On the restriction on complement clauses with the complementizer čto with non-agentive uses of speech act verbs in Russian

 
PIIS0373658X0011217-7-1
DOI10.7868/S0373658X18030017
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Affiliation:
National Research University Higher School of Economics
Saint Petersburg State University
Moscow State University of Education
Address: Saint Petersburg, 190121, Russian Federation
Journal nameVoprosy Jazykoznanija
EditionIssue 3
Pages7-39
Abstract

The paper discusses a distributional restriction on the realization of čto-clause complements observed with non-agentive uses of speech act verbs. It is shown that these restrictions obtain only when the sentential complement is in the oblique position and that they are related to the argument structure of the predicate (the presence of an attitude holder argument). The paper presents the results of an experimental study using a factorial design (modelled on experimental studies of island effects), which provide evidence for the grammatical nature of the observed restriction. Several approaches to the distribution of sentential complements in generative grammar are discussed. It is argued that the observed restriction can be accounted for by the (abstract) Case requirement of sentential complements coupled with a mechanism of Case-licensing of sentential complements in oblique positions by a null preposition.

Keywordsargument structure, experimental syntax, null elements, propositional attitudes, sentential complements
Received15.07.2018
Publication date15.07.2018
Number of characters1026
Cite   Download pdf To download PDF you should sign in

Price publication: 0

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 673

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. BAS — Slovar' sovremennogo russkogo literaturnogo yazyka. T. 1—17. M.: Izd-vo AN SSSR, 1948—1965. [Slovar’ sovremennogo russkogo literaturnogo yazyka [A dictionary of modern standard Russian]. Vol. 1—17. Moscow: Izd-vo AS USSR, 1948—1965.]

2. Glovinskaya 1993a –– Glovinskaya M. Ya. Semantika glagolov rechi s tochki zreniya teorii rechevykh form // Russkij yazyk v ego funktsionirovanii: Kommunikativno-pragmaticheskij aspekt. M.: Nauka, 1993. S. 158––217. [Glovinskaya M. Ya. Semantics of speech verbs from the perspective of speech act theory. Russkii yazyk v ego funktsionirovanii: Kommunikativno-pragmaticheskii aspekt. Moscow: Nauka, 1993. Pp. 158––217.]

3. Glovinskaya 1993b — Glovinskaya M. Ya. Russkie rechevye akty so znacheniem mental'nogo vozdeĭstviya // Logicheskij analiz yazyka: Mental'nye dejstviya. M.: Nauka, 1993. S. 82––88. [Glovinskaya M. Ya. Russian speech acts with the meaning of mental influence. Logicheskii analiz yazyka: Mental’nye deistviya. Moscow: Nauka, 1993. Pp. 82––88.]

4. Gorshkova 2014 — Gorshkova M. A. Sub'ekty netipichnykh ontologicheskikh klassov pri glagolakh rechemyslitel'noĭ sfery i sfery vospriyatiya v russkom yazyke. Diplomnaya rabota. SPb.: SPbGU, 2014. [Gorshkova M. A. Sub”ekty netipichnykh ontologicheskikh klassov pri glagolakh rechemyslitel’noi sfery i sfery vospriyatiya v russkom yazyke. Diplomnaya rabota [Subjects of non-typical ontological classes in collocations with verbs of cogitative and verbal activity and verbs of perception in Russian. Diploma paper]. St. Petersburg: Saint Petersburg State Univ., 2014.]

5. Zaliznyak 2000 — Zaliznyak Anna A. Glagol govorit': tri ehtyuda k slovesnomu portretu // Yazyk o yazyke. M.: Yazyki russkoj kul'tury, 2000. [Zaliznyak Anna A. The verb govorit’: Three sketches to the descriptive portrait. Yazyk o yazyke. Moscow: Yazyki Russkoi Kul’tury, 2000.]

6. Knyazev 2017 — Knyazev M. Yu. Issledovanie «slabogo» grammaticheskogo ogranicheniya metodami ehksperimental'nogo sintaksisa: primer pridatochnykh s soyuzom chto v funktsii sententsial'nogo aktanta suschestvitel'nogo // Rema. 2017. № 1. S. 22—40. [Knyazev M. Yu. Studying a weak grammatical violation with experimental syntax methods: The case of sentential complements of nouns with the complementizer čto. Rhema. 2017. No. 1. Pp. 22—40.]

7. Letuchij 2012 — Letuchij A. B. O nekotorykh svojstvakh sententsial'nykh aktantov v russkom yazyke // Voprosy yazykoznaniya. 2012. № 5. C. 57—87. [Letuchii A. B. Some features of sentential arguments in Russian. Voprosy jazykoznanija. 2012. No. 5. Pp. 57—87.]

8. NKRYa — Natsional'nyj korpus russkogo yazyka // http://www.ruscorpora.ru. [Natsional’nyi korpus russkogo yazyka [Russian National Corpus]. Available at: http://www.ruscorpora.ru.]

