Muutke küpsiste eelistusi

E-raamat: Building and Interpreting Possession Sentences

(Boston University)
  • Formaat: 472 pages
  • Sari: The MIT Press
  • Ilmumisaeg: 14-Oct-2016
  • Kirjastus: MIT Press
  • Keel: eng
  • ISBN-13: 9780262336130
Teised raamatud teemal:
  • Formaat - PDF+DRM
  • Hind: 93,60 €*
  • * hind on lõplik, st. muud allahindlused enam ei rakendu
  • Lisa ostukorvi
  • Lisa soovinimekirja
  • See e-raamat on mõeldud ainult isiklikuks kasutamiseks. E-raamatuid ei saa tagastada.
  • Formaat: 472 pages
  • Sari: The MIT Press
  • Ilmumisaeg: 14-Oct-2016
  • Kirjastus: MIT Press
  • Keel: eng
  • ISBN-13: 9780262336130
Teised raamatud teemal:

DRM piirangud

  • Kopeerimine (copy/paste):

    ei ole lubatud

  • Printimine:

    ei ole lubatud

  • Kasutamine:

    Digitaalõiguste kaitse (DRM)
    Kirjastus on väljastanud selle e-raamatu krüpteeritud kujul, mis tähendab, et selle lugemiseks peate installeerima spetsiaalse tarkvara. Samuti peate looma endale  Adobe ID Rohkem infot siin. E-raamatut saab lugeda 1 kasutaja ning alla laadida kuni 6'de seadmesse (kõik autoriseeritud sama Adobe ID-ga).

    Vajalik tarkvara
    Mobiilsetes seadmetes (telefon või tahvelarvuti) lugemiseks peate installeerima selle tasuta rakenduse: PocketBook Reader (iOS / Android)

    PC või Mac seadmes lugemiseks peate installima Adobe Digital Editionsi (Seeon tasuta rakendus spetsiaalselt e-raamatute lugemiseks. Seda ei tohi segamini ajada Adober Reader'iga, mis tõenäoliselt on juba teie arvutisse installeeritud )

    Seda e-raamatut ei saa lugeda Amazon Kindle's. 

A major question for linguistic theory concerns how the structure of sentences relates to their meaning. There is broad agreement in the field that there is some regularity in the way that lexical semantics and syntax are related, so that thematic roles (the different participant roles in an event: agent, theme, goal, etc.) are predictably associated with particular syntactic positions. In this book, Neil Myler examines the syntax and semantics of possession sentences, which are infamous for appearing to diverge dramatically from this broadly regular pattern.

On the one hand, Myler points out, possession sentences have too many meanings; in any given language, the construction used to express archetypal possessive meanings (such as personal ownership) is also often used to express other apparently unrelated notions (body parts, kinship relations, and many others). On the other hand, possession sentences have too many surface structures; languages differ markedly in the argument structures used to convey the same possessive meanings. Myler argues that recent work on the syntax-semantics interface in the generative tradition has developed the tools needed to solve these puzzles.

Examining and synthesizing ideas from the literature and drawing on data from many languages (including some understudied Quechua dialects), Myler presents a novel way to understand the apparent irregularity of possession sentences while preserving explanations of general cross-linguistic regularities, offering a unified approach to the syntax and semantics of possession sentences that can also be integrated into a general theory of argument structure.

