The dissertation investigates syntactic and semantic aspects of the indefinite pronoun system in Modern Hebrew and consists of an experimental part and a theoretical part. The experimental part presents the grammaticality judgment task conducted to test three theoretical questions: (1) the relation between negation and the licensing of AF `any' and KOL `any'; (2) the contrast between EYZE `some' and EYZESEHU `some' in terms of specificity; and (3) the correlation between syntactic position and free choice readings. Three main theoretical findings are contributed by this work. First, it is shown that from a typological viewpoint, Hebrew, a Semitic language, patterns with Romance and Germanic languages, rather than Japanese-type languages, in having indefinite pronouns specialized for particular operators available in the discourse. Second, the thesis proposes a novel unified syntax-semantics for KOL which accounts for its interpretational variability. Working with the Kratzer and Shimoyama (2002) framework where indefinite pronouns generate sets of individual alternatives, the semantics of a KOL--modified noun phrase is formalized as a variable and containing a restriction. When this restriction ranges over kinds, KOL receives a generic reading; when the restriction is over a contextually specified set of entities, KOL has an episodic reading. In these cases, the KOL--phrase moves to the argument position of a universal quantifier which binds the individual alternatives generated by the KOL--phrase. If KOL stays in situ, the individual alternatives are allowed to expand into propositional alternatives, resulting in the free choice reading. Third, I discuss the DP-internal structure of [eyze(N)se-hu (N)] and [(N) kol(N)se-hu], treating 'se-hu' as a CP. I propose that there is a correlation between the postnominal position and the free choice readings of these pronouns, suggesting that domain restrictions, usually derived in the semantics-pragmatics, may also be encoded in the syntax. If this hypothesis is on the right track, it could provide us with a better understanding of how and when in the process of language acquisition domain restrictions found with indefinite pronouns are acquired.

The dissertation investigates syntactic and semantic aspects of the indefinite pronoun system in Modern Hebrew and consists of an experimental part and a theoretical part. The experimental part presents the grammaticality judgment task conducted to test three theoretical questions: (1) the relation between negation and the licensing of AF `any' and KOL `any'; (2) the contrast between EYZE `some' and EYZESEHU `some' in terms of specificity; and (3) the correlation between syntactic position and free choice readings. Three main theoretical findings are contributed by this work. First, it is shown that from a typological viewpoint, Hebrew, a Semitic language, patterns with Romance and Germanic languages, rather than Japanese-type languages, in having indefinite pronouns specialized for particular operators available in the discourse. Second, the thesis proposes a novel unified syntax-semantics for KOL which accounts for its interpretational variability. Working with the Kratzer and Shimoyama (2002) framework where indefinite pronouns generate sets of individual alternatives, the semantics of a KOL--modified noun phrase is formalized as a variable and containing a restriction. When this restriction ranges over kinds, KOL receives a generic reading; when the restriction is over a contextually specified set of entities, KOL has an episodic reading. In these cases, the KOL--phrase moves to the argument position of a universal quantifier which binds the individual alternatives generated by the KOL--phrase. If KOL stays in situ, the individual alternatives are allowed to expand into propositional alternatives, resulting in the free choice reading. Third, I discuss the DP-internal structure of [eyze(N)se-hu (N)] and [(N) kol(N)se-hu], treating 'se-hu' as a CP. I propose that there is a correlation between the postnominal position and the free choice readings of these pronouns, suggesting that domain restrictions, usually derived in the semantics-pragmatics, may also be encoded in the syntax. If this hypothesis is on the right track, it could provide us with a better understanding of how and when in the process of language acquisition domain restrictions found with indefinite pronouns are acquired.

