Duffield Particles and Projections in Irish Syntax

1995
ISBN: 978-94-011-0155-4
Verlag: Springer Netherland
Format: PDF
Kopierschutz: 1 - PDF Watermark

E-Book, Englisch, Band 32, 372 Seiten, eBook

Reihe: Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory

Zielgruppe

Research

Autoren/Hrsg.

Duffield, N.

Inhaltsverzeichnis

1: Theoretical Issues.- 1.1 Explaining Syntactic Universals and Syntactic Variation.- 1.1.1 Lexical and Functional Projections: A Retrospective.- 1.1.2 Projections, Particles and Initial Consonant Mutation.- 1.2 Constraints on Phrase-Structure.- 1.2.1 X’-theory.- 1.2.2 Deriving X’-theory: Kayne (1993).- 1.3 Conditions on Movement: Deriving Locality.- 1.4 Motivating Syntactic Movement.- 1.4.1 Motivating NP-movement.- 1.4.2 Motivating Head Movement.- 1.4.3 A Note on Terminology.- 1.5 Summary.- 2: Movement and Mutation Processes In Modern Irish.- 2.0 Introduction.- 2.0.1 Initial Consonant Mutation.- 2.0.2 On Deriving VSOX Word-Order: Preliminaries.- 2.1 The Scope of Verb-Movement in Irish.- 2.1.1 Adverb Placement (I).- 2.1.2 ’Pronoun-Postposing’.- 2.1.2.1 Diachronic Changes.- 2.1.2.2 Adverb Placement (II).- 2.1.2.3 Restrictions on ’Postposing.- 2.2 Unpacking INFL: The Preverbal Particle System.- 2.2.1 Deriving [C°].- 2.2.2 Deriving [T°].- 2.2.3 Deriving [Neg°].- 2.2.4 Deriving [Agr°].- 2.3 Mutation in Copular Constructions.- 2.4 Summary.- 3: Conspicuous Absences: Mutation & Extraction In Negated Contexts.- 3.0 Introduction.- 3.1 The Problem of Gan: Mutation And Extraction.- 3.1.1 Small Clauses and Infinitival Clauses.- 3.1.2 Gan: Mutation and Subject Extraction.- 3.2 Relative Clauses, Narrative Fronting and Topicalization in Irish.- 3.2.1 Indirect vs. Direct Relatives: aNvs. aL.- 3.2.1.1 Dialectal & Historical Factors.- 3.2.1.2 Past Tense Contexts.- 3.2.1.3 Independent & Dependent Forms.- 3.2.2 Negative Relatives: The Dog that Didn’t Bark.- 3.2.3 Topicalization and WH-movement in Celtic and Germanic.- 3.2.3.1 Müller & Sternefeld (1993).- 3.2.3.2 Direct Relatives as Topic-Phrases.- 3.2.3.3 Topicalization vs. Narrative-Fronting.- 3.2.3.4 Negative Polarity Licensing.- 3.3 Conclusion.- 4: Visible Arguments: Theta-Government And Case In Ulster Irish.- 4.0 Introduction.- 4.1 Deriving SOVX word order.- 4.1.1.1 Thematic Constraints.- 4.1.1.2 Lexical Subjects.- 4.1.1.3 The Particle aL.- 4.1.2 A Previous Analysis: McCloskey & Sells (1988).- 4.1.3 An Alternative Analysis: aL and ’Object Agreement’.- 4.2 Theta-marking and Extraction in Progressive Contexts.- 4.2.1.1 Ag and taréis: Structural Differences.- 4.2.1.2 Ag and aL: Structural Parallels.- 4.2.2 Extraction from Progressives: the ag ? aL Rule.- 4.2.3 AL and the Distribution of Resumptive Pronouns.- 4.2.4 Towards a Unified Account of Object Licensing.- 4.2.5 Genitive Complements: Noun-Phrase Incorporation.- 4.3 Non-Finite Word-Order and Object Agreement in Southern Dialects.- 4.4 Summary.- 5: Irish Noun Phrases.- 5.0 Introduction.- 5.0.1 fish Nominal Paradigms.- 5.0.2 Prepositional Phrases: Two Types of Mutation Context.- 5.1 Construct State Nominals and DP Projections.- 5.1.1 Rightward Specifiers.- 5.1.2 Adjective Placement.- 5.1.3 Possessive Particles.- 5.1.4 Demonstrative Licensing and Interpretation.- 5.1.5 Head-movement and ICM Effects.- 5.2 Summary.- References.- Index of Names and Subjects.