Volume 43, Issue 1 - Special Issue: Combining formal and functional approaches to variation in (morpho)syntax; Guest Editor: Thomas Strobel

This special issue examines the question of how both formal(ist) and functional(ist) accounts or elements of theorizing can contribute to the explanation of (morpho)syntactic variation. Are formal and functional approaches really irreconcilable with each other, as often seems to be taken for granted by their respective advocates? It will be argued instead that they are rather complementary and that both can make a valuable contribution to explaining linguistic variation, in synchronic as well as diachronic respects. The integration of ways of looking at a certain phenomenon or problem from the respective other camp is proven to provide a significant added value and should not be excluded. The volume focuses on several Germanic languages and dialects, more specifically on German, Dutch, and Swedish varieties. It unites different formal and functional perspectives and, not least, it considers also semantic and phonological factors. The models covered include different versions of generative grammar, information-based morphology, construction grammar/construction morphology, natural morphology, and sociolinguistics.

Linguistic variation is a feature that characterizes every natural language. In this paper, I focus on linguistic variation and its importance and its role in language change (LC). To determine its importance and role, one must distinguish between emergence and diffusion of variants because both dimensions provide different contributions to LC. The emergence and further development of new variants is a process that often (though not always) displays the form of a cycle, whereas the diffusion within a speech community often follows an S-curve form. Both dimensions are important for LC, but they relate to very different aspects. In this paper, I will treat variation with respect to its role in LC. Variation, in general, is a crucial factor in LC in two respects: First, it is the result of LC and second, it can trigger LC.

This paper combines experimental, theoretical and quantitative approaches to syntactic microvariation. The empirical goal is to clarify the situation with respect to wh-doubling (also: wh-copying) in varieties of German and Dutch. With a large-scale survey in the German and Dutch language areas we sought to establish which speakers allow wh-doubling, which speakers allow right-complexity, i.e., configurations in which the lower copy of the wh-dependency is more complex that the higher one, and which speakers allow left-complexity, i.e., the reverse, with a more complex higher copy. We also wanted to know whether there are associations between these properties, to identify groups of speakers and dialects. We found three types of grammars: (i) a grammar that allows both wh-doubling and right- and left-complexity, (ii) a grammar that allows wh-doubling and has a strong preference for right-complexity over left-complexity, and (iii) a grammar that does not allow any wh-doubling configuration. This shows that there is a clear limit to variation in this domain. Grammars with a preference for left-complexity do not exist. We then point out the consequences of these findings for the copy theory of movement, and for analyses that enrich this theory with the option of partial deletion.

This paper will show that agreement cannot be considered a purely narrow-syntactic phenomenon, i.e., a phenomenon which cannot be given a functional-semantic explanation. It will show that person-number-gender (PNG-)affixes on verbs and adjectives are semantically interpretable even in languages such as English and Swedish, where they at first sight seem to be completely redundant. Several instances of so-called semantic agreement will reveal that these PNG-affixes convey important meanings not overtly marked by their co-referential DPs. In some cases, this even holds for the opposite case, i.e., that the PNG-affixes displaying grammatical agreement with their co-referential DPs also contribute with meanings not conveyed by the latter. Attempts to explain away semantic agreement by assuming there to be phonologically null determiners that give the DPs the same PNG-values as the agreement affixes will be refuted by data that show that the nouns often cannot be modified by such elements. Instead of being uninterpretable features that must be deleted before the derivation is sent to the semantic component, it will be shown that PNG-affixes on verbs and adjectives function like pronominal affixes, i.e., that they are arguments of the verbs and adjectives. They can either be anaphoric, in which case they can display semantic agreement, agreeing with the lexical semantics of the referent rather than with the PNG-values of the co-referential DP, or cataphoric, in which case they behave like formal-subject pronouns, signifying the PNG-value of the following logical DP subject.

The present contribution starts from Goldberg and Perek’s (2019) analysis of gapping within a constructionist framework. The authors promote their analysis as surpassing non-constructionist takes on gapping and ellipsis more generally. In particular, they claim predictive power. That this is not the whole truth is explained in detail in this contribution. It is shown which predictions can be made from their perspective versus from a generative perspective and it is discussed whether they are borne out. Furthermore, I highlight how the predictions relate to the fundamentals of the respective theories and, as a consequence, how they differ in kind.

Modal verbs in German show phonologically unconditioned umlaut in the pres.pl versus pres.sg whose functional motivation is unclear. Based on a large sample of dialectological data, I explore the distribution of this umlaut as well as other irregularization strategies like contractions and/or consonant mutations in different paradigm cells. My observations point to the conclusion that these facets of irregularity are morphomic in that they serve no other function than signaling inflectional class coherence. A promising approach to capture these complex patterns of stem allomorphy is Information-based Morphology (IBM), an inferential-realizational approach to morphology developed in the context of Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG). The concept of a stem space allows for expressing implicational or directed generalizations in stem formation and their mapping to phonology. In diachronic terms, however, transcategorial number marking, as proposed in the relevant literature, is a plausible functional motivation for the analogical extension of umlaut as a verbal plural marker.

This paper aims to explain recent empirical findings on subjunctive II formation in the Bavarian dialects of Austria from both functional and formal perspectives. For this purpose, the explanatory power of the functional principles of natural morphology (NM) is compared with the formal framework of constructional morphology (CxM). It is argued that the two approaches complement each other. Thus, it is shown that the key concepts of NM (constructional iconicity, uniformity and transparency) can easily be adapted in terms of CxM. These adjustments are needed to explain the ongoing changes in subjunctive II formation in the Bavarian dialects of Austria. This is due to the well-documented shift towards the use of periphrastic constructions (with the täte - and würde -auxiliary) that are located at the interface between morphology and syntax.

This study aims to account for the German expression von wegen (literally ‘of ways’) when used outside of the sentence structure. Drawing on corpus data for written and spoken German, we show that there are two types of syntactically non-integrated von wegen : (i) illustrating/exemplifying von wegen and, (ii) opposing von wegen . By combining both a formal and a functional perspective, we claim that these two types can be analyzed as modal expressions. In fact, from a formal point of view based on Werner Abraham’s classification in lexical and grammatical forms of modality, both illustrating/exemplifying and opposing von wegen encode a quotative/evidential meaning, whereas only the second type expresses an epistemic modal value. Nevertheless, von wegen does not belong to the prototypical forms of modality described by Abraham as it does not occupy a structural position within the sentence and therefore does not fall into any of the classes proposed by Abraham. For this reason, we also need to integrate the formal perspective with a functional one by defining modality not only structurally but also semantically. In doing so, we account for the modality of von wegen in that we assume the existence of a third strategy of modalization that is specific to syntactically non-integrated expressions and operates at the discourse level.