Gaps and Dummies
เจเจจ 2005 ยท Amsterdam University Press
เจ-เจเจฟเจคเจพเจฌ
352
เจชเฉฐเจจเฉ
family_home
เจฏเฉเจ
info
reportเจฐเฉเจเจฟเฉฐเจเจพเจ เจ
เจคเฉ เจธเจฎเฉเจเจฟเจเจตเจพเจ เจฆเฉ เจชเฉเจธเจผเจเฉ เจจเจนเฉเจ เจเฉเจคเฉ เจเจ เจนเฉ ย เจนเฉเจฐ เจเจพเจฃเฉ
เจเจธ เจ-เจเจฟเจคเจพเจฌ เจฌเจพเจฐเฉ
In this study the syntactic properties of empty categories and dummy pronouns are investigated within the framework of Government-Binding theory.
The assumption that clauses must have a subject is present in most, if not all, linguistic theories. In GB theory the requirement that clauses have a subject is stipulated as a consequence of the base rules or the Extended Projection Principle. In this book it is claimed that no such stipulation is necessary. The presence of a subject is exclusively determined by the theories of thematic roles and Case.
This view is supported by the fact that the alleged dummy subjects Dutch, i.e. er and het, show a variety of properties, which can only be explained if they are not analyzed as dummy subjects. Further confirmation is derived from the fact that Dutch, subjectless sentences are found in precisely those circumstances in which neither -theory nor Case theory requires a subject to be present.
Chapter 1 presents a theory of empty categories. This theory enables us to explain the distribution of gaps, and makes precise and correct predictions with respect to the occurrence of parasitic gaps.
The non-dummy status of het, discussed in chapter 2, is supported by the fact that it can be the antecedent of PRO, reflexives, and parasitic gaps, and by an asymmetry in wh-movement from sentential complements. The analysis of het leads to a discussion of a variety of constructions, including constructions with raising, ergative, and psychological verbs.
The adverbial pronoun er displays several distinct syntactic functions. In chapter 3 it is argued that none of these different functions justifies an analysis of er as a dummy subject.
In chapter 4 some of the consequences of the theory introduced in the preceding chapters are investigated. These include a discussion of the status of the subject position in languages such as English, Italian, French, and Spanish, the structure of Old English, and the status of dummy pronouns in German and English.
The assumption that clauses must have a subject is present in most, if not all, linguistic theories. In GB theory the requirement that clauses have a subject is stipulated as a consequence of the base rules or the Extended Projection Principle. In this book it is claimed that no such stipulation is necessary. The presence of a subject is exclusively determined by the theories of thematic roles and Case.
This view is supported by the fact that the alleged dummy subjects Dutch, i.e. er and het, show a variety of properties, which can only be explained if they are not analyzed as dummy subjects. Further confirmation is derived from the fact that Dutch, subjectless sentences are found in precisely those circumstances in which neither -theory nor Case theory requires a subject to be present.
Chapter 1 presents a theory of empty categories. This theory enables us to explain the distribution of gaps, and makes precise and correct predictions with respect to the occurrence of parasitic gaps.
The non-dummy status of het, discussed in chapter 2, is supported by the fact that it can be the antecedent of PRO, reflexives, and parasitic gaps, and by an asymmetry in wh-movement from sentential complements. The analysis of het leads to a discussion of a variety of constructions, including constructions with raising, ergative, and psychological verbs.
The adverbial pronoun er displays several distinct syntactic functions. In chapter 3 it is argued that none of these different functions justifies an analysis of er as a dummy subject.
In chapter 4 some of the consequences of the theory introduced in the preceding chapters are investigated. These include a discussion of the status of the subject position in languages such as English, Italian, French, and Spanish, the structure of Old English, and the status of dummy pronouns in German and English.