The dissertation investigates syntactic and semantic aspects of the indefinite pronoun system in Modern Hebrew and consists of an experimental part and a theoretical part. The experimental part presents the grammaticality judgment task conducted to test three theoretical questions: (1) the relation between negation and the licensing of AF `any' and KOL `any'; (2) the contrast between EYZE `some' and EYZESEHU `some' in terms of specificity; and (3) the correlation between syntactic position and free choice readings. Three main theoretical findings are contributed by this work. First, it is shown that from a typological viewpoint, Hebrew, a Semitic language, patterns with Romance and Germanic languages, rather than Japanese-type languages, in having indefinite pronouns specialized for particular operators available in the discourse. Second, the thesis proposes a novel unified syntax-semantics for KOL which accounts for its interpretational variability. Working with the Kratzer and Shimoyama (2002) framework where indefinite pronouns generate sets of individual alternatives, the semantics of a KOL--modified noun phrase is formalized as a variable and containing a restriction. When this restriction ranges over kinds, KOL receives a generic reading; when the restriction is over a contextually specified set of entities, KOL has an episodic reading. In these cases, the KOL--phrase moves to the argument position of a universal quantifier which binds the individual alternatives generated by the KOL--phrase. If KOL stays in situ, the individual alternatives are allowed to expand into propositional alternatives, resulting in the free choice reading. Third, I discuss the DP-internal structure of [eyze(N)se-hu (N)] and [(N) kol(N)se-hu], treating 'se-hu' as a CP. I propose that there is a correlation between the postnominal position and the free choice readings of these pronouns, suggesting that domain restrictions, usually derived in the semantics-pragmatics, may also be encoded in the syntax. If this hypothesis is on the right track, it could provide us with a better understanding of how and when in the process of language acquisition domain restrictions found with indefinite pronouns are acquired.

The dissertation investigates syntactic and semantic aspects of the indefinite pronoun system in Modern Hebrew and consists of an experimental part and a theoretical part. The experimental part presents the grammaticality judgment task conducted to test three theoretical questions: (1) the relation between negation and the licensing of AF `any' and KOL `any'; (2) the contrast between EYZE `some' and EYZESEHU `some' in terms of specificity; and (3) the correlation between syntactic position and free choice readings. Three main theoretical findings are contributed by this work. First, it is shown that from a typological viewpoint, Hebrew, a Semitic language, patterns with Romance and Germanic languages, rather than Japanese-type languages, in having indefinite pronouns specialized for particular operators available in the discourse. Second, the thesis proposes a novel unified syntax-semantics for KOL which accounts for its interpretational variability. Working with the Kratzer and Shimoyama (2002) framework where indefinite pronouns generate sets of individual alternatives, the semantics of a KOL--modified noun phrase is formalized as a variable and containing a restriction. When this restriction ranges over kinds, KOL receives a generic reading; when the restriction is over a contextually specified set of entities, KOL has an episodic reading. In these cases, the KOL--phrase moves to the argument position of a universal quantifier which binds the individual alternatives generated by the KOL--phrase. If KOL stays in situ, the individual alternatives are allowed to expand into propositional alternatives, resulting in the free choice reading. Third, I discuss the DP-internal structure of [eyze(N)se-hu (N)] and [(N) kol(N)se-hu], treating 'se-hu' as a CP. I propose that there is a correlation between the postnominal position and the free choice readings of these pronouns, suggesting that domain restrictions, usually derived in the semantics-pragmatics, may also be encoded in the syntax. If this hypothesis is on the right track, it could provide us with a better understanding of how and when in the process of language acquisition domain restrictions found with indefinite pronouns are acquired.

京都大学 / 0048 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(文学) / 甲第21492号 / 文博第797号 / 新制||文||673(附属図書館) / 京都大学大学院文学研究科行動文化学専攻 / (主査)准教授 千田 俊太郎, 教授 吉田 和彦, 教授 吉田 豊, 教授 加藤 昌彦 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Letters / Kyoto University / DGAM

