No description available.

No description available.

Thesis (M.S.)--Brigham Young University. Dept. of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 41-46).

Revision of dissertation (Ph.D)--State University of New York, Buffalo - "Demonstratives in cross-linguistic and diachronic perspective". / Includes index. Includes bibliographical references at the end of each section.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2003. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 231-238).

Word order universals constitute a well-known problem in language typology, first outlined in Greenberg (1963). It has been firmly established in databases of over 1500 languages that languages with verb-object ordering are very likely to have prepositions and noun-genitive ordering, while languages with object-verb ordering are very likely to have postpositions and genitive-noun ordering (Dryer and Haspelmath 2011). This thesis attempts to give a historical explanation for these facts in terms of the origin of syntactic categories: adpositions have historically developed from nouns and verbs (Givon 1984, Aristar 1991); and verbs often develop from nominalizations used with a genitive object. These types of grammaticalization can explain why adpositions retain the ordering of their source nouns or verbs, and why verb/object ordering often parallels noun/genitive ordering. This historical explanation is elaborated on, with data from different language families. Examples of verbs grammaticalizing from nominalizations used with genitive objects are given, drawing on historical work such as Salanova (2007) on Brazilian Jê languages and Starosta, Pawley and Reid (1982) on Austronesian. Different languages show varying degrees of 'nominalism', the morphosyntactic resemblance between verb forms and noun phrases/nominalizations. Other languages show a less developed distinction between adpositions and verbs/nouns. These examples of gradience in syntactic categories are argued to be behind resemblances in word orderings. Language contact is responsible for preserving word order types, when languages undergo change in more than one word order (e.g. Greenberg 1969); and the difference in rates of word order change across constructions is argued to be behind hierarchies such as Hawkins (1983)'s Prepositional Noun Modifier Hierarchy. This explanation of word order universals contrasts with more mainstream accounts such as Hawkins (1994) in terms of processing efficiency, and Kirby and Christiansen (2003) in terms of learnability. While these explanations are perhaps compatible with the historical explanation, they are argued to be redundant; grammaticalization arguably is not driven or constrained by learnability and processing efficiency, with memetics, 'typological poise' (Enfield 2003) and language contact given as alternatives. Instead of reflecting functional biases, word order patterns are argued to reflect language history, both the history of language contact, and the history of syntactic categories developing through grammaticalization. / published_or_final_version / Linguistics / Master / Master of Philosophy

Not available / text

No description available.

In this thesis, I propose a theory of ergativity in which NP arguments are checked for Case by moving to projections of agreement at LF. The Case-marking pattern of an ergative language arises when transitive subjects move to the projection of agreement usually associated with objects (AGR.o), while transitive objects and intransitive subjects move to the projection of subject agreement (AGR.s). While this proposal assigns the same underlying structure to clauses in an ergative language (unlike Marantz, 1984), it does have distinctive syntactic effects. In this it contrasts with a purely morphological approach to ergativity, such as that of Anderson (1976). / Arguments can move to the specifier position of agreement, or adjoin to its maximal projection. Movement cannot take place across the same kind of position as the landing site, which leads us to predict that transitive subjects cannot undergo grammatical extraction in an ergative language. This prediction turns out to be correct in a number of languages, including Chamorro, Mam, and other members of the Mayan group. Our theory also allows for a plausible account of split ergativity--non-canonical patterns in an otherwise ergative language where transitive and intransitive subjects are marked the same, but behave differently under extraction. / The proposal that NPs are not checked for Case until LF entails that they remain in their base positions at S-structure. Evidence for this claim is adduced from the distribution of empty pronoun arguments whose contents must be identified. Our prediction is that transitive subjects in an ergative language will interfere in the identification of an empty object pronoun, since it is closer to the pronoun than its legitimate identifier, AGR.s. This is also shown to be the case.

How is the logical form of a sentence expressed in natural language? This thesis examines in detail wh-questions and negative polarity items in Japanese and English in an effort to pin down a number of issues related to this question. / Chapter one introduces some of the basic notions of current syntactic theory within which the discussion in this thesis takes place. The chapter also contains basic syntactic properties of wh-questions and negative polarity items in English and Japanese. / Chapter two advances a cooccurence restriction condition on wh-questions and negative polarity items. The condition to be introduced is referred to as the Linear Crossing Constraint (LCC). Assuming with Saito (1992) that scrambling can be undone at the level of logical form, it is argued that the LCC applies to the surface form of a sentence. Various consequences that follow from the LCC are also discussed. / Chapter three argues that wh-phrases and negative polarity items undergo movement in the logical form component of grammar. The discussion in this chapter is dependent on the scope facts involving these grammatical constructions. / Chapter four is concerned with the Subjacency Condition. Nishigauchi (1992) proposes that movement in the logical form component is constrained by the Subjacency Condition in much the same way as movement is in the overt component. It is shown that the relevant sentences pointed out by Nishigauchi should be accounted for by a condition on logical form representations. / Chapter five deals with why certain instances of scrambling can be undone in the logical form component but others cannot, as observed by Takahashi (1993). / The aim of Chapter six is to develop an account of the distribution of adjunct wh-phrases, such as why and naze. It is pointed out that naze shares a number of characteristics in common with negative polarity items and floating quantifiers. I argue that there is only one specifier position per functional head. / Chapter Seven extends the theory developed in Chapter six to another set of data. It is argued that the distribution of floating quantifiers can naturally be captured under the proposed theory. / The final chapter concludes this thesis by pointing out some consequences of this theory.