4 years ago

Structural analogy in language and its limits [Contrast and analogy v.2]

Structural analogy in language and its limits [Contrast and analogy v.2]

John Anderson 102

John Anderson 102 answers within the Chomskyan framework. Particularly, though we do find examples like (ix.a) in Old English, with initial hwæðer andinversion’, parallel, apparently, to later (viii), this is exceptional, and normally there is no ‘inversion’ and the verb is subjunctive, as in (ix.b): (ix) a. Hweðer geleornodest þu, þe myd þam eagum, þe mid þam ingeþance? Whether learned you either with the eyes or with the mind (Did you learn with your eyes or with your mind?) (Soliloquies of Augustine, 22.3) b. Hwæðer ic mote lybban oðþæt ic hine geseo? Whether I am-allowed-subj to-live until I him see (May I remain alive until I see him?) (Ælfric’s Homilies, i.136.30) (See Mitchell 1985: §§1873, 1656, for these and other examples.) The ‘inverted’ word order and declarativeness that we find with hweðer in (ix.a), on the other hand, are usually associated with questioning of an argument rather than the clause, as illustrated in (x): (x) Hweðer ðincð þe þonne betre, þe ðæt soð þe seo soðfestnes? Which think-decl you then better either the truth or the sincerity (Which do you think better, truth or sincerity?) (Mitchell 1985: §1662). 38 Though, as Noonan claims, ‘all languages have some sort of sentence-like complement type’ (1985: 49), the elements that introduce even ‘sentence-like’ complements, conventionally grouped as ‘complementisers’, ‘typically derive historically from pronouns, conjunctions, adpositions or case markers’ (Noonan 1985: 47), i.e. elements associated with nominal constructions. Could it be, after all, that the basic template for the clause resembles that for the syllable in at least this respect: the centre of the clause is ‘verbal’, as the centre of the syllable is vocalic; non-central elements are interpreted as non-verbal, just as non-central elements in the syllable are non-vocalic? 39 And this is consistent with the subject also being a complement, in that even when no (other) complement or adjunct is present, the finite clause is postposed: (i) students who work It is unnecessary to invoke finiteness here as a separate factor determining modifier position.

103 Structural analogy in language, and its limits References Agutter, A.J.L. 1988a. The not-so-Scottish vowel length rule. In: J.M. Anderson & N. Macleod (eds.) Edinburgh Studies in the English language, 120-32. Edinburgh: John Donald. Agutter, A.J.L. 1988b. The dangers of dialect parochialism: The Scottish vowel length rule. In: J. Fisiak (ed.) Historical dialectology, 1-21. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Aissen, Judith, 1979. The syntax of causative constructions. New York: Garland. Aitken, A.J. 1981. The Scottish vowel-length rule. In: M. Benskin & M.L. Samuels (eds.) So meny people longages and tonges, 131-57. Edinburgh: Benskin & Samuels. Anderson, John M. 1972. Remarks on the hierarchy of quasi-predications. Revue roumaine de linguistique 17, 23-44, 121-40, 193-202, 319-35. Anderson, John M. 1973. On existence and the perfect. Foundations of language 10, 333-7. Anderson, John M. 1976. Perfect possibilities and existential constraints. Studia Anglica Posnaniensis 7, 3-6. Anderson, John M. 1977. On case grammar: Prolegomena to a theory of grammatical relations. London: Croom Helm. Anderson, John M. 1984. Case grammar and the lexicon. University of Ulster Occasional Papers in Linguistics and Language Learning, No.10. Anderson, John M. 1986a. Suprasegmental dependencies. In: Jacques Durand (ed.) Dependency and non-linear phonology, 55-133. London: Croom Helm. Anderson, John M. 1986b. The English prosody /h/. In: D. Kastovsky and A Szwedek (eds.) Linguistics across historical and geographical boundaries, 799-809. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Anderson, John M. 1986c. Structural analogy and case grammar. Lingua 70, 79-129. Anderson, John M. 1987. The limits of linearity. In: John M. Anderson & Jacques Durand (eds.) Explorations in dependency phonology, 169-90. Dordrecht: Foris. Anderson, John M. 1988a. System geometry and segment structure: A question of Scots economy. NELS 18, 22-37. Anderson, John M. 1988b. More on slips and syllable structure. Phonology 5, 157-9. Anderson, John M. 1988c. The type of Old English impersonals. In: John M. Anderson & Norman Macleod (eds.) Edinburgh studies in the English Language, 1-32. Edinburgh: John Donald. Anderson, John M. 1988d. Old English ablaut again: The essentially concrete character of dependency phonology. In: Caroline Duncan-Rose & Theo Vennemann (eds.) On language: rhetorica, phonologica, syntactica – A festschrift for Robert P. Stockwell from his friends and colleagues, 161-82. London: Routledge. Anderson, John M. 1991. Kabardian disemvowelled, again. Studia Linguistica 45, 18-48. Anderson, John M. 1992a. Linguistic representation: Structural analogy and stratification. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Anderson John M. 1992b. Exceptionality and non-specification in the history of English phonology. In: Matti Rissanen, Ossi Ihalainen, Terttu Nevalainen & Irma Taavitsainen (eds.) History of Englishes: New methods and interpretations in historical linguistics, 103-16. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Contrast in phonology, structural analogy, and the interfaces
Structural analogy and universal grammar
Structural Realism: Continuity and Its Limits - Ioannis Votsis
1 Finegan, Edward, Language. Its Structure and Use. 3rd edition ...
The Structure and Content of the Body of an OLIF v.2 File
Correlation Between Structure of Bcl-2 and Its Inhibitory Function of ...
Correlation Between Structure of Bcl-2 and Its Inhibitory Function of ...