West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL) (38th : 2020)

How to license embedded instances of no-da and the politeness marker mas in Japanese : CP recursion or… Yasui, Miyoko 2020-03-06

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata


73804-Yasui_M_Embedded_instances_WCCFL38_2020.pdf [ 502.93kB ]
JSON: 73804-1.0389913.json
JSON-LD: 73804-1.0389913-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 73804-1.0389913-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 73804-1.0389913-rdf.json
Turtle: 73804-1.0389913-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 73804-1.0389913-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 73804-1.0389913-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

WCCFL38@UBC (03/06/2020)                                                       Miyoko Yasui 1 How to license embedded instances of no-da and the politeness marker mas in Japanese: CP recursion or Speech Act Phrase Dokkyo University (myasui@dokkyo.ac.jp)  1. Outline of this study Ø The no-da/des construction (Noda 1997, Kuno 1973, Kitagawa & Ross 1982 i.a.) and the politeness marking by mas (Miyagawa 2017) involve the speaker’s attitude. They are possible only with comple-ment clauses with the quotative marker to. (1)    [A student reports the reason for her absence to her teacher] Kaze-o  hiki-mas-ita.     Ame-ni nure-ta     no-desu.  (Kuno 1973:144)         cold-ACC catch-POL-PAST   rain-by get.wet-PAST NO DA.POL         ‘I caught a cold. (It is because) I got wet in the rain.’   (2) a.  Taroo-wa [Hanako-ga   ki-ta no-da]      to hookokus-ita.   (nonfactive) Taroo-TOP Hanako-NOM come-PAST NO-DA TO report-PAST b. *Taroo-wa [Hanako-ga   ki-ta no-da]      koto-wo  hookokus-ita.   (factive) Taroo-TOP Hanako-NOM come-PAST-NO-DA KOTO-ACC report-PAST           ‘Taro reported that Hanako came.’ (3) a.  Taroo-wa [Hanako-ga   ki-mas-ita]     to  hookokus-tia.     (nonfactive) Taroo-TOP Hanako-NOM come-MAS-PAST C  report-PAST     b. *Taroo-wa [Hanako-ga   ki-mas-ita]    koto-wo   hookokus-ita.  (factive) Taroo-TOP Hanako-NOM come-MAS-PAST KOTO -ACC report-PAST        ‘Taro reported that Hanako came.’                (Miyagawa 2012:93)  Ø Section 2 à Hopper & Thompson (1973, H&T) attempt to identify the range of non-root declarative clauses that allow the root transformations (RTs) listed by Emonds (1970, 2004); they have been char-acterized as ‘assertive,’ ‘nonfactive’ or ‘novel’ complements (Cattell 1978, Hegarty 1992).  Ø Section 3 à H&T analyze RTs as emphatic. The no-da construction is also emphatic. If RTs and no-da are embedded, it has to be clarified which is the emphasizer: the speaker or the matrix subject.  Ø Section 4 à Three pieces of evidence will be discussed to support the CP recursion analysis of embed-ded main clause phenomena (MCP)  Section 4.1 à The subject-auxiliary inversion (SAI) in non-root interrogative clauses of Irish English analyzed by McCloskey (1992, 2006).  Section 4.2 à Que + wh-interrogatives in Spanish analyzed by Lahiri (1991, 2002) based on Rivero (1980) among others. Section 4.3 à The Japanese quotative marker to in interrogative complements discussed by Nishigau-chi (1999) among others. Ø Section 5 attempts to offer a unified analysis of embedded MCP under the CP recursion approach.  2. The parallel distributions of no-da and of English RTs  (4)  a.  The scout reported that [beyond the next hill stood a large fortress]  (speaking V)  b.  I suppose that [most embarrassing of all was falling off the stage]    (mental process V)    c.  