9. NOSS 2003 — Novyj ob'yasnitel'nyj slovar' sinonimov russkogo yazyka / Pod obsch. ruk. akad. Yu. D. Apresyana. 2-e izd. M.: Yazyki slavyanskoj kul'tury, 2003. [Novyi ob’yasnitel’nyi slovar’ sinonimov russkogo yazyka [New explanatory dictionary of Russian synonyms]. Under general supervision of acad. Yu. D. Apresjan. 2nd ed. Moscow: Yazyki Slavyanskoi Kul’tury, 2003.]

10. Paducheva 2001 — Paducheva E. V. Kauzativnyĭ glagol i dekauzativ v russkom yazyke // Russkij yazyk v nauchnom osveschenii. 2001. № 1. S. 52—79. [Paducheva E. V. Causative verb and decausative in Russian. Russkii yazyk v nauchnom osveshchenii. 2001. No. 1. Pp. 52—79.]

11. Paducheva 2004 — Paducheva E. V. Dinamicheskie modeli v semantike leksiki. M.: Yazyki slavyanskikh kul'tur, 2004. [Paducheva E. V. Dinamicheskie modeli v semantike leksiki [Dynamic models in the semantics of lexis]. Moscow: Yazyki Slavyanskikh Kul’tur, 2004.]

12. Pekelis 2014 — Pekelis O. E. Infinitiv vs. pridatochnoe s soyuzom chtoby: k voprosu o vybore sposoba oformleniya sententsial'nogo aktanta v russkom yazyke // Voprosy yazykoznaniya. 2014. № 4. C. 13—45. [Pekelis O. E. Infinitive vs. čtoby-clause: Choosing the strategy of sentential argument marking in Russian. Voprosy jazykoznanija. 2014. No. 4. Pp. 13—45.]

13. Ushakov — Tolkovyj slovar' russkogo yazyka. T. 1—4 / Pod. red. D. N. Ushakova. M., 1935—1940. [Ushakov D. N. (ed.). Tolkovyi slovar’ russkogo yazyka [Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language]. Vol. 1—4. Moscow, 1935—1940.]

14. Fedorova 2013 — Fedorova O. V. Ob ehksperimental'nom sintaksise i o sintaksicheskom ehksperimente v yazykoznanii // Voprosy yazykoznaniya. 2013. № 1. S. 3—21. [Fedorova O. V. Experimental syntax and syntax experiment. Voprosy jazykoznanija. 2013. No. 1. Pp. 3—21.]

15. Almeida 2014 — Almeida D. Subliminal Wh-islands in Brazilian Portuguese and the consequences for syntactic theory. Revista da ABRALIN. 2014. Vol. 13. No. 2. Pp. 55—93.

16. Alrenga 2005 — Alrenga P. A sentential subject asymmetry in English and its implications for complement selection. Syntax. 2005. Vol. 8. No. 3. Pp. 175—207.

17. Authier 1991 — Authier J.-M. V-governed expletives, case theory, and the projection principle. Linguistic Inquiry. 1991. Vol. 22. No. 4. Pp. 721—740.

18. Bošković 1995 — Bošković Ž. Case properties of clauses and the greed principle. Studia Linguistica. 1995. Vol. 49. No. 1. Pp. 32—53.

19. Chomsky 1981 — Chomsky N. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris, 1981.

20. Chomsky, Lasnik 1993 — Chomsky N., Lasnik H. The theory of principles and parameters. Syntax: An international handbook of contemporary research. Vol. 1. Jacobs J., von Stechow A., Sternefeld W., Vennemann T. (eds.). Pp. 506—569.

21. Davies, Dubinsky 2009 — Davies W., Dubinsky S. On the existence (and distribution) of sentential subjects. Hypothesis A / hypothesis B: Linguistic explorations in honor of David M. Perlmutter. Gerdts D. B., Moore J. C., Polinsky M. (eds.). Cambridge (MA): MIT Press, 2009. Pp. 111—128.

22. Grice 1957 — Grice P. Meaning. The Philosophical Review. 1957. Vol. 66. No. 3. Pp. 377—388.

23. Grimshaw 1990 — Grimshaw J. Argument structure. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press, 1990.

24. Harley 2002 — Harley H. Possession and the double object construction. Yearbook of linguistic variation. Vol. 2. Pica P., Rooryck J. (eds.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2002. Pp. 31—70.

25. Hofmeister, Sag 2010 — Hofmeister P., Sag I. A. Cognitive constraints and island effects. Language. 2010. Vol. 86. No. 2. Pp. 366—415.

26. Khomitsevich 2008 — Khomitsevich O. Dependencies across Phases: From sequence of tense to restrictions on movement. PhD diss. Utrecht: Utrecht Univ., 2008.

27. Kissine 2010 — Kissine M. Metaphorical projection, subjectification and English speech act verbs. Folia Linguistica. 2010. Vol. 44. No. 2. Pp. 339—370.

28. Kluender, Kutas 1993 — Kluender R., Kutas M. Subjacency as a processing phenomenon. Language and Cognitive Processes. 1993. Vol. 8. No. 3. Pp. 573—633.

