Logical Form in the Second Language: An Investigation into Quantification in Interlanguage

In coping with variability in morphological production in L2 acquisition, which represents a challenge for the parameter (re-)setting theories, Lardiere (2008) proposed the feature reassembly hypothesis in which sequential difficulty in L2 acquisition of morpho-syntactic features is captured by the processes of (re-)assembly and mapping of features onto their morphological realizations. Slabakova (2009, 2013) incorporated Lardiere’s proposal in establishing a scale of difficulty in learning semantic properties (e.g. definiteness) which is based on whether reassembly is needed and whether the universal meaning is obtained by overt morphology or context (See also Ramchand & Svenonius, 2008). In considering the truth-conditional aspect of meaning, the feature-based framework is not powerful enough to account for the variability of interpretations that L2 learners come to learn. Take as an example the acquisition of English comparatives by Japanese L2 learners. We discuss the L2 acquisition of a special type of syntaxsemantics mismatch in which in which a certain meaningprimitive (i.e., comparative and tense) is expressed using different truth conditions in the native and target language

A conspiracy theory for clefts : the syntax and interpretation of cleft constructions

The main goal of this thesis is to contribute to the discussion about the degree to which semantic and discourse related concepts are syntactically encoded. More particularly, I investigate whether there are consistent correlations between the interpretative and syntactic properties of four European Portuguese cleft constructions, and how these potential correlations should be accounted for theoretically. The cleft constructions taken into consideration are it-clefts, pseudoclefts, é que-clefts and SER-clefts. Syntactically we can distinguish between biclausal clefts (it-clefts and pseudoclefts) and monoclausal clefts (é que-clefts and SER-clefts). All cleft constructions have a focalized cleft constituent that can both constitute information focus and contrastive focus, and an existentially presupposed cleft clause. Additionally, the cleft constituent exhaustively identifies an open position in the cleft clause. The alternative semantics for focus (Rooth 1985) is adopted, according to which intonational focus uniformly contributes a set of alternatives in LF. Pragmatic rules operating on this set give rise to two suspendable implicatures: existential presupposition and exhaustivity. Given that both é que-clefts and SER-clefts have the same interpretation as non-cleft sentences with intonational focus when it comes to existential presupposition and exhaustivity, I conclude that their particular syntactic structure does not contribute anything to these interpretive aspects. The biclausal clefts on the other hand, argued to be specificational sentences, have a non-suspendable existential presupposition and exhaustive interpretation, on a par with non-cleft specificational sentences. I argue that this is because in these structures, the cleft constituent identifies a variable introduced by a definite description. The cleft clause, a headed relative clause in complement position of a definite determiner in it-clefts and a free relative in pseudoclefts, are shown to have the same semantic denotation as definite DPs, which are inherently presupposed. The strongly exhaustive interpretation arises because of the identification relation between the cleft constituent and the definite description. Furthermore, I argue that focus features do not trigger A’-movement to a dedicated FocP in European Portuguese: when focalized constituents move, they do so for focus-independent reasons. This is confirmed by the fact that only the cleft constituent of é que-clefts has properties of A’-movement, the other ones seem to be in situ. I propose that the cleft constituent of é que-clefts is a topic with a focus feature that moves to a TopP. This account straightforwardly captures the similar discourse restrictions that exist for non-focalized topics and for the cleft constituent of é que-clefts. The quantificational focus feature pied-piped by topicalization gives rise to intervention effects, causing left-peripheral focus not to be recursive and to be incompatible with movement of constituents with quantificational features. The account predicts the observed embedding restrictions of é que-clefts. Finally, I develop an account for the syntax of SER-clefts that approximates it to structures with focus particles. I argue that the copula is a focus-sensitive operator that is merged together with the cleft constituent. Distributional restrictions of the copula are due to selectional requirements of higher heads