Sally plans for Gary to marry her, and he recognizes that, [whether he likes it or not, marry  her he will]                                              (semifactive V) WCCFL38@UBC (03/06/2020)                                                       Miyoko Yasui 2 (5) a. *He was surprised that [never in my life had I seen a hippopotamus]    (factive) b. *It was impossible that [each part he had examined carefully]         (probability/likelihood) Ø Acceptable RTs (4a-c) in English à (6) a.  Taroo-wa [Hanako-ga  yat-ta    no-da] to/*koto-wo  hookokus-ita.   (speaking V)       Taro-TOP   Hanako-NOM do-PAST NO-DA TO/KOTO-ACC report-PAST       ‘Taro exclaimed that it was OK with that.’ b.  Taroo-wa [Hanako-ga  tuini  kuru  no-da] to/*koto-wo  soozoos-ita.  (mental process V)       Taro-TOP   Hanako-NOM finally come NO-DA TO/KOTO-ACC imagine-PAST       ‘Taro imagined that Hanako would finally come.’ c.  Taroo-wa [Hanako-ga   yat-ta    no-da] to/*koto-ni   kizui-ta.        (semifactive V)       Taro-TOP  Hanako-NOM do-PAST  NO-DA TO/KOTO-DAT discover-PAST       ‘Taro discovered that Hanako did it.’ Ø Unacceptable RTs (5a,b) in English à (7) a. *Taroo-wa [Hanako-ga   kaba-wo     katteiru no-da] koto/no-ni    odoro-ita.  (factive)       Taro-TOP  Hanako-NOM hippopotamus keep   NO-DA KOTO/NO -DAT be.surprized-PAST       ‘Taro was surprised that Hanako kept a hippopotamus.’    b. *[Taro-ga   zenbu-no buhin-wo teineini  kensas-ita    no-da] koto/no-wa arienai.        Taro-NOM all-GEN  part-ACC  carefully examine-PAST NO-DA KOTO/NO-TOP impossible     ‘It is impossible that Taro examined every part carefully.’       (probability/likelihood) Ø H&T regard RTs as emphatic, arguing correctly that ”it is not appropriate to emphasize elements of a sentence whose proposition is already known, whose truth is presupposed, and whose content is rele-gated to the background.” RTs are disallowed in factive complements.  3. Stephenson’s (2007) Assessor Sensitivity/Immediateness Requirement Ø Pearson (to appear) adopts the lexical entry for believe in (8) and extends this format to say and want, analyzing all of them as attitude verbs.  (See also Heim&Kratzer 1998: chapter 12) (8) ⟦believe⟧g, w = λp ∈ D<s,t>. λx ∈ De.Doxx,w ⊆ p, where Doxx,w = {w’: it is compatible with what x  believes in w for w to be w’}.        Ø Stephenson (2005, 2007): If epistemic modals and predicates expressing personal taste (PPT) are em-bedded by more than one attitude verbs, it is the subject of the clause immediately containing the epis-temic modals and PPT whose knowledge state or taste is relevant.  (9) a.  Maryi thinks that Johnj thinks it must/might be raining, but  (i) I know it isn’t / (ii) shei knows it isn’t / (iii) #hej knows it isn’t.  b. Maryi thinks that Johnj thinks the dip tastes good, but  (i) I find it disgusting / (ii) shei finds it disgusting / (iii) #hej finds it disgusting.  (10)  RTs in English a.  Sally plans for Garyi to marry her, and hei recognizes that, whether hei likes it or not,  [VP marry her] hei will.   (=(4c))      b.  (i) I don’t think hei will / (ii) #hei doesn’t think hei will. WCCFL38@UBC (03/06/2020)                                                       Miyoko Yasui 3 (11) the no-da construction a.  Taro-wa  konomu to konom-aza-ru    ni  kakawara-zu Hanako-to  kekkon-suru koto  ni        Taro-TOP like    or like-not-NONPAST on depend-not  Hanako-with marry      KOTO to       naru   no-da to  ninsikisitei-ru.      become NO-DA TO recognize-NONPAST           ‘Taro recognizes that, whether he likes it or not, he will marry Hanako.’ b.  Demo (i) watasi-wa soo nar-anai   to omou / (ii) #kare-wa soo nar-anai  to omottei-ru.      but    I-TOP    so  become-not TO think    kare-TOP so become-not TO think-NONPAST          ‘But (i) I think it won’t happen / (ii) #he thinks that it won’t happen.’ (12) the politeness marking with mas a.  