The size of things I

This book focuses on the role size plays in grammar. Under the umbrella term size fall the size of syntactic projections, the size of feature content, and the size of reference sets. The contributions in this first volume discuss size and structure building. The most productive research program in syntax where size plays a central role revolves around clausal complements. Part 1 of Volume I contributes to this program with papers that argue for particular structures of clausal complements, as well as papers that employ sizes of clausal complements to account for other phenomena. The papers in Part 2 of this volume explore the interaction between size and structure building beyond clausal complements, including phenomena in CP, vP, and NP domains. The contributions cover a variety of languages, many of which are understudied. The book is complemented by Volume II which discusses size effects in movement, agreement, and interpretation

The size of things I

This book focuses on the role size plays in grammar. Under the umbrella term size fall the size of syntactic projections, the size of feature content, and the size of reference sets. The contributions in this first volume discuss size and structure building. The most productive research program in syntax where size plays a central role revolves around clausal complements. Part 1 of Volume I contributes to this program with papers that argue for particular structures of clausal complements, as well as papers that employ sizes of clausal complements to account for other phenomena. The papers in Part 2 of this volume explore the interaction between size and structure building beyond clausal complements, including phenomena in CP, vP, and NP domains. The contributions cover a variety of languages, many of which are understudied. The book is complemented by Volume II which discusses size effects in movement, agreement, and interpretation

The syntax of wh-questions in Syrian Arabic

PhD ThesisThis thesis discusses some different types of wh-questions available in the dialect of Syrian Arabic. It demonstrates that this variety of Arabic has a very rich and varied system of wh-questions. As a prelude to this, it will first be shown that, as far as basic word order in the clause is concerned, two possible orders are allowed in SA, VSO and SVO. It will be argued that in the past tense, the unmarked order is VSO and SVO as a commonly occurring alternative. In the VSO order, the verb raises to a higher functional head F, a lower head in the complementizer system following Rizzi (2001). The subject raises to SpecTP due to the rich agreement system in SA. In the SVO order, the NP is either definite or specific indefinite. Assuming that F can be marked with a definite/specific feature, it can attract a subject to its specifier. Alternatively F can be marked with a [Focus] feature so it can attract a wh-phrase when a higher interrogative head INT is merged with F. It will be shown that in wh-questions, the V-S order is obligatory; however, this is not a consequence of a V2 constraint. Following Holmberg (2014), it will be argued that this order follows from a constraint on movement across the head F where the verb lands. Only one XP can precede the finite verb in F. After this, the strategies for wh-question formation in SA will be discussed, demonstrating that the in-situ strategy is marginal, being employed only in discourse linked contexts. It will be argued that Merchant‟s (2001, 2005) analysis of multiple wh-questions does not account for the facts of SA. Instead, it will be proposed that they should be accounted for in terms of the clause structure folding approach discussed in Moro (2011). A further topic covered will be pied-piping in SA. Facts from this domain will be used to argue against Heck‟s (2009) edge generalization, according to which a wh-pied-piper has to move to the edge of the pied-piped phrase. However, it will be shown that there is no such movement in the possessive structure in SA, as illustrated in (1): (1) a. hada beit bassel. this house Bassel „This is Bassel‟s house.‟ v b. beit miin hada? house who this „Whose house is this?‟ In (1a), the possessor appears in post-nominal position. In the case of a wh-possessor, as in (1b), it still appears in that position. Specifically, it does not undergo movement to the edge of the pied-piped phrase. In order to account for the pied-piping facts in this construction, I investigate the Q/wh-agreement system in SA, following Cable (2007), trying to determine whether the facts in (1) might follow from SA being a non-Q/wh-agreement language. However, I show that SA is an agreement language and propose that the behaviour of Wh-possessive phrases can be accounted for in terms of a combination of Cinque‟s (2000, 2005) roll up movement and Cable‟s (2007) Q-theory. As I will show, this analysis also accounts elegantly for the fact that wh-possessive phrases cannot contain adjectives. Along with the long extraction strategy, SA also employs the partial wh-movement (wh-scope marking) strategy for questioning out of embedded questions, as in (2): (2) šw fakkar-ty maʕ miin knt ʕam iħki? what thought-2SG.F with who was.1SG PROG speaking „What did you think? Who was I talking to?‟ It will be argued that there is no direct dependency between the wh-scope marker and the embedded wh-phrase. The wh-scope marker is not an expletive. It is base generated in the complement of a copula clause. It will be rgued that the wh-scope marker and the embedded wh-clause form a small clause embedded in the complement of the main verb. This clause takes the embedded wh-clause as its subject and the wh-scope marker as its predicate assimilating the embedded wh-clause to a free relative clause headed by a null head. Another strategy for questioning out of embedded questions in SA involves what looks like clausal pied piping: vi (3) addesh ʕmr-a al-et-l-ak? how.much age-her said-3SG.F.SU-to-2SG.M.OBJ „How old is she, did she say?‟ It will be argued that sentences like (3) are instances not of pied piping but of interrogative slifting, an operation that is different from both scope marking and long distance movement. Following Haddican et al (2014), it will be proposed that the slifted clause does not originate in the complement of the main clause. Rather, it is coindexed with a null operator merged in that position

