Topic
Germanic verb
About: Germanic verb is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 22 publications have been published within this topic receiving 271 citations.
Papers
TL;DR: This paper defends the essentially syntactic nature of head movement, contra Chomsky (1999:30f), arguing that effects of word order that do not find a natural place in phonology result from the interaction of formal feature movement and lexical feature movement.
Abstract: This paper defends the essentially syntactic nature of head movement, contra Chomsky (1999:30f). Head movement yields effects of word order that do not find a natural place in phonology, defined as the conversion of syntactic terminals to strings of phonemes. It also feeds syntactic processes such as NP-raising in restructuring constructions. The only “phonological” aspect to head movement involves the fluctuating spell-out positions of the verb. It is argued that these fluctuations, illustrated in the Continental West Germanic verb movement patterns, result from the interaction of formal feature movement (“syntactic verb movement”) and lexical feature movement (“phonological verb movement”), the latter restricted to situations where the target of formal feature movement lacks lexical features of its own.
111 citations
28 May 2004
59 citations
1 Jan 2010
TL;DR: Germanic Phonology Germanic Verb Classes Germanic Verbal Inflexion Germanic Nominal Inflexions German English Scandinavian Albanian Armenian Balto-Slavic Italo-Celtic Anatolian Indo-Uralic Appendix References Index as discussed by the authors
Abstract: Preface Introduction Indo-European Phonology Indo-European Morphosyntax Greek Indo-Iranian Tocharian Germanic Phonology Germanic Verb Classes Germanic Verbal Inflexion Germanic Nominal Inflexion German English Scandinavian Albanian Armenian Balto-Slavic Italo-Celtic Anatolian Indo-Uralic Appendix References Index
34 citations
TL;DR: This paper showed that there is an asymmetry in the possible ordering of dependents of a lexical head before versus after the head, and that dependents need to be treated separately by class.
Abstract: Cinque (Linguist Inq 36(3):315–332, 2005; Universals of language today. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 165–184, 2009; Functional structure from top to toe. Vol. 9 of The cartography of syntactic structures. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 232–265, 2014a) observes that there is an asymmetry in the possible ordering of dependents of a lexical head before versus after the head. A reflection on some of the concepts needed to develop Cinque’s ideas into a theory of neutral word order reveals that dependents need to be treated separately by class. The resulting system is applied to the problem of word order in the Germanic verb cluster. It is shown that there is an extremely close match between theoretically derived expectations for clusters made up of auxiliaries, modals, causative ‘let’, a main verb, and verbal particles. The facts point to the action of Cinque’s fundamental left–right asymmetry in language in the realm of the verb cluster. At the same time, not all verb clusters fall under Cinque’s generalization, which, therefore, argues against treating all cases of restructuring uniformly.
23 citations
1 Jan 2005
TL;DR: The present study contests this claim, documenting early targetlike V2 production for 6 Swedish ab-initio (and 23 intermediate) learners of German, at a time when their interlanguage syntax elsewhere is nontargetlike (head-initial VPs).
Abstract: Acquiring Germanic verb second is typically described as difficult for second-language learners. Even speakers of a V2-language (Swedish) learning another V2-language (German) are said not to transfer V2 but to start with a non-V2 grammar, following a universal developmental path of verb placement. The present study contests this claim, documenting early targetlike V2 production for 6 Swedish ab-initio (and 23 intermediate) learners of German, at a time when their interlanguage syntax elsewhere is nontargetlike (head-initial VPs). Learners whose only nonnative language is German never violate V2, indicating transfer of V2-L1 syntax. Informants with previous knowledge of English are less targetlike in their L3-German productions, indicating interference from non-V2 English. V2 per se is thus not universally difficult for nonnative learners. (Less)
16 citations
Related Topics (5)
Performance Metrics
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2019 | 1 |
| 2018 | 1 |
| 2017 | 1 |
| 2016 | 1 |
| 2010 | 1 |
| 2006 | 1 |