The question of how to integrate idioms into standard theories of grammar has been a matter of investigation since at least the beginning of generative grammar. Idioms are uniquely positioned at the interface between the lexicon and the syntax, demonstrating properties of both words and phrases. On the one hand, idioms behave like stored units, arbitrary correspondences between sound and meaning that must simply be memorized by speakers of the language. In this way, they are similar to words, which have long been recognized as arbitrary sound-meaning pairs (cf. Saussure (1986)'s arbitrariness of the sign). On the other hand, idioms in the traditional sense are multiword units, often with some degree of syntactic flexibility, ranging from tense inflection (e.g. Eli kicked the bucket yesterday vs. I'm pretty sure Eli's going to kick the bucket tomorrow) to passivizability (e.g. Lisa spilled the beans vs. The beans were spilled (by Lisa)), and beyond. This places idioms in the purview of the syntax, where the combination and manipulation of multiword units is typically assumed to take place. Idioms, then, bridge the gap between the lexicon and the syntax, challenging traditional assumptions about grammar. This dissertation provides a proposal for dealing with just such issues. I provide an account of idiomatic representations that is consistent with theoretical and empirical research in the field. I explore what kinds of structures are licensed to have special idiomatic interpretations, and I present novel experimental and corpus results that bear on the issue of how idioms are represented. Ultimately, I argue that the structural requirement model alone is able to sufficiently account for the data.

I argue that the shift of explanatory burden from the generator to the evaluator in OT syntax – together with the difficulties that arise when we try to formulate a working theory of the interfaces of syntax – leads to a number of assumptions about syntactic structures in OT which are quite different from those typical of minimalist syntax: formal features, as driving forces behind syntactic movement, are useless, and derivational and representational economy are problematic for both empirical and conceptual reasons. The notion of markedness, central in Optimality Theory, is not fully compatible with the idea of synactic economy. Even more so, seemingly obvious cases of blocking by structural economy do not seem to result from grammar proper, but reflect (economical) aspects of language use.

abstract: A question that has driven much of the current research in formal syntax is whether it is the lexicon or the syntax that determines the argument structure of a verb. This dissertation attempts to answer this question with a focus on Arabic, a language that has received little attention in the literature of argument structure. In this dissertation, argument structure realization is examined in relation to three different components, namely the root, the CV-skeleton and the structure around the verb. I argue that argument structure is not determined on a root level in Arabic. I also show that only few CV-skeletons (verb patterns) are associated with certain argument structures. Instead, the burden of determining argument structure lies on elements around the structure of VP. The determinants of inner aspect in Arabic and the relation between eventuality types and argument structure are also examined. A cartographic model is provided to show how elements around the VP play a role in determining the inner aspect. This model also represents a relationship between argument structure and eventuality types. The question of what determines argument structure is further addressed through the investigation of the causative/inchoative alternation in Arabic in light of recent semantic and syntactic accounts. I argue that most Arabic verbs that undergo the alternation are non-agentive change-of-state verbs. Although certain lexical characteristics may account for which verbs alternate and which do not, exceptions within a language and/or across languages do exist. I point to a range of phenomena that can be only explained from syntactic points of view. / Dissertation/Thesis / Ph.D. English 2012

