当前位置: X-MOL 学术Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Clause structure, case and agreement in Polish existential, possessive and locative sentences: A phase-based account
Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics ( IF 0.5 ) Pub Date : 2018-11-27 , DOI: 10.1515/psicl-2018-0025
Joanna Błaszczak 1
Affiliation  

Abstract In this paper it will be argued that the difference between existential and locative sentences is primarily structurally encoded at the vP/VP level (at the first phase of a derivation). The crucial question is which argument of the verb BE (the Location or the nominal argument (“Theme”)) is projected as the “external argument”, i.e., which argument is the subject of inner predication. In the case of existential sentences it is the Location argument which is the subject of inner predication, and in the case of locative sentences it is the nominal argument. The subject of inner predication becomes by default also the subject of outer predication, i.e., the topic of the sentence. Hence, in the case of locative sentences the nominal argument is the subject of outer predication, i.e., the topic of the sentence, and in the case of existential sentences it is the Location which becomes the topic. (Or, alternatively, the actual topic (the subject of outer predication) might be the situational/ event variable, and the Location functions as a restriction on it.) However, the actual arrangement of constituents in the sentences under discussion, as in any other Polish sentence, is determined by the pragmatic/communicative principles. Given this, it is reasonable to think that the NOM/GEN case alternation in negated existential/locative sentences is primarily a matter of syntax, and not one of information structure or scope of negation. The analysis will be modeled in accordance with the phasal model of Chomsky (2000 et seq.).

中文翻译:

波兰语存在性,所有格和定句中的条款结构,案例和协议:基于阶段的说明

摘要本文将论证存在句和定位句之间的差异主要在vP / VP级别(在推导的第一阶段)进行结构编码。关键问题是动词BE的哪个自变量(位置或名义自变量(“主题”))被投影为“外部自变量”,即哪个自变量是内部谓词的主语。在存在句子的情况下,位置论元是内部谓词的主题,在位置句的情况下,它是名词性论点。默认情况下,内部谓词的主题也将成为外部谓词的主题,即句子的主题。因此,在定位句子的情况下,名词性论点是外部谓词的主题,即句子的主题,在存在句子的情况下,位置成为主题。(或者,实际主题(外部谓词的主题)可能是情境/事件变量,而Location则是对它的限制。)但是,在讨论的句子中,构成成分的实际排列方式波兰语中的其他句子由实用/交际原则决定。鉴于此,有理由认为否定的存在性/定句中的NOM / GEN格交替主要是语法问题,而不是信息结构或否定范围之一。将根据Chomsky的阶段模型(2000年及其后)对分析进行建模。实际主题(外部谓词的主题)可能是情境/事件变量,而“位置”则是对其的限制。)但是,与其他波兰语句子一样,所讨论句子中成分的实际排列方式是由务实/沟通原则决定。鉴于此,有理由认为否定的存在性/定句中的NOM / GEN格交替主要是语法问题,而不是信息结构或否定范围之一。将根据Chomsky的阶段模型(2000年及其后)对分析进行建模。实际主题(外部谓词的主题)可能是情境/事件变量,而“位置”则是对其的限制。)但是,与其他波兰语句子一样,所讨论句子中成分的实际排列方式是由务实/沟通原则决定。鉴于此,有理由认为否定的存在性/定句中的NOM / GEN格交替主要是语法问题,而不是信息结构或否定范围之一。将根据Chomsky的阶段模型(2000年及其后)对分析进行建模。是由务实/沟通原则决定的。鉴于此,有理由认为否定的存在性/定句中的NOM / GEN格交替主要是语法问题,而不是信息结构或否定范围之一。将根据Chomsky的阶段模型(2000年及其后)对分析进行建模。是由务实/沟通原则决定的。鉴于此,有理由认为否定的存在性/定句中的NOM / GEN格交替主要是语法问题,而不是信息结构或否定范围之一。将根据Chomsky的阶段模型(2000年及其后)对分析进行建模。
更新日期:2018-11-27
down
wechat
bug