Otooto-wa         ki-mas-u.                (the speaker uses mas for the hearer)                           younger.brother-TOP come-MAS-NONPAST          ‘My younger brother will come.’            b.  Taroo-wa [otooto-ga           ki-mas-u]          to  Yamada kyoozyu-ni it-ta.         Taro- TOP  younger.brother-NOM come-MAS-NONPAST TO Yamada professor-to say-PAST        ‘Taroi told Prof. Yamada that hisi younger brother would come.’          (Taro uses mas for Prof. Yamada.  The speaker uses the nonpolite form for the hearer)     c.  Hanako-ga   ki-mas-u           kara    uti-ni   ite-kudasai/*kure.        Hanako-NOM come-MAS-NONPAST because home-at stay-iMP.POLITE/IMP.NONPOLITE        ‘Since Hanako will come, please stay home.’      (adapted from Miyagawa 2017:96)        (The speaker uses mas/kudasai for the hearer.) Ø Mas in (12b) is not licensed by the Speech Act Phrase assumed in Miyagawa (2017), which encodes the speaker/hearer. Mas, the no-da construction and RTs in general obey the Immediateness Requirement on attitude predicates.  4. Evidence on CP recursion for MCP in interrogative complements 4.1 Subject-auxiliary inversion (SAI) in Irish English (McCloskey 1992, 2006) (13) Ask-type (question) predicates a.  I wonder [was he illiterate] b.  She asked the stewards [was any member of the committee in the hall] c.  I wonder [what is he like at all] d.  I asked him [from what source could the reprisal come] (14) Know-type (resolutive) predicates a. *It was amazing who did they invite.              (McCloskey 2006:17) b. *How much had he grown really astonished me.   Declarative complements with know-type/ask-type  (15) a.  It was amazing that they invited John (, #but they didn’t invite him).       b.  That he had grown five inches taller astonished me (, #but he had grown only two inches). (16)   *They wondered/asked that Susan had been nominated.    (McCloskey 2006:29) Immediateness Requirement on Semifactive predicates (17) a. *I found out how did they get into the building.           (McCloskey 2006:3) b. *The police discovered who had they beaten up.   WCCFL38@UBC (03/06/2020)                                                       Miyoko Yasui 4 c. *I usually know who might they hire. d. *I remember clearly how many people did they arrest.   (18) a. ?Do you remember who did they hire?              (McCloskey 2006:18) b.  I don’t know what is it at all?    c.  I’ve never found out if I’d asked him would he really have come with me.  Ø Following Rizzi and Roberts (1989), McCloskey argues that SAI cannot apply to finite interrogative complements in Standard English since moving an auxiliary into C results in a violation of the matrix verb’s selectional property. If this is correct, it follows that embedded SAI in Irish English can some-how circumvent a selectional violation.  Ø Drawing on Iatridou & Kroch’s (1992) analysis of embedded verb second (V2) among others (see also Haegeman 2006, de Cuba & Ürögdi 2010), McCloskey adopts the CP recursion structure, where the higher C does not s-select the lower CP. (19)  But the simple analysis which suggests [CP that because American investment takes place  here [CP that we should be a lapdog for their efforts in the war]] is one that I think is quite  objectionable and quite offensive.     (McCloskey 2006:23)  4.2 Que + wh-phrase in Spanish (Lahiri 1991, Rivero 1978, 1980, Suñer, 1989, Plann 1982, i.a.)  (20) Ask-type a.  Te  preguntan [CP que [CP para qué  quieres el  péstamo]]              you ask.3p       that    for  what want.2s the loan ʻThey ask you what you want the loan for.’ b.  Pensó  [CP que [CP cuáles      seían    adecuados]]   thought.3s  that    which.ones  would.be appropriate ʻHe wondered which ones would be appropriate.’        (Rivero 1980:381-382) (21) Know-type  a.  El detective sabe     [CP (*que) [CP quidn la  mató]]   the detective know.3s    (*that)    who  her killed.3s ʻThe detective knows who killed her.’ b.  Elena se enteró de [CP (*que) [CP por qué  no la  habían invitado a  la fiesta]] Elena found.out.3s    (*that)    for what not her had.3p invited  to the party ‘Elena found out why they had not invited her to the party.’     (Lahiri 1991:77)  4.3 Ka to in Japanese interrogative complements (Nishigauchi 1999) (22) Ask-type   [Dare-ga  kuru ka-to ] omot-ta/ tazune-ta/ibukat-ta/ kangae-ta/soozoos-ita. who-NOM come       wondered/asked/ wondered/pondered/ imagined ‘I wonder/asked/wondered/pondered/imagine who would come.’ (23) Know-type   [Dare-ga  kuru ka (*-to)] sit-ta/osie-ta/wasure-ta/oboe-te-iru/wakat-ta who-NOM come         knew/told/ forgot/    remember/ found.out ‘I know/told/forgot/remember/found out who would come.’ WCCFL38@UBC (03/06/2020)                                                       Miyoko Yasui 5 (24) Know-type taking a declarative with koto a.  [Taro-ga   ki-ta]      koto-wo sitte-iru/osie-ta/wasurete-ita/oboete-iru.          Taro-NOM come-PAST KOTO-ACC know/told/have forget/remember         ‘I know/told (someone)/have forgotten/remember that Taro came.’     b.  [Taro-ga   ki-ta]      koto-ga  wakar-ta.     Taro-NOM come-PAST KOTO-NOM find.out-PAST  ‘I found out that Taro had come.’ (25) a.  [Dare-ga  kuru] ka *omow-ta/OKtazune-ta/OKibukar-ta/OKkangae-ta/OKsoozoos-ita. who-NOM come Q *think/  OKasked /   OKwondered/OKpondered/OK imagined     b.  [Taro-ga   kuru] to    OKomow-ta/*tazune-ta/*ibukar-ta/ OKkangae-ta/OKsoozoos-ita. Taro-NOM come nonQ  OKthought/*asked/   *wondered/ OKpondered/OKimagined  5. MCP, selection and CP recursion  (26) a. Aitat! to itta             b.  Tokyo-kara/hayaku to itta             ouch    said               Tokyo-from/quickly  said (27)  Assumptions (i) Natural languages have a complementizer (to be expressed as Cus) that is unselective for its clausal complement.  Only attitude verbs can select Cus. To in Japanese, che in Spanish and that in Standard and Irish varieties of English are examples of Cus.  Irish English has a nonovert Cus. (ii) Cus lacks semantic content and can be transparent for the s-selectional relation between its comple-ment and an attitude verb selecting Cus. (iii) Natural languages have an interrogative feature (to be expressed as [Q]) that constitutes an inter-rogative clause.  It is bundled into lexical items like ka in Japanese, if, nonovert C or finite tenses in (Irish) English, and nonovert Cus in Irish English. (see Yasui 2014) Ø Below,z-mindicates the presence of some selectional relation,z // mits absence, and  z *	ma violation of selection.  5.1 Omow (‘think’) s-selects declarative with to (28) a.  [ dare-ga (who-NOM) kuru (come) ]	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	à matrix question with the rising intonation     b.  [[ dare-ga (who-NOM) kuru (come)] ka[Q] ]    à dare-ga is licensed by ka z-------------m           matrix question w/wo the rising intonation c.  [[[[ dare-ga (who-NOM) kuru (come)] ka[Q]   ]  to  ] omotta (thought) ] z--------------mz //mz -m    à embedded question (29) (28a) à  b. ?[[[ dare-ga (who-NOM) kuru (come)]  to ] omotta (thought)]   à dare-ga is not licensed  z------ //-------mz -m      by to but possible as a direct quote?	(30) a.  [ Taro-ga (Taro-NOM) kuru (come) ]	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 à matrix declarative or  interrogative with the rising intonation b.  [[Taro-ga (Taro-NOM) kuru (come)] ka]    à matrix question with the rising intonation or matrix declarative with ka as a S-final particle (SFP)   c.  [[[[ Taro-ga (Taro-NOM) kuru (come)] ka(SFP)  ]  to  ] omotta (thought) ] à embedded  z //-mz-m             declarative  d.  [[[[Taro-ga (Taro-NOM) kuru (come)] ka doo-ka (whether or not)]  to ] omotta (thought)] z----- //-----mz-mà embedded question WCCFL38@UBC (03/06/2020)                                                       Miyoko Yasui 6 (31) (30a) à (30b) à                                                            c. *[[[ Taro-ga (Taro-NOM) kuru (come)] ka ]  omotta (thought) ]  z-*	-m        à omow does not select interrogative    (32) (30a) à b. [[[Taro-ga (Taro-NOM) kuru (come)] to   ] omotta (thought) ]   à embedded declarative z- //-mz-m  5.2 Tazune (‘ask’) s-selects interrogative  (33) a.  [ dare-ga (who-NOM) kuru (come) ]	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	      b.  [[ dare-ga (who-NOM) kuru (come)] ka[Q] ] z-------------m           c.  [[[ dare-ga (who-NOM) kuru] ka[Q]  ] tazuneta (asked) ]    à s-selection of tazune is z----------mz -m                   satisfied by ka 	(34) (33a) à (33b) à      c.  [[[ dare-ga (who-NOM) kuru] ka[Q] ] to ] tazuneta (asked) ]  à s-selection of tazune is  z----------mz //mz -m            not satisfied by to	z ------m   ß Assumption (27-ii): to is transparent (35) (33a) à                                       for s-selection     b. ?[[[ dare-ga (who-NOM) kuru (come)] to ] tazuneta (asked) ]    à s-selection of tazune is  z------//------mz m    not satisfied by to but possible as a direct quote? z ------m ß Assumption (27-ii) (36) a.  [ Taro-ga (Taro-NOM) kuru (come) ]	 	 	 	  b.  [[Taro-ga (Taro-NOM) kuru (come)] ka]    à matrix question with the rising intonation or matrix declarative with ka as a S-final particle (SFP) c.  [[[[ Taro-ga (Taro-NOM) kuru (come)] ka[Q]  ] to  ] tazuneta (asked) ]   à embedded  z //-m                     alternate question z ------m  ß Assumption (27-ii) (37) (36a) à b. ?[[Taro-ga (Taro-NOM) kuru (come)]  to ]] tazuneta (asked) ]  à s-selection of tazune is not z --//--mz m      satisfied by to but possible as a direct quote? z ---------m  ß Assumption (27-ii)  5.3 Soozoos (‘imagine’) s-selects declarative and interrogative (38) [ dare-ga (who-NOM) kuru (come) ]  ka[Q] ]  to  ]] [V soozoosita (imagined)]] z-------------mz //mz--m    à embedded question                                         soozoos s-selects declarative or interrogative? (39) [ dare-ga (who-NOM) kuru (come) ]  ka[Q] ] [V soozoosita (imagined)]]    à embedded question z--------------mz--m             soozoos s-selects interrogative	(40) [[[ Taro-ga (Taro-NOM) kuru (come) ]	ka[Q] ] soozoosita (imagined)] à embedded alternate question. soozoos s-selects interrogative (41) [[[ Taro-ga (Taro-NOM) kuru (come) ]	to ] soozoosita (imagined)]  à embedded declarative  soozoos s-selects declarative 5.4 The no-da construction Ø The Japanese copula distinguishes the conclusive (CONCL) and noun-modifying (NMOD) forms: da and na, respectively. Da of the no-da construction lacks the noun-modifying form. Koto/no are Ns. (42)  [[Taro-ga (Taro-NOM) kita (came)-NMOD ] [N koto/no ]-wo (ACC) hookokusita (reported)]                                     z--m z --------	m WCCFL38@UBC (03/06/2020)                                                       Miyoko Yasui 7 (43) *[[Taro-ga (Taro-NOM) kita (came) no-da-CONCL ] [N koto/no ]-wo (ACC) hookokusita (reported)]                                      z---*--m  z --------	m (44)  [[Taro-ga (Taro-NOM) kita (came) no-da-CONCL ]  to  ] hookokusita (reported)]                                      z--//--mz ----	m  5.5 Questions in Standard English  Ø (27-iii) on page 5: Natural languages have an interrogative feature [Q], which is bundled into lexical items like ka in Japanese, if, nonovert C or finite tenses in (Irish) English, and nonovert Cus in Irish English.  