https://ebookmass.com/product/syntactic-features-and-the-
Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) ready for you
Download now and discover formats that fit your needs...
Offensive Speech, Religion, and the Limits of the Law
Nicholas Hatzis
https://ebookmass.com/product/offensive-speech-religion-and-thelimits-of-the-law-nicholas-hatzis-2/
ebookmass.com
Offensive Speech, Religion, and the Limits of the Law
Nicholas Hatzis
https://ebookmass.com/product/offensive-speech-religion-and-thelimits-of-the-law-nicholas-hatzis/
ebookmass.com
The Politics of Presidential Term Limits Alexander Baturo (Editor)
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-politics-of-presidential-termlimits-alexander-baturo-editor/
ebookmass.com
Mood 1st Edition Paul Portner
https://ebookmass.com/product/mood-1st-edition-paul-portner/
ebookmass.com
NoSQL and SQL data modeling: bringing together data, semantics, and software Hills
https://ebookmass.com/product/nosql-and-sql-data-modeling-bringingtogether-data-semantics-and-software-hills/
ebookmass.com
Exiles of ColSec Douglas Hill
https://ebookmass.com/product/exiles-of-colsec-douglas-hill/
ebookmass.com
A Deal with a Devilish Duke: A Steamy Marriage of Convenience Historical Regency Romance Novel (The Rules of Scandal Book 1) Tessa Brookman
https://ebookmass.com/product/a-deal-with-a-devilish-duke-a-steamymarriage-of-convenience-historical-regency-romance-novel-the-rules-ofscandal-book-1-tessa-brookman/ ebookmass.com
Relentless (Bad Reputation) Katie Golding
https://ebookmass.com/product/relentless-bad-reputation-katiegolding-2/
ebookmass.com
Nanostructures for Drug Delivery. A volume in Micro and Nano Technologies 1st Edition Edition Ecaterina Andronescu And Alexandru Mihai Grumezescu (Eds.)
https://ebookmass.com/product/nanostructures-for-drug-delivery-avolume-in-micro-and-nano-technologies-1st-edition-edition-ecaterinaandronescu-and-alexandru-mihai-grumezescu-eds/ ebookmass.com
Women Doing Intimacy: Gender, Family and Modernity in Britain and Hong Kong 1st ed. Edition Stevi Jackson
https://ebookmass.com/product/women-doing-intimacy-gender-family-andmodernity-in-britain-and-hong-kong-1st-ed-edition-stevi-jackson/
ebookmass.com
SyntacticFeaturesandtheLimits ofSyntacticChange OXFORDSTUDIESINDIACHRONIC ANDHISTORICALLINGUISTICS Generaleditors
AdamLedgewayandIanRoberts,UniversityofCambridge
Advisoryeditors
CynthiaL.Allen, AustralianNationalUniversity;RicardoBermúdez-Otero, UniversityofManchester;TheresaBiberauer, UniversityofCambridge; CharlotteGalves, UniversityofCampinas;GeoffHorrocks, UniversityofCambridge; PaulKiparsky, StanfordUniversity;AnthonyKroch, UniversityofPennsylvania; DavidLightfoot, GeorgetownUniversity;GiuseppeLongobardi, UniversityofYork; GeorgeWalkden, UniversityofKonstanz; DavidWillis, UniversityofOxford
ReferentialNullSubjectsinEarlyEnglish KristianA.Rusten
WordOrderandParameterChangeinRomanian AComparativeRomancePerspective AlexandruNicolae 37
CyclesinLanguageChange
Editedby MiriamBouzouita,AnneBreitbarth,LievenDanckaert, andElisabethWitzenhausen 38
PalatalSoundChangeintheRomanceLanguages DiachronicandSynchronicPerspectives AndréZampaulo 39
DativeExternalPossessorsinEarlyEnglish CynthiaL.Allen 40
TheHistoryofNegationintheLanguagesofEuropeandtheMediterranean VolumeII: PatternsandProcesses
AnneBreitbarth,ChristopherLucas,andDavidWillis 41
VariationandChangeinGallo-RomanceGrammar Editedby SamWolfeandMartinMaiden 42
PhoneticCausesofSoundChange
ThePalatalizationandAssibilationofObstruents DanielRecasens 43
SyntacticFeaturesandtheLimitsofSyntacticChange
Editedby JóhannesGísliJónssonandThórhallurEythórsson
SyntacticFeaturesand theLimitsofSyntactic Change Editedby