1 Introduction
1(66)
1.1 The Domain of Inquiry
1(10)
1.2 The Architecture of the Grammar
11(34)
1.2.1 Syntax
13(18)
1.2.2 PF (The Morphophonological Component)
31(9)
1.2.3 LF (The Semantic Component)
40(5)
1.3 Consequences and Major Claims
45(4)
1.4 The Solution in a Nutshell
49(14)
1.5 Excursus: Why John is a doctor ≠ John has a doctor
63(2)
1.6 Structure of this Book
65(2)
2 Previous Approaches to Predicative Possession
67(110)
2.1 The Scale of the Puzzles: Typological Work
68(31)
2.1.1 Clark (1970/1978)
68(10)
2.1.2 Heine (1997)
78(5)
2.1.3 Stassen (2009)
83(15)
2.1.4 Tham (2013)
98(1)
2.2 The Freeze/Kayne Tradition
99(24)
2.2.1 The Foundations: Szabolcsi (1981, 1983, 1994)
100(12)
2.2.2 The Locative Paradigm: Freeze (1992) and P Incorporation
112(7)
2.2.3 A Modular Approach to BE vs. HAVE: Kayne (1993)
119(4)
2.3 Extensions and Reactions to the Freeze/Kayne Tradition
123(26)
2.3.1 Principles and Parameters and the HAVE/BE Question
124(11)
2.3.2 Acknowledging the Multiplicity of be Constructions
135(6)
2.3.3 Severing HAVE from be: Blaszczak (2007)
141(2)
2.3.4 Relating HAVE and BE via (In)transitivity
143(4)
2.3.5 Conclusions: The State of the Art on the Too-Many-(Surface)-Structures Puzzle
147(2)
2.4 Approaches to the Too-Many-Meanings Puzzle
149(27)
2.4.1 HAVE as Vague but Meaningful
150(12)
2.4.2 HAVE as Specific but Meaningless
162(13)
2.4.3 Section Conclusion: The State of the Art on the Too-Many-Meanings Puzzle
175(1)
2.5
Chapter Conclusion: Approaching Predicative Possession
176(1)
3 The Micro-Comparative Syntax of Possession in Quechua
177(76)
3.1 Outline of the
Chapter
177(1)
3.2 Background on Quechua and a Word on the Data
178(4)
3.3 Possession Sentences, Movement, and UTAH
182(49)
3.3.1 Three Arguments for (51)
192(4)
3.3.2 BE vs. BE-APPL: Against a Movement Approach
196(6)
3.3.3 Applicative -pu Is Semantically Null
202(17)
3.3.4 How Two Syntaxes Can Have the Same Semantic Result
219(11)
3.3.5 Conclusions
230(1)
3.4 BE-APPL in Cochabamba vs. Santiago del Estero Quechua
231(8)
3.5 To HAVE and to hold Across the Quechua Family
239(13)
3.5.1 Santiago del Estero Has have
240(4)
3.5.2 have, BE and Parametric Variation: the View from Quechua
244(8)
3.6 Conclusions
252(1)
4 Building and Interpreting HAVE Sentences
253(54)
4.1 The Syntax and Semantics of Have
256(37)
4.1.1 Cases Where the Meaning of a Have Sentence = That of Have's Complement (If Voice = Expl)
256(21)
4.1.2 Cases Where the Meaning of a Have Sentence = That of have's Complement+That of Voice (If Voice ≠ Expl)
277(16)
4.2 A Loose End: Modal Have
293(2)
4.3 A Language with Two HAVEs: Icelandic
295(6)
4.4 Conclusions
301(6)
5 Consequences and Comparisons
307(38)
5.1 Comparing the Approaches
307(4)
5.1.1 Freeze (1992)
307(3)
5.1.2 Kayne (1993)
310(1)
5.2 Problems for the Freeze/Kayne Approach
311(17)
5.2.1 Problems for Freeze (1992)
311(9)
5.2.2 Problems for Kayne (1993)
320(8)
5.2.3 Conclusions
328(1)
5.3 Crucial Predictive Differences
328(15)
5.3.1 The Nature of Definiteness Effects in HAVE Sentences
329(7)
5.3.2 Have Is Transitive, Not Unaccusative
336(7)
5.4 Conclusion
343(2)
6 Extending the Typology I: Predicativization
345(40)
6.1 Introducing -yoq
347(3)
6.2 -yog-Marked Phrases Are Nominal (for at Least Some Speakers)
350(4)
6.2.1 Distributional Argument #1: Nominals but Not PPs Can Stand Alone in Argument Position
351(2)
6.2.2 Distributional Argument #2: Nominal Plural Morphology
353(1)
6.2.3 Reassuring Distributional Facts: Modification by Numerals and Determiners
354(1)
6.3 Against Decompositional Approaches to -yoq
354(6)
6.4 -yoq and the Semantics of Predicativization
360(6)
6.5 The Comparative Syntax of Predicativization
366(18)
6.5.1 The Accidental Participle
370(4)
6.5.2 Restrictions Against Kinship and Other Social Relations
374(3)
6.5.3 Modification Requirements
377(5)
6.5.4 A Typology of Predicativization
382(2)
6.6 Conclusion
384(1)
7 Extending the Typology II: The WITH-Possessive
385(18)
7.1 Re-introducing WITH-Possessives
385(1)
7.2 Levinson's (2011) Approach
386(6)
7.3 WITH-Possessives in Icelandic and Bantu
392(7)
7.3.1 Vera Med in Icelandic
392(5)
7.3.2 Na in Bantu
397(2)
7.4 Conclusion: Syntax and Semantics in WITH-Possessives
399(4)
8 Conclusions and Prospects
403(18)
8.1 Summary of the Proposal and Arguments
403(7)
8.2 Areas for Extension
410(10)
8.2.1 Prospects for an Extension to BE and HAVE as Aspectual Auxiliaries
411(4)
8.2.2 A Sketch of an Extension to HAVE in Existential Constructions
415(2)
8.2.3 Some Open Questions
417(3)
8.3 General Conclusion
420(1)
Appendix: Adaptation to the System of Francez (2009) 421(4)
Bibliography 425(20)
Index 445