Volume 38, Issue 1

This paper contributes to the typology of “active-stative” split intransitivity and middle voice with a detailed case study: it proceeds from a typological comparison of the two phenomena, which are usually treated apart, to an analysis of the Enets data and a discussion of its place in the typology of possible intransitive splits. Enets (Uralic, Samoyedic) has two classes of intransitive verbs, and each class uses its own cross-reference paradigm in all finite forms. The paper provides an account of the morphology of this intransitive split and its connection to the lexical aspect, followed by an overview of semantic composition of the two lexical classes; special attention is given to cases of class variation available for a dozen verbs. The research is based on the data of a fieldworkers’ corpus and thus also shows the advantages of a corpus-based approach to this phenomenon.

This explorative study focuses on grammatical taboos in German, morphosyntactic constructions which are subject to stigmatisation, as they regularly occur in standard languages. They are subjected to systematic experimental testing in a questionnaire study with gradient rating scales on two salient and two non-salient grammatical taboo phenomena of German. The study is divided into three subexperiments with different judgement types, an aesthetic judgement, a norm-oriented judgement and the sort of possibility judgement that comes closest to linguists’ understanding of grammar. Included in the investigated material are also examples of ordinary gradient grammaticality: unmarked, marked and ungrammatical sentences. The empirical characteristics of grammatical taboos are compared to those ordinary cases with the finding that they are rated at the level of markedness, but differ from ordinary markedness in that they produce a different pattern of between-subject variance. In addition, we find that grammatical taboos have a particular disadvantage under the aesthetic judgement type. The paper also introduces the concept of empirical grammaticality as a necessary theoretical cornerstone for empirical linguistics. Methodically, the study applies a mix of parametric and non-parametric methods of statistical analysis.

A certain class of predicates in German optionally allows for their complement clause to appear as coordinated with the matrix clause rather than embedded into it. This construction, which I will call Implicational Complement Coordination, exhibits all the hallmark properties of Asymmetric Coordination: Despite technically being in a conjunct position, the clause in question behaves like a subordinate clause with respect to asymmetric binding, asymmetric scope of negation and adverbs as well as asymmetric extraction. Based on the detailed description of the phenomenon by Reis (1993), it can be shown that this coordinate construction mimics its infinitival counterpart with respect to these syntactic tests. In this paper, I argue that this can be accounted for by saying that the coordinate construction is derived on the basis of its subordinate counterpart by means of movement. The subordinate properties of the second conjunct then derive from its derivational history as a subordinate clause. Further, I will show that even though other cases of Asymmetric Coordination (in German) lack a minimally different infinitival counterpart, they can and should still be derived from an underlyingly subordinate syntax.

The paper investigates two related questions that concern the realization of plural morphology on nouns across languages. The first question is whether markedness in the sense of complexity in form goes hand in hand with complexity in meaning. In other words, since plural nouns are formally more complex than singular nouns, does that mean that they differ in interpretation? On the basis of experimental and theoretical investigations the claim is supported that plurals, although morphologically more complex than singulars, are semantically unmarked across languages. The second question is what regulates the presence of plural morphology in numeral-noun constructions across languages, in light of the proposal that plural appears on nouns in such constructions only if it is semantically unmarked. The paper offers an explanation of this distribution by adopting a dual system of agreement, which distinguishes between CONCORD and INDEX features. By looking at these two questions, the paper makes a contribution to the discussion of the relationship between semantic and morphological markedness.