JÓHANNESGÍSLIJÓNSSONAND THÓRHALLUREYTHÓRSSON GreatClarendonStreet,Oxford,OX26DP, UnitedKingdom
OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford. ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship, andeducationbypublishingworldwide.Oxfordisaregisteredtrademarkof OxfordUniversityPressintheUKandincertainothercountries
©editorialmatterandorganizationJóhannesGísliJónsson andThórhallurEythórsson2021 ©thechapterstheirseveralauthors2021
Themoralrightsoftheauthorshavebeenasserted FirstEditionpublishedin2021
Impression:1
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedin aretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,withoutthe priorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,orasexpresslypermitted bylaw,bylicenceorundertermsagreedwiththeappropriatereprographics rightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproductionoutsidethescopeofthe aboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,OxfordUniversityPress,atthe addressabove
Youmustnotcirculatethisworkinanyotherform andyoumustimposethissameconditiononanyacquirer
PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyOxfordUniversityPress 198MadisonAvenue,NewYork,NY10016,UnitedStatesofAmerica
BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData
Dataavailable
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2021931819
ISBN978–0–19–883258–4
DOI:10.1093/oso/9780198832584.001.0001
Printedandboundby CPIGroup(UK)Ltd,Croydon,CR04YY
LinkstothirdpartywebsitesareprovidedbyOxfordingoodfaithand forinformationonly.Oxforddisclaimsanyresponsibilityforthematerials containedinanythirdpartywebsitereferencedinthiswork.
Contents SeriesPreface vii
Listofabbreviations ix
Thecontributors xv
1.Introduction:Syntacticfeaturesandthelimitsofsyntacticchange1
JóhannesGísliJónssonandThórhallurEythórsson
PARTI:THELEFTPERIPHERY 2.Degreesemantics,polarity,andthegrammaticalizationof comparativeoperatorsintocomplementizers15
JuliaBacskai-Atkari
3.CyclicchangesinHungarianrelativeclauses 40
JuliaBacskai-AtkariandÉvaDékány
4.Diachronicchangeandfeatureinstability:ThecyclesofFin inRomanianobligatorycontrol64
GabrielaAlboiuandVirginiaHill
5.NullsubjectsinMiddleLowGerman:Diachronicstability andchange84
MelissaFarasynandAnneBreitbarth
PARTII:THET-DOMAIN 6.FeaturereanalysisandtheLatinoriginofRomanceNegative Concord113
ChiaraGianollo
7.DegrammaticalizationofpronominalcliticsinSlavic 139 HakyungJungandKrzysztofMigdalski
8.(In)vulnerableinflectedinfinitivesascomplementsto modals:EvidencefromGalicianandRomeyka161
IoannaSitaridou
9.Assessingphonologicalcorrelatesofsyntacticchange: ThecaseofLateLatinweak 178 LievenDanckaert
10.Investigatingthepastofthefuturatepresent
ElizabethCowper, DanielCurrieHall, BronwynM.Bjorkman , RebeccaTollan, andNeilBanerjee
PARTIII:CASEMARKING 11.Fromlexicaltodependent:ThecaseoftheGreekdative241 ElenaAnagnostopoulouandChristinaSevdali
12.ThenatureandoriginofsyntacticergativityinAustronesian languages265 EdithAldridge
13.Featuraldynamicsinmorphosyntacticchange 301 IrisEddaNowensteinandAntonKarlIngason
PARTIV:SYNTACTICRECONSTRUCTION 14.Syntacticreconstructionbasedonlinguisticfossils: ObjectmarkinginUralic323 KatalinÉ.Kiss
15.Regularsyntacticchangeandsyntacticreconstruction 348 MarkHaleandMadelynKissock
SeriesPreface Moderndiachroniclinguisticshasimportantcontactswithothersubdisciplines, notably first-languageacquisition,learnabilitytheory,computationallinguistics, sociolinguistics,andthetraditionalphilologicalstudyoftexts.Itisnowrecognized inthewider fieldthatdiachroniclinguisticscanmakeanovelcontributionto linguistictheory,tohistoricallinguistics,andarguablytocognitivesciencemore widely.
