in German, too, under the same condision (cf den Besten 1984 andSafir 1995). It is therefore concluded that either the objective-marked EXP or the nominative-marked THEME in a clause with a psych-verb in Dutch can appear at the Spec of T in overt syntax.…”

Section: Summary For Lango Anti-impersonal Passivesupporting

confidence: 62%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Multiple Feature-Checking: A Theory of Grammatical Function Splitting

Ura¹

1998

Journal of Japanese Linguistics

113

147

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Summary For Lango Anti-impersonal Passivesupporting

confidence: 62%

“…According to den Besten (1984), Hoekstra (1984) and, especially, Broekhuis (1992), it is more precise to regard those verbs that allow this kind of OBJ's permutation not as psych-verbs, but as ergative verbs.…”

Section: Summary For Lango Anti-impersonal Passivementioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple Feature-Checking: A Theory of Grammatical Function Splitting

Ura¹

1998

Journal of Japanese Linguistics

113

147

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This section will discuss a case that has traditionally been analyzed as involving extraction from argument, the socalled wat voor-split.. We will see that this split does not lend support to Chomsky's claim that extraction is possible from derived subjects only: extraction of wat from derived and from underlying subjects is equally (im)possible. My claim is perhaps surprising given that Den Besten (1985) has contended that wat voor-split is possible with direct objects and derived subjects (9a′&b′), but not from underlying subjects (9c′). (9) At first sight Den Besten's examples in (9) seem to support Chomsky's claim, but closer scrutiny quickly reveals that this is not really the case.…”

Section: Extraction From Subject!mentioning

confidence: 97%

Extraction from subjects: some remarks on Chomsky’s On phases

Broekhuis¹,

Corver²,

Huybregts³

et al. 2006

Organizing Grammar

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…We will see that this split does not lend support to Chomsky's claim that extraction is possible from derived subjects only: extraction of wat is equally (im)possible from derived and from underlying subjects. At first sight, this claim is perhaps surprising, given that Den Besten (1985) has contended that the wat voor-split is possible with direct objects and derived subjects (11a&b), but not with underlying subjects (11c). (11) Den Besten's examples in (11) therefore seem to support Chomsky's claim, but closer scrutiny quickly reveals that this is not really the case.…”

Section: Extraction From Subject?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Feature inheritance versus extended projections

Broekhuis¹

2016

Optimality-Theoretic Syntax, Semantics, and Pragmatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article shows that the empirical data that Chomsky (2008) provides in favor of feature inheritance and parallel movement are rather suspect, and that there are both empirical and conceptual reasons to reject this implementation of the idea that the formal features in C and T originate in a single head position. This does not imply, however, that the latter idea should be completely rejected. This paper argues that there are also reasons to assume that the relevant features all originate in the T-head, and that the C-position comes (or rather: may come) into existence as a result of the remerge of T as a specific instantiation of the formation of extended projections in the sense of Grimshaw (1997). We will conclude by showing that the extended projection approach is preferred to the feature inheritance approach in terms of optimization/economy given that for subject-initial sentences, CP-structures are normally harmonically bounded by TP-structures due to the fact that they invoke additional violations of *MOVE and *MERGE.

show abstract

The Ergative Hypothesis and Free Word Order in Dutch and German

Cited by 83 publications

References 1 publication

Multiple Feature-Checking: A Theory of Grammatical Function Splitting

Multiple Feature-Checking: A Theory of Grammatical Function Splitting

Extraction from subjects: some remarks on Chomsky’s On phases

Feature inheritance versus extended projections

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About