29. Knyazev 2016 — Knyazev M. Licensing clausal complements: The case of čto-clauses. PhD diss. Utrecht: Utrecht Univ., 2016.

30. Knyazev 2017 — A general DP-shell analysis of clausal complements: Experimental evidence from the agentivity restriction on Russian čto- and čtoby-clauses. Rhema. No. 4. Pp. 79—93.

31. Koster 1978 — Koster J. Why subject sentences don’t exist. Recent transformational studies in European languages. Keyser S. J. (ed.). Cambridge (MA): MIT Press, 1978. Pp. 53—64.

32. Landau 2006 —Landau I. Severing the distribution of PRO from Case. Syntax. 2006. Vol. 9. No. 2. Pp. 153—170.

33. Lasnik 2008 — Lasnik H. On the development of Case theory: Triumphs and challenges. Foundational issues in lingustic theory: Essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud. Freidin R., Otero C., Zubizarreta M.-L. (eds.). Cambridge (MA): MIT Press, 2008. Pp. 17—41.

34. Martin 2001 — Martin R. Null Case and the distribution of PRO. Linguistic Inquiry. 2001. Vol. 32. No. 1. Pp. 141—166.

35. Moore, Perlmutter 2000 — Moore J., Perlmutter D. M. What does it take to be a dative subject. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. 2000. Vol. 18. No. 2. Pp. 373—416.

36. Moulton 2009 — Moulton K. Natural selection and the syntax of clausal complementation. PhD diss. Amherst: Univ. of Massachusetts, 2009.

37. Noonan 1985 — Noonan M. Complementation. Language typology and syntactic description. Vol. III. Complex constructions. Shopen T. (ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1985.

38. Pesetsky 1982 — Pesetsky D. Paths and categories. PhD diss. Cambridge (MA): MIT, 1982.

39. Pesetsky 1991 — Pesetsky D. Zero Syntax II: An essay on infinitives. Ms. Cambridge (MA): MIT, 1991.

40. Pesetsky 1993 — Pesetsky D. Topic… comment. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. 1993. Vol. 11. No. 2. Pp. 557—558.

41. Pesetsky 1998 — Pesetsky D. Some optimality principles of sentence pronunciation. Is the Best Good Enough? McGinnis M., Hagstrom P., Barbosa P., Fox D., Pesetsky D. (eds.). Cambridge (MA): MIT Press, 1998. Pp. 337—383.

42. Pesetsky 2013 — Pesetsky D. Russian case morphology and the syntactic categories. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press, 2013.

43. Pesetsky, Torrego 2004 — Pesetsky D., Torrego E. Tense, case, and the nature of syntactic categories. The syntax of time. Guéron J., Lecarme J. (eds.). Cambridge (MA): MIT Press, 2004. Pp. 495—537.

44. Pesetsky, Torrego 2011 — Pesetsky D., Torrego E. Case. The Oxford handbook of linguistic minimalism. Boeckx C. (ed.). Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2011. Pp. 52—72.

45. Phillips 2013 — Phillips C. On the nature of island constraints. I: Language processing and reductionist accounts. Experimental syntax and island effects. Sprouse J., Hornstein N. (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013. Pp. 64—108.

46. Pylkkänen 2008 — Pylkkänen L. Mismatching meanings in brain and behavior. Language and Linguistics Compass. 2008. Vol. 2. No. 4. Pp. 712—738.

47. Pustejovsky 1995 — Pustejovsky J. The generative lexicon. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press, 1995.

48. Ramchand 2008 — Ramchand G. Verb meaning and the lexicon: A first phase syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2008.

49. Safir 1985 — Safir K. Syntactic chains. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1985.

50. Schütze 2016 — Schütze C. T. The empirical base of linguistics: Grammaticality judgments and linguistic methodology. (Classics in Linguistics, 2.) Berlin: Language Science Press, 2016.

51. Schütze, Sprouse 2014 — Schütze C., Sprouse J. Judgment data. Research methods in linguistics. Podesva R., Sharma D. (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014. Pp. 27—50.

52. Searle 1976 — Searle J. R. A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society. 1976. Vol. 5. No. 1. Pp. 1—23.

53. Sprouse, Hornstein 2013 — Sprouse J., Hornstein N. (eds.). Experimental syntax and island effects. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013.

54. Sprouse et al. 2013 — Sprouse J., Wagers M., Phillips C. Deriving competing predictions from grammatical approaches and reductionist approaches to island effects. Experimental syntax and island effects. Sprouse J., Hornstein N. (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013. Pp. 21—41.

55. Stowell 1981 — Stowell T. Origins of phrase structure. PhD diss. Cambridge (MA): MIT, 1981.

56. Takahashi 2010 — Takahashi S. The hidden side of clausal complements. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. 2010. Vol. 28. No. 2. Pp. 343—380.

57. Tsai 1995 — Tsai W.-T. D. Visibility, complement selection and the Case requirement of CP. Journal of East Asian Linguistics. 1995. Vol. 4. No. 4. Pp. 281—312.

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up