Thisseriesprovidesaforumforworkinbothdiachronicandhistorical linguistics,includingworkonchangeingrammar,sound,andmeaningwithin andacrosslanguages;synchronicstudiesoflanguagesinthepast;anddescriptive historiesofoneormorelanguages.Itisintendedtoreflectandencouragethelinks betweenthesesubjectsand fieldssuchasthosementionedabove.
Thegoaloftheseriesistopublishhigh-qualitymonographsandcollectionsof papersindiachroniclinguisticsgenerally,i.e.studiesfocusingonchangein linguisticstructure,and/orchangeingrammars,whicharealsointendedto makeacontributiontolinguistictheory,bydevelopingandadoptingacurrent theoreticalmodel,byraisingwiderquestionsconcerningthenatureoflanguage change,orbydevelopingtheoreticalconnectionswithotherareasoflinguistics andcognitivescienceaslistedabove.Thereisnobiastowardsaparticular languageorlanguagefamilyortowardsaparticulartheoreticalframework;work inalltheoreticalframeworksandworkbasedonthedescriptivetraditionof languagetypology,aswellasquantitativelybasedworkusingtheoreticalideas, alsofeatureintheseries.
AdamLedgewayandIanRoberts UniversityofCambridge
Listofabbreviations 1 firstperson
2 secondperson
3 thirdperson
ablative
absolutive
accusative
active(Voice)
adverb
Agreement
aorist
applicative
ASGAnglo-SaxonGospels
aspect
Att.EpistulaeadAtticum
Aug.Augustine
Auxiliary
BBLBirchbarkLetters
BCCBorer–ChomskyConjecture
Boeth.Boethius
BPBrazilianPortuguese
C complementizer
Caes.Ar.CaesariusofArles
c.Faust.contraFaustumManichaeum
causative
CGClassicalGreek
C–IConceptual–Intentional
Cic.Cicero
classifier/clitic(Ch.11)
CLnC/Edge-linker
CNcommonnoun
connegative
ColBPColloquialBrazilianPortuguese
complementizerphrase/comparativedegree(Ch.9) comprcomparative
conditional ConjPconjunctionphrase
Cons.PhilosophiaeConsolatio
CPComplementizerPhrase
dative
DEFdefinitearticle
definite
definiteobjectagreementonverb
demonstrative
diminutive
DMDistributedMorphology
DNDoubleNegation
DODirectobject
differentialobjectmarker
Dor.Doric
DPDeterminerPhrase
DSDativeSubstitution
dual
E Eastern
EAexternalargument
ECExhaustiveControl
ECDRElsewhereConditionDeathRattle
ECSSElsewhereConditionSerialSearch
elativecase
emphatic
ENHGEarlyNewHighGerman
EPEuropeanPortuguese
EPPExtendedProjectionPrinciple
ergative
feminine
F functional(Chs3,9)/feminine(Ch.5)/feature(Chs6,10)/foot(Ch.9)
F(P)(generic)functionalprojection
Fin finite
Focfocusfeature
Foc(P)Focus(Phrase)
FOFCFinal-Over-FinalConstraint
frequency
future
GCCGestaConlationisCarthaginiensis
genitive
gerundive
I intonationalphrase
IAinternalargument
IE Indo-European
iF interpretablefeature
illativecase
imperative
imperfect(ive)
inclusive
indicative
indefinite
inessivecase
INEQinequality
infinitive
INFLinflection
Infl inflectedverb
instructive
instrumental
intransitive
IOIndirectobject
Iord.Jordanes
IP inflectionalphrase
InfinitivusProParticipio
irrealis
KJVKingJamesVersion
KPKasephrase
L1 first-language
Latin/lative
LCALinearCorrespondenceAxiom
LFLogicalForm
LI lexicalitems
Liv.Livy
linker
locative
M masculine
masculine
m-casemorphologicalcase
MEMiddleEnglish
MGModernGreek
MLGMiddleLowGerman
MNwMiddleNorwegian
modal
Modmodal(verb)
MTCmovementtheoryofcontrol
Mur.ProMurena
neuter
N Northern
NActNon-activeVoice(morphology)
NAnNuclearAustronesian
NCINegativeConcordItem
negation
Negnegationfeature
NEGNegation/negative
NegPNegationPhrase
NGNorthernGreek
NInegativeindefinite
NMnegativemarker
