Polysemie und Umdeutung satzeinbettender Prädikate

Die Polysemie satzeinbettender Prädikate spielt eine wichtige Rolle fur deren Einbettungsverhalten. Konkret wird gezeigt, dass Polysemie mit struktureller Ambiguität als Kontroll- vs. Anhebungsverb assoziiert sein kann (Beispiel drohen/versprechen) und dass NEG-Raising auf bestimmte Lesarten eines polysemen Verbs beschränkt sein kann. Des Weiteren wird beleuchtet, welche Faktoren die syntaktische Flexibilität satzeinbettender Prädikate, d.h. das Einbettungspotenzial bzgl. der wichtigsten Satzkomplementtypen des Deutschen, begünstigen und welche Rolle dabei Umdeutungen (z.B. von bedauern zu 'mit Bedauern äußern'), die Polysemie induzieren, spielen. Alle betrachteten Phänomene deuten darauf hin, dass sie S-Selektion (semantische Selektion) eine zentrale Rolle in der Satzeinbettung spielt

Towards a typology of complement control

It is the aim of this paper to evaluate the various types of sentential complementation available in terms of complement control cross-linguistically. I will propose a lexical classification of control classes on the basis of the instantiated subordination patterns. I want to focus on an important distinction, namely that of structural vs. inherent control. Structural control is found with predicates that select a clausal complement whose structure requires argument identification and thus 'induces' control. Infinitival complements are prototypical cases for this kind of control because in most languages infinitival complements can only 'survive' in structures of control or raising. The interesting question is which predicates license structural control and which cross-linguistic differences emerge between potential licensors. Inherent control is found with predicates that require control readings independent of the instantiated structure of sentential complementation (e.g. a directive predicate such as zwingen 'force'). In addition, I will recapitulate and add arguments for the dual lexical-syntactic nature of complement control

Studies in complement control

This volume represents a collection of papers that present some of the results of two projects on control: on the one hand, the project Typology of complement control directed by Barbara Stiebels and funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG STI 151/2-2), and on the other hand the project Variation in control structures directed by Maria Polinsky and Eric Potsdam and funded by the US National Science Foundation (NSF grants BCS-0131946, BCS-0131993; website http://accent.ucsd.edu/). Whereas the first project pursued a lexical approach to control with a semantic definition of obligatory control, the second project has mainly pursued a syntactic approach to control – with special emphasis on less studied control structures (such as adjunct control, backward control, finite control, etc.). Both projects have aimed at extending the research on complement control to structures that differ from the prototypical cases of infinitival complements with empty subjects found in many Indo-European languages; their common interest was to bring in new empirical data, both primary and experimental

Appendix : Questionnaire for complement control and control predicates

This questionnaire focuses on control structures that are instantiated by predicates that take a state of affairs (SOA) argument. Noonan (1985) has called these predicates 'complement-taking predicates'; I will use the notion of SOAAtaking predicates (SOAA = state of affairs argument). Prototypically, complement control is instantiated by certain classes of verbs; however, adjectives (be eager to) and nouns (e.g. nominalizations such as promise) may function as control predicates as well. 'Control' refers to the pattern of argument identification between an argument of the SOAA-taking predicate and an argument of the SOAA-head. In the literature the notion of 'equi deletion' or 'equi-NP deletion' has been used (following Rosenbaum 1967), which refers to structures in which an overt argument of the matrix predicate is identified with a covert argument of the embedded predicate. This questionnaire aims at a cross-linguistic application of the notion of control and thus uses a semantic definition of complement control. It extends the notion of control to other patterns of referential dependency between arguments of a SOAA-taking predicate and of the embedded predicate

Das Griechische

Skopeteas S. Das Griechische. In: Krifka M, Błaszczak J, Leßmöllmann A, et al., eds. Das mehrsprachige Klassenzimmer: Über die Muttersprachen unserer Schüler. Berlin: Springer; 2014: 427-449

Case inversion in Georgian: Syntactic properties and sentence processing

Skopeteas S, Fanselow G, Asatiani R. Case inversion in Georgian: Syntactic properties and sentence processing. In: Lamers M, De Swart P, eds. Case, Word Order, and Prominence. Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics. New York: Springer; 2011: 145-171.The morphological and syntactic facts from Georgian create a unique puzzle for the study of sentence processing. The word order is characterized by considerable freedom and case marking is not uni-directionally associated with -roles. This article presents a grammatical account of Georgian case marking and a study on incremental sentences processing. The empirical findings show that case is indeed a more reliable cue than word order in processing clauses with thematically ambiguous arguments. Furthermore, the obtained data suggest an asymmetry between dative experiencers and dative actors, such that only the revision of the thematic properties of the latter is associated with high processing cost