Ø I argued in Yasui (2014) that a finite verb with [Q] can internally merge with the clause containing it, which should be an option under the current minimalist idea of free Merge.  (45) a.  [ he {be, PAST, 3SG, NOM} illiterate ]    à matrix declarative b.  He was illiterate. (46) a.  [ he {be, PAST, 3SG, NOM, Q} illiterate ]  à Merge {be, PAST, 3SG, NOM, Q} with (46a) b.  [ {be, PAST, 3SG, Q} [ he {be, PAST, 3SG, Q} illiterate ]]   à matrix question c.  Was he illiterate?                                   (47) a.  [ he {be, PAST, 3SG, NOM} illiterate ]         à Merge if with (47a)        b.  [ if[Q] [ he {be, PAST, 3SG, NOM} illiterate ]]   à embedded alternate question        c.  [ wonder [CP if[Q] [ he {be, PAST, 3SG, NOM} illiterate ]]] z--m d.  I wonder if he was illiterate. (48) (46a) à (46b) à Merge wonder with (46b)     c.  [wonder [{be, PAST, 3SG, Q} [ he {be, PAST, 3SG, Q} illiterate ]]  z-*-m              à wonder cannot c-select V. Standard English lacks a nonovert Cus.        d. *I wonder was he illiterate.         	 5.6 SAI in Irish varieties of English. (49) (46a) à (46b) à Merge Cus with (46b)     c.  [ Cus [{be, PAST, 3SG, Q} [ he {be, PAST, 3SG, Q} illiterate ]]]         z-//-m     d.  [wonder [ Cus [{be, PAST, 3SG, Q} [ he {be, PAST, 3SG, Q} illiterate ]]]    à s-selection by                 z//m                        wonder is not satisfied by Cus. It is satisfied by Q	z-------------m   ß Assumption (27-ii) e.  I wonder was he illiterate. (50) (46a) à (46b) à Merge know with (46b) c.  [know [ {be, PAST, 3SG, Q}[ he {be, PAST, 3SG, Q} illiterate ]]]  à know does not select Cus. z *	m                                            know cannot c-select V. d. *I don’t know was he illiterate/*I know was he illiterate.  5.7 RTs in English Ø A clause to which some RT has applied is assumed to become a larger structure of a distinct category (=a). English has two kinds of that: selective and unselective. (51) a.  [a large fortress stood beyond the next hill]      à Locative inversion        b.  [a beyond the next hill stood a large fortress ] WCCFL38@UBC (03/06/2020)                                                       Miyoko Yasui 8        c.  [[Cus that ] [a beyond the next hill stood a large fortress ]] z //-m              à report as an attitude verb selects [Cus that ]        d.  [ report  [[Cus that ] [a beyond the next hill stood a large fortress ]] z -mz //-m          e.  The scout reported that [beyond the next hill stood a large fortress]  (=(4a)) (52) a.  [I had never seen a hippopotamus in my life]      à Negative inversion b.  [a Never in my life had I seen a hippopotamus in my life] c.  surprised [that [a never in my life had I seen a hippopotamus in my life]] à surprise does z -mz *-m              not select [Cus that ]. Ordinary that cannot select a. d. *He was surprised that never in my life had I seen a hippopotamus.   (=(5a))  6. Concluding remarks and remaining issues Ø Evidence on the existence of unselective complementizers (Cus) in natural languages. (53) a.  [Taro-ga  ki-ta      to] omot-ta.    b. [[ Dare-ga  ki-ta     ka ] to] omot-ta. Taro-NOM come-PAST TO think-PAST       Who-NOM come-PAST Q  TO think-PAST  ‘(I) think Taro came.’                  ‘(I) wonder who came.’ Ø Attitude predicates in Pearson’s (to appear) sense, which are extended to ask-type interrogative predi-cates, are subject to the Immediateness Requirement. They are assumed to select Cus.   