nominalization
NOCnon-obligatorycontrol
nominative
non-future
NPnounphrase
NPINegativePolarityItem
NSNarrowSyntax
NSLnullsubjectlanguage
O object
OBJobjectagreement(suffix)
oblique
OCobligatorycontrol
OCSOldChurchSlavonic
OEOldEnglish
OHGOldHighGerman
ONwOldNorwegian
Op.operator
OROldRussian
OSOldSaxon
OTOptimalityTheory
P preposition
PaPapastparticiple
PAnProto-Austronesian
particle
passive
PCPartialControl
PDEPresent-DayEnglish
PEAnProto-ErgativeAustronesian
Perfperfect
perfect(ive)
PFPhoneticForm/PhonologicalForm(Chs8,13)
Phi-featuresperson/numberfeatures
PIEProto-Indo-European
plural
pluperfect
personalname possessive
possibilitysuffix
PPprepositionalphrase
Pplparticiple
present
preterite
procovertsubjectpronoun
present
particle
indicativesimplepast
PSRPerson-SpecificRetention
pasttense
participle
QMquotativemarker
QPquantifierphrase
realis
reduplication
reflexive
relative
RNSreferentialnullsubject(s)
ROfRomeykaofOf(Ophis)
Rom.Romana
RSüRRomeykaofSürmene
Ssubject
singular
SHA ScriptoresHistoriaeAugustae
SMSensory-motor
SMGStandardModernGreek
Specspecifier
SRsurfacerepresentation
SSWLSyntacticStructuresoftheWorld’sLanguages,http://test.terraling.com/ groups/7
StdBPStandardBrazilianPortuguese SUsubject(Phrase)
sublativecase
subjunctive
Subj(P)Subject(Phrase)
superessivecase(Ch.3)/supine(Ch.4)
TLGThesaurusLinguaeGraecae
topic
Toptopic
T(P)Tense(Phrase)
transitive
UUtterance
uDuninterpretableD-feature
uFuninterpretablefeature
UGUniversalGrammar
URunderlyingrepresentation
V(lexical)verb
V1verb first
V2verbsecond
VLverb-late
VOCvocative
v(P)(little/light)verb(Phrase)
VPVerbPhrase
VTVetusTestamentum
Vulg.Vulgate
WPweakpronoun
X
⁰ syntactichead
XPsyntacticphrase
θ thematic σ syllable φ phonologicalphrase ω phonologicalword
Thecontributors GabrielaAlboiu isAssociateProfessoratYorkUniversity,Toronto.Shefocusesprimarily onclausestructure,verbmovement,leftperipheries,structuralCase,andobligatorycontrol inRomanian.Herpublicationsincludebookchapters(e.g.JohnBenjamins,DeGruyter Mouton,Springer,Elsevier,OxfordUniversityPress)andjournalarticles(e.g. Syntax, NaturalLanguageandLinguisticTheory, TheLinguisticReview, JournalofHistorical Syntax, Isogloss, Revueroumainedelinguistique, CanadianJournalofLinguistics).Sheis theauthorof TheFeaturesofMovementinRomanian (BucharestUniversityPress,2002), andtheco-author(withVirginiaHill)of VerbMovementandClauseStructureinOld Romanian (OxfordUniversityPress,2016).
EdithAldridge isAssociateProfessorofLinguisticsattheUniversityofWashingtonand AssociateResearcheratAcademiaSinica.Herresearchfocusesoncomparativeand diachronicsyntax,withlanguageconcentrationsinAustronesianlanguages,Chinese,and Japanese.Herrecentpublicationsinhistoricallinguisticsinclude. ‘Twotypesofalignment changeinnominalizations’ (withYukoYanagida, Diachronica,forthcoming), ‘Subject/nonsubjectmovementasymmetriesinLateArchaicChinese’ (Glossa,2019), ‘C-TInheritance andtheLeftPeripheryinOldJapanese’ (Glossa,2018), ‘Intransitivityandthedevelopment ofergativealignment’ (TheOxfordHandbookofErgativity,OxfordUniversityPress,2017), ‘ECMandcontrolinArchaicChinese’ (NewAspectsofClassicalChineseGrammar, Harrassowitz,2016), ‘ErgativityfromsubjunctiveinAustronesianlanguages’ (Language andLinguistics,2016),and ‘PronominalObjectShiftinArchaicChinese’ (SyntaxoverTime: Lexical,MorphologicalandInformation-StructuralInteractions,OxfordUniversityPress, 2015).
