No description available.

No description available.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1990. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves [210]-215) / Microfiche. / ix, 215 leaves, bound ill. 29 cm

M.A. / The purpose of this research is fourfold, namely to identify the different types of interrogative sentences used in Zulu; to describe the syntactic-semantic features of interrogative sentences; to point at the semantic interpretation which might be attached to specific syntactic interrogative sentences and to establish the pragmatic use of interrogative sentences. In the course of this study it became evident that the interpretation of interrogative sentences is bound to the pragmatic discourse context ...

M.A. (African Languages) / Questions in Zulu are characterised by a diversity of structures. Existing descriptions are of a sporadic and limited nature. The purpose of the study is to give an overview of all relevant features of questions in Zulu. The approach involves an examination firstly of general phonological, semantic, morphological and syntactical features of questions in Zulu and, secondly, of the features of each lexical item of an interrogative nature. Semantically, three basic types of questions can be distinguished in Zulu namely the "mere" (or "neutral") question, the question implying doubt and specific questions. On the phonological level subtle differences in intonation indicate shifts of meaning and distinguish between statements and questions. Morphologically, the interrogative lexical items have normal features according to the morphological system of Zulu and the word classes to which they belong. Syntactically the same rules apply as for statements and the word-order is basically the same as in statements. Certain lexical indicators are characteristic of Zulu questions. The interrogative indicator can be used in all three types. Although it is a general feature, its usage is not essential. (Y)ini, on the other hand, is only used when doubt (and a presumption of a "no" answer) is present. or as specific answers. occuring classes, specific but is A variety of other interrogative items ask more questions and also expect more specific Specific interrogative lexical items although especially as nouns, belong to various word including relatives and adjectives, adverbs particles. Each of these has its own phonological and semantic features but is morphologically and semantically in agreement with the essential features of the word-class to which it belongs. Overall the Zulu language proves to have a richness in the variety of ways in which general as well as specific questions may be asked.

published_or_final_version / English / Master / Master of Philosophy

M.A. (African Languages) / Please refer to full text to view abstract

Thesis (Ph.D. (Translation Studies and Linguistics)) -- University of Limpopo, 2019 / Refer to ducoment

Li, Haoze. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2011. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 157-163). / Abstracts in English and Chinese. / Abstract --- p.i / Acknowledgements --- p.v / Table of Contents --- p.vii / List of Abbreviations --- p.x / Chapter Chapter One --- Introduction --- p.1 / Chapter 1.1 --- What are focus intervention effects --- p.1 / Chapter 1.2 --- Theoretical framework --- p.3 / Chapter 1.2.1 --- Minimalist Program --- p.3 / Chapter 1.2.2 --- Classification of features --- p.5 / Chapter 1.2.3 --- Agree --- p.6 / Chapter 1.3 --- Previous studies of Mandarin wh-questions --- p.7 / Chapter 1.3.1 --- wh-nominals --- p.8 / Chapter 1.3.2 --- wh-adverbials --- p.10 / Chapter 1.4 --- Organization of the thesis --- p.18 / Chapter Chapter Two --- Literature review --- p.21 / Chapter 2.1 --- Two types of intervention effects --- p.21 / Chapter 2.2 --- LF movement blocking --- p.24 / Chapter 2.3 --- Separation Principle --- p.26 / Chapter 2.4 --- Agree blocking --- p.36 / Chapter 2.5 --- Competition effect --- p.39 / Chapter 2.6 --- Summary --- p.43 / Chapter Chapter Three --- Mandarin contrastive focus particles --- p.44 / Chapter 3.1 --- Focus --- p.44 / Chapter 3.2 --- Information focus vs. contrastive focus --- p.46 / Chapter 3.2.1 --- Semantic interpretation --- p.47 / Chapter 3.2.2 --- Syntactic distribution --- p.50 / Chapter 3.2.3 --- Syntactic association --- p.51 / Chapter 3.3 --- Mandarin contrastive focus particles --- p.52 / Chapter 3.3.1 --- Semantic Properties --- p.53 / Chapter 3.3.2 --- Syntactic Distributions --- p.58 / Chapter 3.3.3 --- Association with focused constituents --- p.65 / Chapter 3.3.4 --- "Inner focus, Outer focus and Agree" --- p.70 / Chapter 3.4 --- Summary --- p.73 / Chapter Chapter Four --- Focus intervention effects --- p.75 / Chapter 4.1 --- Focus intervention effects in wh-questions with wh-nominals --- p.75 / Chapter 4.2 --- Focus intervention effects in wh-questions with wh-adverbials --- p.78 / Chapter 4.3 --- F-XP association and F-Wh association --- p.91 / Chapter 4.4 --- Weakening or canceling contexts --- p.98 / Chapter 4.4.1 --- Embedded contexts --- p.99 / Chapter 4.4.2 --- D-linking contexts --- p.102 / Chapter 4.4.3 --- wh-fronting contexts --- p.105 / Chapter 4.5 --- Summary --- p.108 / Chapter Chapter Five --- The syntactic analysis of focus intervention effects --- p.110 / Chapter 5.1 --- Inadequacies of previous proposals --- p.110 / Chapter 5.1.1 --- Soh's (2005) Separation principle --- p.111 / Chapter 5.1.2 --- Kim's (2006) Agree blocking analysis --- p.112 / Chapter 5.1.3 --- Yang's (2008) Competition effect --- p.114 / Chapter 5.2 --- Interrogative wh-words and focus --- p.115 / Chapter 5.3 --- The syntactic mechanism of focus intervention effects --- p.117 / Chapter 5.3.1 --- Proposal --- p.117 / Chapter 5.3.2 --- Configurations with focus intervention effects --- p.119 / Chapter 5.3.3 --- Configurations without focus intervention effects --- p.121 / Chapter 5.3.4 --- Interim summary --- p.123 / Chapter 5.4 --- Alternative analysis and residual issues --- p.123 / Chapter 5.4.1 --- Focus conflict --- p.123 / Chapter 5.4.2 --- Residual issues --- p.126 / Chapter 5.5 --- Summary --- p.133 / Chapter Chapter Six --- Conclusion --- p.136 / Chapter 6.1 --- Summary --- p.136 / Chapter 6.2 --- Contributions of the current study --- p.138 / Chapter 6.3 --- Residual issues --- p.139 / Chapter 6.3.1 --- Individual feature matching vs. feature matrix matching --- p.140 / Chapter 6.3.2 --- LF movement of contrastive focus --- p.143 / Chapter 6.3.3 --- Multiple wh-questions and LF unselective binding --- p.145 / Chapter 6.3.4 --- Focus intervention effects are not related to LF representations --- p.148 / Bibliography --- p.157

No description available.