Ø Clauses with MCP are larger than and categorially distinct from those without MCP; the former are rep-resented as a. a is allowed as a root clause since it is selected by nothing. Merger of Cus with a does not result in a selectional violation due to its unselective nature. If a Cus layer is absent, merger of a with a head causes a violation of the head’s selectional property. Ø There should be syntactic/semantic basis to define what attitude predicates are.  (8) ⟦believe⟧g, w = λp ∈ D<s,t>. λx ∈ De.Doxx,w ⊆ p, where Doxx,w = {w’: it is compatible with what  x believes in w for w to be w’}. Ø It has to be explained what logical relation, if any, holds between the format of lexical entries for atti-tude verbs such as (8) and an unselective C in syntactic structure. Selected References Aelbrecht, L., L. Haegeman & R. Nye, eds. Main Clause Phenomena: New Horizons. John Benjamins. de Cuba, Carlos. 2007. On (non)factivity, clausal complementation and the CP-field. PhD Diss. Stony Brook U. de Cuba, C. & B. Ürögdi. 2010. Clearing up the ‘facts’ on complementation. In UPenn. Working Papers in Linguistics 16 (1), 41-50.  Emonds, Joseph. 1970. Root and structure-preserving transformations. Doctoral diss., MIT. _____. 2004. Unspecified categories as the key to root constructions. In D. Adger, C. De Cat & G. Tsoulas (eds.) Peripheries: syntactic edges and their effects, pp.75-120. Kluwer.  Haegeman, Liliane. 2006b. Conditionals, factives and the left periphery. Lingua 116:1651-1669. Hooper, J. and S. Thompson. 1973. On the applicability of root transformations. Linguistic Inquiry 4:465-497. Iatridou, Sabine and Anthony Kroch. 1992. The licensing of CP-recursion and its relevance to the Germanic verb second phenomenon. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 50:1-24.  Lahiri, U. 1991. Embedded interrogatives and predicates that embed them. PhD diss., MIT.  McCloskey, J. 2006. Questions and questioning in a local English. In Zanuttini, E. et al. eds., Crosslinguistic research in syntax and semantics: Negation, tense, and clausal architecture, pp.87-126. Georgetown University Press. Miyagawa, S. 2012. Agreements that occur mainly in the main clause. In L. Aelbrecht et el. eds., pp.79-112. Nishigauchi, T. 1999. Quantification and Wh-movement. In Tsujimura, N. ed., The Handbook of Japanese linguistics, Blackwell, pp.269-296.  Pearson, H. (to appear). Attitude Verbs. In Matthewson, L. et al. eds., Companion to semantics. Wiley.  Plann, S. 1982. Indirect questions in Spanish. Linguistic inquiry 13:297–312.  Rivero, M.-L. 1980. On left-dislocation and topicalization in Spanish. Linguistic Inquiry, 11:363–393.  Rizzi, L. & I. Roberts. 1989. Complex inversion in French. Probus 1:1–30.  Stephenson, T. 2007. Towards a theory of subjective meaning. PhD diss., MIT.  Yasui, M. 2014. Innocuousness of {XP, YP} as a root clause in Japanese and English. MITWPL 73 (FAJL 7): 277-288. WCCFL38@UBC (03/06/2020)                                                       Miyoko Yasui 9 Extra data Pseudo-clefts in English What John bought is this.      This is what John bought. [A student reports the reason for her absence to her teacher] (1)  Kaze-o  hiki-mas-ita.     Ame-ni nure-ta     no-desu.  (Kuno 1973:144)   cold-ACC catch-POL-PAST   rain-by get.wet-PAST NO DA.POL   ‘I caught a cold. (It is because) I got wet in the rain.’ (2) [Noticing some sound outside]    Ame-ga futteiru no-desu    rain-NOM faling NO DA.POL      ‘It is raining.’ Empty topic  (1) à Sore-wa ame-ni  nure-ta     no-desu.       It-TOP  rain-by get.wet-PAST NO DA.POL   ‘It was (because) I got wet in the rain.’ (2) à Are-wa  ame-ga  futteiru no-desu             ‘That (sound) is the falling of rain.’  that-TOP rain-NOM faling  NO DA.POL The no-da construction falls under the topic construction (Maki et al. 1999)     


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items