La présente recherche doctorale traite des constructions causatives dans une perspective développementale et contrastive. Elle poursuit un double objectif. D'une part, démontrer que la complexité morphosyntaxique des mécanismes causatifs joue un rôle important dans le processus de leur acquisition par les enfants. D'autre part, prendre en considération plusieurs habiletés langagières (production, compréhension, imitation) pour explorer pleinement les divers niveaux de maitrise des constructions causatives. Les deux langues que nous étudions – le français et le bulgare – n'utilisent pas les mêmes mécanismes pour encoder la notion de causativité. Le français privilégie le prédicat complexe faire + Vinf, mais accepte également quelques causatifs lexicaux (nourrir X). Le bulgare fait appel à trois procédés : lexical (xranja X – nourrir X), morphologique (le préfixe ‘raz-' : razsmivam X – faire rire X) et périphrastique (karam X da V présent – inciter X à ce que V présent). Un total de 113 francophones (71 enfants et 42 adultes) et de 96 bulgarophones (56 enfants et 40 adultes) participent à cette étude contrastive ; tous sont des locuteurs natifs monolingues. Les enfants sont répartis en trois tranches d'âge (3-4 ans, 4-5 ans et 5-6 ans) et ils participent à trois tâches expérimentales (production, compréhension, imitation). Les adultes sont enregistrés uniquement en tâche de production. Notre recherche aboutit à quelques résultats intéressants. Premièrement, entre 3 et 6 ans, la conceptualisation de la causativité ne pose pas de problèmes particuliers aux enfants francophones et bulgarophones ; ils comprennent les mécanismes causatifs de leur langue. Deuxièmement, l'ordre d'acquisition des formes causatives est étroitement lié à leur degré de complexité morphosyntaxique. Dans les deux langues étudiées, les causatifs lexicaux sont complètement maitrisés par les enfants. En revanche, malgré son caractère compact et sa simplicité formelle, le causatif morphologique du bulgare semble apparaitre tardivement. La présence d'erreurs par surgénéralisation chez les enfants âgés de 5 à 6 ans révèle que l'acquisition de ce mécanisme causatif n'est pas achevée. La construction périphrastique karam X da V présent, quant à elle, peut être considérée comme maitrisée, puisqu'entre 4 et 5 ans, les habiletés des enfants bulgares à la produire sont déjà très proches de l'usage adulte. Enfin, le prédicat complexe faire + Vinf est en voie de stabilisation ; les enfants français doivent faire quelques ajustements au niveau de l'intégrité de la séquence faire + Vinf et de l'usage de l'argument causataire (sa fonction syntaxique et sa présence dans les énoncés). Troisièmement, le rappel de la structure des mécanismes causatifs en tâche d'imitation améliore les performances productives des enfants. En conclusion, par la prise en compte de trois habiletés langagières, cette étude apporte un éclairage dans la recherche sur les constructions causatives. Dans l'esprit du Modèle de compétition et des approches basées sur l'usage, notre travail valide également la pertinence de trois principaux facteurs déterminant l'ordre d'acquisition des unités linguistiques : 1/ fréquence dans l'input (ou disponibilité) ; 2/ fiabilité (ou spécialisation dans l'expression d'une fonction communicative) ; 3/ complexité (formelle et conceptuelle). / The present study investigates the causative constructions from a developmental and cross-linguistic perspective. On the one hand, it aims to show the important role of the morphosyntactic complexity of causative mechanisms during language acquisition. On the other hand, it aims to examine different language skills (production, comprehension, imitation) in order to explore various levels of mastery of the causative constructions in two languages, French and Bulgarian. The two languages under investigation, French and Bulgarian, do not use the same mechanisms to express causativity. French uses the faire + Vinf complex predicate and some lexical causatives (nourrir X – feed X). In Bulgarian, the causativity is expressed using three mechanisms: lexical (xranja X – feed X), morphological (prefix ‘raz-': razsmivam X - make X laugh) and periphrastic construction (karam X da V pres – make that X + V pres). A total of 113 L1 French speakers (71 children and 42 adults) and 96 L1 Bulgarian speakers (56 children and 40 adults) took part in this cross-linguistic study. The children were divided into three age groups: 3-4, 4-5 and 5-6 years of age; they all participated in three experimental tasks (production, comprehension and imitation). The adults took part in one experimental task (production). Our cross-linguistic study provided some interesting results. Firstly, the conceptualization of causativity is equally understood in both languages, each child group globally understands the causative mechanisms available in their own language. Secondly, the order of acquisition of the causative mechanisms is tightly linked to its degree of morphosyntactic complexity. In both languages, lexical causatives are already mastered by all the children groups. Surprisingly enough, in Bulgarian, the morphological causative appears to be a late language development, as children as old as 5 to 6 years produce overgeneralizations of this mechanism, that means it is not yet mastered. In the Bulgarian data, we found that the periphrastic construction is acquired between the ages of 4 to 5 years; the children of this age group already show an adult-like ability in producing this analytical causative mechanism. In the French data, we found that the production of the faire + Vinf complex predicate begins to stabilize; however, children have to adjust both the integrity of the faire + Vinf structure and the usage of the causee argument (its syntactic function and its presence in the utterance). Thirdly, in instances when the structure of causative mechanisms is present during the imitation task, the children's production is improved. In conclusion, by including various language skills (production, comprehension and imitation), this study brings a new perspective in investigating the causative constructions. Our research is also consistent with both the Competition model and the usage-based approaches; it validates the relevance of three major factors determining the order of acquisition of the linguistic structures: 1/ input frequency (or ‘cue availability'); 2/ cue reliability; 3/ formal and semantic complexity (or ‘cue cost').

