The Syntactic Status of VP-Internal Dative NPs
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
A long-standing conflict has evolved in the literature on the morphosyntactic processes involved in case assignment to VP-internal NPs. Some analysts insist that the Accusative direct object stands higher in the syntactic tree than the Dative indirect object because it has the potential to bind and control into the Dative NP, which is characteristic of a structure in which NPACC c-commands NPDAT. Other analysts argue that the Accusative direct object must occupy a lower position because it forms a constituent together with the verb. These positions have previously seemed to be quite irreconcilable. The present article presents an analysis of the structure of VP under which the competing properties which underly the two alternative proposed structures can be reconciled. It is argued that the second structural analysis, whereby NPACC stands lower and forms a constituent with V, is correct. The arguments in favor of this position are all configurational in nature, and therefore they follow directly from a structural account. The arguments against this structure, and in favor of the alternative, are all related to semantics and pragmatics. It is argued that the distinction between grammatically prominent and semantically/pragmatically prominent NP complements to V is analogous to the well-established distinction between two types of subjects in Russian grammar: the grammatical subject and the logical or notional subject. It is argued that this distinction should not be restricted to subjects alone, but extended to other important NP arguments as well. This extension explains all the hitherto intractable facts while introducing no additional apparatus or ad hoc assumptions beyond what is independently required elsewhere in the grammar of Russian.
Abstract
A long-standing conflict has evolved in the literature on the morphosyntactic processes involved in case assignment to VP-internal NPs. Some analysts insist that the Accusative direct object stands higher in the syntactic tree than the Dative indirect object because it has the potential to bind and control into the Dative NP, which is characteristic of a structure in which NPACC c-commands NPDAT. Other analysts argue that the Accusative direct object must occupy a lower position because it forms a constituent together with the verb. These positions have previously seemed to be quite irreconcilable. The present article presents an analysis of the structure of VP under which the competing properties which underly the two alternative proposed structures can be reconciled. It is argued that the second structural analysis, whereby NPACC stands lower and forms a constituent with V, is correct. The arguments in favor of this position are all configurational in nature, and therefore they follow directly from a structural account. The arguments against this structure, and in favor of the alternative, are all related to semantics and pragmatics. It is argued that the distinction between grammatically prominent and semantically/pragmatically prominent NP complements to V is analogous to the well-established distinction between two types of subjects in Russian grammar: the grammatical subject and the logical or notional subject. It is argued that this distinction should not be restricted to subjects alone, but extended to other important NP arguments as well. This extension explains all the hitherto intractable facts while introducing no additional apparatus or ad hoc assumptions beyond what is independently required elsewhere in the grammar of Russian.
참고문헌 (20)
- Bailyn, John F., "The Unification of Instrumental Case Assignment in Russian", Cornell Working Papers in Linguistics, 9, pp.99~126 (1991)
- Bailyn, John F., "A Configurational Approach to Russian “Free” Word Order", 박사, pp.1995
- Bailyn, John F., "Configurational Case Assignment in Russian Syntax", The Linguistic Review, 12, pp.315~360 (1995)
- Bailyn, John F., "What’s Inside VP? New (and old) Evidence from Russian", To appear in Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics, 18
- Chomsky, Noam., "The Minimalist Program" (1995), MIT Press
- Choo, Sukhoon., "A Unified Account of Dative Subjects in Russian", The General Tendency of Russian Linguistics - in Nizhnyj Novgorod, International Conference Proceedings, pp.60~69 (2007)
- Dik, S. C., "Functional Grammar" (1978), North-Holland
- Dyakonova, Marina., "Russian Double Object Constructions", ACLC Working Papers, 2(1), pp.3~30 (2005)
- Dyakonova, Marina., "A Phase-Based Approach to Russian Free Word Order", 박사, University of Amsterdam, pp.2007
- Fowler, George., "The Syntax of the Genitive Case in Russian", 박사, pp.1987
- Fowler, George, "Oblique Passivization in Russian", Slavic and East European Journal, 40(3), pp.519~546 (1996)
- Fox, Danny, "Condition A and Scope Reconstruction", Linguistic Inquiry, 35, pp.474~485 (2004)
- Franks, Steven, "Parameters of Slavic Morphosyntax" (1995), Oxford University Press
- Jackendoff, Ray, "The Architecture of the Language Faculty" (1997), MIT Press
- Junghanns, Uwe, "Syntax and Information Structure of Russian Clauses", Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics, 6, pp.289~319 (1997)
- Levin, Beth, "Deconstructing the Thematic Hierarchy", Paper presented at the 38th Seoul Linguistics Forum (2004), Seoul National University
- Pereltsvaig, Asya., "On the Nature of Intra-Clausal Relations", 박사, pp.2001
- Richardson, Kylie R., "Case and Aspect in Slavic" (2007), Oxford University Press
- Testelets, Jakov., "Vvedenie v obščij sintaksis" (2001), RGGU
- Yokoyama, Olga T., "Discourse and Word Order in Russian" (1986), Benjamins