Spanish Clitic Left Dislocation as a Non-quantificational A-movement

This paper argues that the Spanish Clitic Left Dislocation (CLLD) must be analyzed as a movement account, not as a base-generation one. Specifically, this study provides a novel analysis of the Spanish CLLD constructions by means of combining two explicit derivational steps: A-movement and A-movement that take place successively throughout different phasal domains (vP and CP). In the first step, A-movement is realized, and as a result of [+Case] and [+Specific/+Presuppositional] features checking between the DP constituent and the light verb v, a reduplicated clitic is spelled-out. In the second step, the dislocated constituent, which is not a quantifier but a referential DP, moves up to the left periphery to check its [+Contrastive Topic] feature with the TopP. Our analysis gives a plausible explication of the issues involved in the Spanish CLLD, such as clitic reduplication, weak crossover effect, parasitic gap, syntactic island, etc., drawing on well-justified arguments. It is claimed that the CLLD is different from the typical A-movement construction such as the Wh-question or the contrastive focus fronting, since the CLLD is not a quantificational movement that enters into the operator-variable configuration. Instead, CLLD in Spanish involves displacement of a referential DP to the left periphery of the sentence through its reduplicated pronominal clitic, characterizing this derivation as a non-quantificational A-movement

Intonation, word order and focus projection in Serbo-Croatian

LoC Class: PG1224.7, LoC Subject Headings: Serbo-Croatian language--Intonation, Serbo-Croatian language--Word orde

Syntax of Dutch

The Syntax of Dutch will be published in at least seven volumes in the period 2012-2016 and aims at presenting a synthesis of the currently available syntactic knowledge of Dutch. It is primarily concerned with language description and not with linguistic theory, and provides support to all researchers interested in matters relating to the syntax of Dutch, including advanced students of language and linguistics. The two volumes Nouns and Noun Phrases discuss the internal make-up as well as the distribution of noun phrases. Topics that will be covered include: complementation and modification of noun phrases; properties of determiners (article, demonstratives), numeral and quantifiers; the use of noun phrases as arguments, predicates and adverbial modifiers.De afgelopen vijftig jaar zijn er talloze wetenschappelijke en vaak specialistische werken over grammatica verschenen. In diezelfde periode is echter niet alleen de discussie over grammatica veranderd, maar ook de presentatie van formele structuren en de interpretatie van informatie. Gedegen antwoorden over de structuur van een bepaalde taal zijn daarom niet eenvoudig te vinden. Syntax of Dutch slaagt hier echter uitstekend in. Het werk richt zich op één enkel kernaspect van de Nederlandse grammatica: de zinsbouw of de syntaxis. Ondanks het specialistische onderwerp bestaat het uit maar liefst zeven delen, waaraan in totaal meer dan tien jaar is gewerkt. Het resultaat is een uniek naslagwerk voor taalkundigen én geïnteresseerde leken die meer willen weten over de syntactische eigenschappen van de Nederlandse taa

Syntax of Dutch. Nouns and Noun Phrases Volume 2

The aim of this publication is to present a complete synthesis of the available knowledge of Dutch syntax. It is primarily concerned with language description and not with linguistic theory, providing support to all researchers of language and linguistics, including graduate students. The first two volumes in this series, Nouns and Noun Phrases, discuss the internal make-up as well as the distribution of noun phrases, and address the following areas: complementation and modification of noun phrases; properties of determiners (articles and demonstratives), numerals and quantifiers; the use of noun phrases as arguments, predicates and adverbial modifiers.

Quantification and Paradox

I argue that absolutism, the view that absolutely unrestricted quantification is possible, is to blame for both the paradoxes that arise in naive set theory and variants of these paradoxes that arise in plural logic and in semantics. The solution is restrictivism, the view that absolutely unrestricted quantification is not possible. It is generally thought that absolutism is true and that restrictivism is not only false, but inexpressible. As a result, the paradoxes are blamed, not on illicit quantification, but on the logical conception of set which motivates naive set theory. The accepted solution is to replace this with the iterative conception of set. I show that this picture is doubly mistaken. After a close examination of the paradoxes in chapters 2--3, I argue in chapters 4 and 5 that it is possible to rescue naive set theory by restricting quantification over sets and that the resulting restrictivist set theory is expressible. In chapters 6 and 7, I argue that it is the iterative conception of set and the thesis of absolutism that should be rejected