Made available in DSpace on 2015-05-14T12:11:55Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 arquivototal.pdf: 2099375 bytes, checksum: cd43c67c82a3165f8062d5c071352f58 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-07-15 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / The problem being addressed in this thesis can be formulated as follows: what is the relationship between the notion of an internalized linguistic competence, as conceived by the generative program, and a semantic theory? In other words, what is the extend and scope of a semantic theory consistent with the theoretical assumptions and the syntactic model assumed by the generative program? Two approaches are compared: the denotational approach, according to which syntactic derivations are inputs to the truth conditional interpretation and the intensional approach , according to which the syntactic derivations constrain, but do not determine, truth conditions .I argue that the first approach leads us to a dilemma : if the semantic structure is isomorphic to the syntagmatic structure, we multiply the terms of explanation, without explanatory gain. If there is no isomorphism, we have even more serious problems, because we could not explain the explanatory success of certain syntactic principles (such as the asymmetry between external argument and internal argument , for example) . Thus, this proposal does not provide the proper kind of idealization, it s not able to extend the positive heuristic of the generative program. I argue that the second proposal, by contrast, increases the positive heuristic of the program because it is able to explain ( and not simply redescribe) important empirical generalizations discovered by the generative program over the years . I argue that the formulation of an I-semantics requires, necessarily, a revision of traditional and tacitly accepted assumptions regarding the nature of the formal study of natural languages semantics. I-Semantics explains the etiology of the computational principles underlying interface phenomena, not the implementation of these operations, how sentences can be used to make true or false assertions. / O problema a ser abordado nesta tese pode ser formulado nos seguintes termos: qual a relação entre a noção de competência linguística internalizada, tal como concebida pelo programa gerativista, e uma teoria semântica? Dito de outro modo, qual o formato e escopo de uma teoria semântica coerente com as assunções teóricas de base e com o modelo sintático assumido pelo programa gerativista? Serão comparadas duas abordagens: a abordagem denotacional, na qual as derivações sintáticas são inputs para a interpretação semântica vero-condicional e a abordagem intensional, segundo a qual as derivações sintáticas restringem, mas não determinam, condições de verdade. Argumento que a primeira abordagem conduz-nos a um dilema: caso a estrutura semântica seja isomórfica à estrutura sintagmática, multiplicamos os termos da explicação, sem ganho explicativo. Caso não haja isomorfismo, ganhamos problemas ainda mais sérios, pois não conseguiríamos explicar o sucesso explicativo de certos princípios sintáticos (como a assimetria entre argumento externo e argumento interno, por exemplo). Assim, essa proposta não fornece o tipo adequado de idealização, não é capaz de ampliar a heurística positiva do programa gerativista. Sustento que a segunda proposta, por contraste, amplia a heurística positiva do programa, pois é capaz de explicar (e não simplesmente redescrever) importantes generalizações empíricas descobertas pelo programa gerativista ao longo dos anos. Defendo a tese de que a formulação de uma semântica-I requer, necessariamente, a revisão de pressupostos tradicional e tacitamente aceitos a respeito da natureza do estudo formal da semântica das línguas naturais. A semântica-I trata da etiologia dos princípios computacionais subjacentes aos fenômenos de interface, e não da implementação dessas operações, do modo como sentenças podem ser usadas para fazer asserções verdadeiras ou falsas.