Cappadocian kinship

Cappadocian kinship systems are very interesting from a sociolinguistic and anthropological perspective because of the mixture of inherited Greek and borrowed Turkish kinship terms. Precisely because the number of Turkish kinship terms differs from one variety to another, it is necessary to talk about Cappadocian kinship systems in the plural rather than about the Cappadocian kinship system in the singular. Although reference will be made to other Cappadocian varieties, this paper will focus on the kinship systems of Mišotika and Aksenitika, the two Central Cappadocian dialects still spoken today in several communities in Greece. Particular attention will be given to the use of borrowed Turkish kinship terms, which sometimes seem to co-exist together with their inherited Greek counterparts, e.g. mána vs. néne ‘mother’, ailfó/aelfó vs. γardáš ‘brother’ etc. In the final part of the paper some kinship terms with obscure or hitherto unknown etymology will be discussed, e.g. káka ‘grandmother’, ižá ‘aunt’, lúva ‘uncle (father’s brother)’ etc

Elements of Structural Syntax

This volume is now finally available in English, sixty years after the death of its author, Lucien Tesnière. It has been translated from the French original into German, Spanish, Italian, and Russian, and now at long last into English as well. The volume contains a comprehensive approach to the syntax of natural languages, an approach that is foundational for an entire stream in the modern study of syntax and grammar. This stream is known today as dependency grammar (DG). Drawing examples from dozens of languages, many of which he was proficient in, Tesnière presents insightful analyses of numerous phenomena of syntax. Among the highlights are the concepts of valency and head-initial vs. head-final languages. These concepts are now taken for granted by most modern theories of syntax, even by phrase structure grammars, which represent, in a sense, the opposite sort of approach to syntax from what Tesnière was advocating

Optimizing cognitive processing in the L2 classroom: new integrated grammar teaching framework, tested on unprepared oral production of Russian case inflection

