- Page 1 and 2: Adverbial and Argument-Doubling Cla
- Page 3 and 4: THE IJNnmuTTYOF MANITOBA FACULTY OF
- Page 5: Acknowledgemenfs This thesis would
- Page 10 and 11: Adverbial and Argument-Doubling Cla
- Page 12 and 13: This treatment of subordinate claus
- Page 14 and 15: (1 ) Proto-Algonquian */nila/ '1' P
- Page 16 and 17: (3) a. Italian: Ha parlato. [CP[3*e
- Page 18 and 19: two NPs) can be expressed with ody
- Page 20 and 21: In Cree, however, there is evidence
- Page 22 and 23: imponantly for our purposes, he rec
- Page 24 and 25: pronominal arguments whenever NPs w
- Page 26 and 27: clauses are in non-argument positio
- Page 28 and 29: to the MVC. The CO-indexing relatio
- Page 30 and 31: would not be any such role for a CP
- Page 32 and 33: However, an examination of the subo
- Page 34 and 35: Hale concluded that the difference
- Page 36 and 37: pronominal clitics were never bound
- Page 38 and 39: Jelinek's analysis did not provide
- Page 40 and 41: theory dong the way. For some prono
- Page 42 and 43: In English, the subject cc-comrnand
- Page 44 and 45: presented above, NPs are situated i
- Page 46 and 47: (24) a. Independent: niwâpamâw c
- Page 48 and 49: Le-, more prominent in the discours
- Page 50 and 51: see.TA-(3-31) buffalo, f ' 'He saw
- Page 52 and 53: - Source b. . ., kâ-wâpamât awa
- Page 54 and 55: . pêmohtêyâhk cj. walk-along. AI
- Page 56 and 57: syntactic relationship to the matri
- Page 58 and 59:
complement-like interpretation. The
- Page 60 and 61:
that A-doubling clauses also occupy
- Page 62 and 63:
as dernonstrated in (44). The NP an
- Page 64 and 65:
3.3.3.1.2 Declarative Argument-Dou
- Page 66 and 67:
to-object does not appear to be fre
- Page 68 and 69:
This shows that these wh-clauses ar
- Page 70 and 71:
examinhg how they behave with diffe
- Page 72 and 73:
semantic relation, namely constnial
- Page 74 and 75:
In example (62) below, we see extra
- Page 76 and 77:
If an NP is in an adverbial clause,
- Page 78 and 79:
-linking relationship between A-dou
- Page 80 and 81:
that its value is not inherent in t
- Page 82 and 83:
the verbal morphology. In the examp
- Page 84 and 85:
younger sister, is proximate. This
- Page 86 and 87:
4.3 Proximatt Sbifts Given more tha
- Page 88 and 89:
(76) kîwêw mistanask; kostêw wak
- Page 90 and 91:
(77) êkosi êkwah sipwêhtêw. so
- Page 92 and 93:
Some examples of complex sentences
- Page 94 and 95:
cân kiskènimêw tânitê mêrîwa
- Page 96 and 97:
Chapter 5 An Analysis of Adverbial
- Page 98 and 99:
pronominals within the verbal cornp
- Page 100 and 101:
discourse prominence of each partic
- Page 102 and 103:
In Example (86) below, even though
- Page 104 and 105:
argument in the matrk verbal comple
- Page 106 and 107:
Example (90) demonstrates that a Wh
- Page 108 and 109:
nominal matenal at al. The NP may c
- Page 110 and 111:
(95) prq-nikiskênimâw-proJ Lw aw
- Page 112 and 113:
eading even ifit does not contain a
- Page 114 and 115:
5.4.4 Chains and Domains The CO-ind
- Page 116 and 117:
see. TI-(3-i11an) cj-horse. fmt. AM
- Page 118 and 119:
doubling clauses, and therefore, fo
- Page 120 and 121:
(107) ( kêtahtawê pr~~kiskêyhtam
- Page 122 and 123:
have the same obviation status. An
- Page 124 and 125:
Lastly, we can consider an adverbia
- Page 126 and 127:
Chapter 6 Conclusion and Further Co
- Page 128 and 129:
above, this analysis accounts for t
- Page 130 and 131:
includes the matrix clause. Without
- Page 132 and 133:
argument r-linked to the containing
- Page 134 and 135:
have subordinate clauses which refl
- Page 136 and 137:
Ellis, C. Douglas. 1983. Spken Cree
- Page 138:
Tomlin, Russ, and Richard Rhodes. 1