The Rise of Functional Categories.

Show other versions (1)

In recent years, word order has come to be seen, within a Government Binding/Minimalist framework, as determined by functional as well as lexical categories. Within this framework, functional categories are often seen as present in every language without evidence being available in that language. Th...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Call Number:Libro Electrónico
Main Author: Gelderen, Elly van
Format: Electronic eBook
Language:Inglés
Published: Amsterdam/Philadelphia : John Benjamins Pub. Co., 1993.
Series:Linguistik aktuell ; Bd. 9.
Subjects:
Grammar, Comparative and general > Grammatical categories.
Generative grammar.
Catégories grammaticales.
Grammaire générative.
Generative grammar
Grammar, Comparative and general > Grammatical categories
Online Access:Texto completo
Table of Contents:
  • Preface
  • Introduction
  • 0.1 Word Order
  • 0.2 Functional Categories and Features
  • 0.3 The Minimalist Framework: Chumsky (1992)
  • 0.4 Outline
  • 1. The Functional Category T in English
  • 1.0 Outline
  • 1.1 PS-rules
  • 1.2 Splitting up the I-node
  • 1.3 What occupies T in English
  • 1.4 Evidence for TP
  • 1.4.1 Right Node Raising and Coordination
  • 1.4.2 Adjunction
  • 1.5 Conclusion
  • 2. Languages without a special Node for Tense
  • 2.0 Outline
  • 2.1 PS rules for languages such as Dutch
  • 2.1.1 Head-initial or head-final
  • 2.1.2 The problem of Negation.
  • 2.2 What occupies T in Dutch, Swedish, German and Old English
  • 2.2.1 Dutch
  • 2.2.2 Swedish
  • 2.2.3 German
  • 2.2.4 Old English
  • 2.3 Lack of evidence for TP and for V-to-T movement
  • 2.3.1 Problems
  • 2.3.2 V-to-T and mixed categories
  • 2.3.3 Right Node Raising, VP-deletion and Coordination
  • 2.4 Conclusion
  • 3. The Introduction of a Tense Node
  • 3.0 Outline
  • 3.1 The appearance of functional elements in T
  • 3.2 The loss of V-2: tense from C to T
  • 3.2.1 Verb-Second and its decline
  • 3.2.2 Verb-movement and the loss of features
  • 3.3 The optionality of that
  • 3.4 Conclusion.
  • 4. Tense in Non-Finite Clauses
  • 4.0 Outline
  • 4.1 To in Katerine, Hali Meidenhad and Wohunge: a prefix or a complementizer?
  • 4.2 To in Caligula
  • 4.3 Forto in Caligula and Otho
  • 4.4 Verb-Raising
  • 4.5 Later Middle English
  • 4.6 The infinitival ending
  • 4.7 Conclusion
  • Appendix
  • 5. Feature Selection
  • 5.0 Outline
  • 5.1 Introduction
  • 5.1.1 Semantic and Syntactic Selection
  • 5.1.2 Selection of categories or maximal projections does not suffice
  • 5.2 Feature Selection
  • 5.2.1 [+fut] complements
  • 5.2.1.1 Tenseless complements
  • 5.2.1.2 Selection of [+fut] features.
  • 5.2.1.3 Tense anchoring
  • 5.2.1.4 Hornstein (1990)
  • 5.2.2 Verbs with [+tense] and TP infinitivals
  • 5.2.3 VP complements
  • 5.3 Dutch
  • 5.4 Old and early Middle English
  • 5.5 Conclusion
  • Appendix
  • 6. AGRsP and Agreement Features
  • 6.0 Outline
  • 6.1 Background
  • 6.1.1 Agreement
  • 6.1.2 VP Subjects
  • 6.2 Modern English
  • 6.2.1 English without AGRs
  • 6.2.2 Which are the agreement features?
  • 6.3 Dutch
  • 6.3.1 Evidence against additional functional categories
  • 6.3.2 Double object verbs
  • 6.3.3 Agreement features
  • 6.3.4 Nominative in Dutch
  • 6.3.5 Subject adjunction to VP.
  • 6.4 Old English and Middle English
  • 6.4.1 Nominative and features
  • 6.4.2 Double Negatives and the Nominative
  • 6.5 Conclusion
  • 7. Functional Categories between Neg and VP
  • 7.0 Outline
  • 7.1 AGRo in Modern English
  • 7.2 AGRo in Dutch
  • 7.3 The introduction of structural Case in Middle English: AGRo?
  • 7.3.1 From inherent to structural Case
  • 7.3.2 AGRo?
  • 7.4 Conclusion
  • 8. Aspect
  • 8.0 Outline
  • 8.1 The data and an analysis for Modern English
  • 8.2 Dutch
  • 8.3 Older stages of English
  • 8.4 Changes and conclusion
  • 9. Conclusion
  • 9.1 Synchronic Observations.

Similar Items