The overarching goal of my research has been to explore possible ways of increasing the effectiveness of teaching L2 grammar through making grammar instruction more processable for learners, this way approaching well-attested difficulties in L2 grammar acquisition from a different perspective. This focus stems from the on-going discussion of form-meaning relationships (e.g., Bates & MacWhinney, 1989; N. Ellis, 2005; Larsen-Freeman, 2003; Lightbown & Spada, 2006; McManus, 2019; VanPatten et al, 2004), as well as rapidly developing research analysing cognitive processes involved in L2 learning, such as encoding, retrieval and proceduralization (e.g., Badecker & Kuminiak, 2007; DeKeyser, 2017; Juffs & Harrington, 2011; Kormos, 2014; Mackey et al, 2010; Martin & Ellis, 2012). My present study investigates the effectiveness of my new innovative teaching framework, based on spiralling (first proposed by Jerome Bruner) and developed through incorporating relevant research findings in psycholinguistics, cognitive psychology and second language acquisition (SLA), as well as recent developments in language pedagogy. More specifically, I examine how Russian nominal case inflection processing can be optimized in an ab-initio L2 classroom, in order to increase the accuracy of inflection production in learners’ speech. In addition, as part of this investigation, I analyse some factors influencing the success of inflection processing. In order to establish the relationships between form and meaning, I, first, review the long-standing opposition between Focus-on-form and Focus-on-meaning in L2 instruction, and, then, I look at how main approaches to SLA explain the acquisition of grammatical form, and that of inflection in particular. The mapping and processing during inflection acquisition are further analysed through the prism of psycholinguistic concepts of declarative and procedural knowledge and the role of Working Memory (WM) in learning structural aspects of an L2. Turning to the issue of effectiveness of learners’ processing, I examine three prominent SLA theories that propose the ways of facilitating L2 grammar acquisition, from the point of view of processing and possibilities of proceduralization. In addition, I propose an explanation of why Skill Acquisition Theory would be unable to fully explain the acquisition of grammatical forms. From the discussion of previous research, a number of inferences are made, which underpin my proposed Grammar Teaching Framework. From the same angle of learners’ processing, I give a brief description of the Russian case system, which is used to illustrate the main principles of the teaching framework and as a basis for the empirical part of the current study. For the purpose of the study, the large and rather general question about the effectiveness of the framework was split into more specific Research Questions (RQ), investigating beginners’ performance on two Russian cases, namely, Prepositional and Accusative. My research design includes both quantitative and qualitative methods, with a longitudinal teaching intervention as a main component of the study. My two comics tests, based on famous Russian pieces of literature, were specifically designed for the present study, as there appears to be no tools suitable for testing the accuracy of unprepared production of inflection in instructional settings. The results of the three rounds of testing demonstrate that the proposed processing-friendly teaching framework can be extremely effective in the acquisition of Russian case inflection. However, the data also show that acquisition is a complex process, and a number of factors impacting it were identified through measuring accuracy of inflecting certain vocabulary groups, presenting different processing demands. Some positive correlation was found between participants’ WM and the case inflection production scores, but WM did not figure as the most critical factor. Interestingly, gender was found to play a considerably more important role than anticipated. The results of this study have important implications for language pedagogy, SLA and psycholinguistics. Most importantly, they show that addressing learners’ processing restrictions in an L2 classroom can lead to the increase in accuracy of inflection production, and that the proposed framework has great potential in increasing the effectiveness of L2 grammar teaching. As the intervention was conducted in the conditions, replicating those of a standard beginner course, the results are considered generalizable to the language education environment. Also, the study shows that a range of different factors influence the production of case inflection and the success of the production, to a certain degree, can be manipulated. More detailed investigations of the exact extent in which the identified factors can affect learners’ performance, especially nominal gender, would be the subject of further investigations. Finally, this study is seminal to research in the acquisition of other morphologically complex languages

Issues in the Syntax of Nominals

This dissertation explores several aspects of nominal syntax of Resian, an underdescribed highly endagered Slovenian dialect spoken in the Northeast of Italy. From a descriptive point of view, this thesis aims at providing an empirical base related to the syntax of Resian nominals by implementing most recent advances in the formal study of nominal expressions. From a theoretical point of view, its goal is to contribute to the ongoing debate on the presence of the DP layer in articleless Slavic languages. The claim is that Resian has developed the definite article, though visible only in certain syntactic enviroments. As a consequence, null Ds are possible if certain structural conditions are satisfied. Chapter 1 offers an overview of socio(linguistic) situation of Resian, some of the properties of Resian grammar ascribed to the contact with Romance, and methodology implemented in the thesis. Chapter 2 contains theoretical framework of the dissertation, including the debate on the presence of DP in article-less nominals, a matter of considerable debate within Slavic linguistics, and the view of the nominal structure endorsed in the thesis. Chapter 3 is dedicated to the description of Resian nominal syntax along with systematic comparison with Slavic and Romance. Chapter 4 and 5 are devoted to the elaboration of the main proposal

Handbook of Lexical Functional Grammar

Lexical Functional Grammar (LFG) is a nontransformational theory of linguistic structure, first developed in the 1970s by Joan Bresnan and Ronald M. Kaplan, which assumes that language is best described and modeled by parallel structures representing different facets of linguistic organization and information, related by means of functional correspondences. This volume has five parts. Part I, Overview and Introduction, provides an introduction to core syntactic concepts and representations. Part II, Grammatical Phenomena, reviews LFG work on a range of grammatical phenomena or constructions. Part III, Grammatical modules and interfaces, provides an overview of LFG work on semantics, argument structure, prosody, information structure, and morphology. Part IV, Linguistic disciplines, reviews LFG work in the disciplines of historical linguistics, learnability, psycholinguistics, and second language learning. Part V, Formal and computational issues and applications, provides an overview of computational and formal properties of the theory, implementations, and computational work on parsing, translation, grammar induction, and treebanks. Part VI, Language families and regions, reviews LFG work on languages spoken in particular geographical areas or in particular language families. The final section, Comparing LFG with other linguistic theories, discusses LFG work in relation to other theoretical approaches