เจฒเฉเจเจ เจฌเจพเจฐเฉ
Hans Bennis is professor of linguistics at the University of Amsterdam and director of the Meertens Institute (Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences) in Amsterdam. The Meertens Institute concentrates on documentation and research of Dutch popular culture and language variation. His research is mainly directed towards the syntax of Dutch within the framework of generative grammar. In recent years, his attention has shifted in the direction of syntactic microvariation within the Dutch language area. He is coordinator and co-author of the Syntactic Atlas of the Dutch Dialects (SAND), the first volume of which has appeared with Amsterdam University Press in 2005.
เจเจธ เจ-เจเจฟเจคเจพเจฌ เจจเฉเฉฐ เจฐเฉเจ เจเจฐเฉ
เจเจชเจฃเฉ เจตเจฟเจเจพเจฐ เจฆเฉฑเจธเฉ
เจชเฉเฉเจนเจจ เจธเฉฐเจฌเฉฐเจงเฉ เจเจพเจฃเจเจพเจฐเฉ
เจธเจฎเจพเจฐเจเจซเจผเฉเจจ เจ
เจคเฉ เจเฉเจฌเจฒเฉเฉฑเจ
Google Play Books เจเจช เจจเฉเฉฐ Android เจ
เจคเฉ iPad/iPhone เจฒเจ เจธเจฅเจพเจชเจค เจเจฐเฉเฅค เจเจน เจคเฉเจนเจพเจกเฉ เจเจพเจคเฉ เจจเจพเจฒ เจธเจตเฉเจเจฒเจฟเจค เจคเฉเจฐ 'เจคเฉ เจธเจฟเฉฐเจ เจเจฐเจฆเฉ เจนเฉ เจ
เจคเฉ เจคเฉเจนเจพเจจเฉเฉฐ เจเจฟเจคเฉเจ เจตเฉ เจเจจเจฒเจพเจเจจ เจเจพเจ เจเจซเจผเจฒเจพเจเจจ เจชเฉเฉเจนเจจ เจฆเจฟเฉฐเจฆเฉ เจนเฉเฅค
เจฒเฉเจชเจเจพเจช เจ
เจคเฉ เจเฉฐเจชเจฟเจเจเจฐ
เจคเฉเจธเฉเจ เจเจชเจฃเฉ เจเฉฐเจชเจฟเจเจเจฐ เจฆเจพ เจตเฉเฉฑเจฌ เจฌเฉเจฐเจพเจเจเจผเจฐ เจตเจฐเจคเจฆเฉ เจนเฉเจ Google Play 'เจคเฉ เจเจฐเฉเจฆเฉเจเจ เจเจเจเจ เจเจกเฉเจ-เจเจฟเจคเจพเจฌเจพเจ เจธเฉเจฃ เจธเจเจฆเฉ เจนเฉเฅค
eReaders เจ
เจคเฉ เจนเฉเจฐ เจกเฉเจตเจพเจเจธเจพเจ
e-ink เจกเฉเจตเจพเจเจธเจพเจ 'เจคเฉ เจชเฉเฉเจนเจจ เจฒเจ เจเจฟเจตเฉเจ Kobo eReaders, เจคเฉเจนเจพเจจเฉเฉฐ เฉเจพเจเจฒ เจกเจพเจเจจเจฒเฉเจก เจเจฐเจจ เจ
เจคเฉ เจเจธเจจเฉเฉฐ เจเจชเจฃเฉ เจกเฉเจตเจพเจเจธ 'เจคเฉ เจเฉเจฐเจพเจเจธเจซเจฐ เจเจฐเจจ เจฆเฉ เจฒเฉเฉ เจนเฉเจตเฉเจเฉเฅค เจธเจฎเจฐเจฅเจฟเจค eReaders 'เจคเฉ เฉเจพเจเจฒเจพเจ เจเฉเจฐเจพเจเจธเจซเจฐ เจเจฐเจจ เจฒเจ เจตเฉเจฐเจตเฉ เจธเจนเจฟเจค เจฎเจฆเจฆ เจเฉเจเจฆเจฐ เจนเจฟเจฆเจพเจเจคเจพเจ เจฆเฉ เจชเจพเจฒเจฃเจพ เจเจฐเฉเฅค