ElenaAnagnostopoulou obtainedherPhDinLinguisticsfromtheUniversityofSalzburg in1994.Afterapost-docatMIT(1997–8),whereshereturnedin2007asaVisiting AssociateProfessor,shetookapositionattheUniversityofCretein1998,wheresheis currentlyProfessorofTheoreticalLinguistics.Herresearchinterestslieintheoreticaland comparativesyntax,formallinguistictypology,morphology,andhistoricalmorphosyntax. In2013shereceivedaFriedrichWilhelmBesselResearchAwardfromtheAlexandervon HumboldtFoundation,Germany.Sheistheauthorof TheSyntaxofDitransitives.Evidence fromClitics (MoutondeGruyter,2003),co-authorof ExternalArgumentsinTransitivity Alternations.ALayeringApproach (OxfordUniversityPress,2015),hasco-editedanumber ofvolumesandconferenceproceedings,andhaspublishedextensivelyinjournalsand editedvolumes.Sheisco-editorintheseries OpenGenerativeSyntax (LanguageScience Press)andmemberoftheeditorialboardsofthe JournalofGreekLinguistics,Linguistic Inquiry,and Syntax
JuliaBacskai-Atkari is VisitingProfessorforEnglishlinguisticsattheUniversityof Konstanz.Shereceivedherdoctoraldegreein2014fromtheUniversityofPotsdam,
Germany,whereshelatercarriedoutaresearchproject ‘Thesyntaxoffunctionalleft peripheriesanditsrelationtoinformationstructure’.Whileherresearchfocuseson Germaniclanguages,shehaswrittenextensivelyonotherEuropeanlanguagesaswell. Oneofhermajorresearchareasisthesyntaxofcomparativeconstructions,aboutwhich shepublishedherlatestbook(devotedtodeletionphenomenainEnglishcomparatives fromacross-linguisticperspective;LanguageSciencePress,2018).
NeilBanerjee isagraduatestudentatMITandanalumnusoftheUniversityofToronto. Heworksonthesyntaxandsemanticsoftenseandmodality,aswellasverbal morphosyntaxinKinyarwandaandBengali.Hewonthe2016CanadianLinguistic Associationstudentpaperawardforhispaper ‘Ofmonstersandmodals’ .
BronwynM.Bjorkman hasbeenatQueen’sUniversityasanAssistantProfessorsince 2015.Herprimaryresearchinterestsconcerntheinterfacesbetweenmorphologyandother componentsofthegrammar,andthewaysgrammaticalinformationisencodedand manipulatedbysyntaxintermsofformalfeatures.
AnneBreitbarth isAssociateProfessorofHistoricalGermanLinguisticsatGhent University.ShehaspublishedonissuesinhistoricalsyntaxandlanguagechangeinHigh andLowGerman,aswellasDutchandEnglish,andhasledprojectsbuildingparsed corporaforhistoricalLowGermanandSouthernDutchdialects.Sheistheauthorof The HistoryofLowGermanNegation (OxfordUniversityPress,2014),co-author(with ChristopherLucasandDavidWillis)of TheHistoryofNegationintheLanguagesof EuropeandtheMediterranean.Vol.II:PatternsandProcesses (OxfordUniversityPress, 2020),andtheeditorofseveralvolumesonlanguagechangeinthedomainsofnegationand polarity,aswellasdiachronicchangeandstabilityingrammar.
ElizabethCowper hasbeenattheUniversityofTorontosince1976,wheresheisnow ProfessorEmeritus.Herrecentresearchdealswiththegrammaticalfeaturesofnominals (definiteness,person,number,andgender),andclauses(finiteness,tense,mood,and aspect)inawidevarietyoflanguages,andwhattheyrevealaboutthehumanlanguage faculty.
LievenDanckaert worksasaCNRSresearcherattheUniversityofLille.Heobtainedhis PhDatGhentUniversityin2011.HisexpertiseisingenerativegrammarandLatinsyntax, withspecialemphasisonthestudyofwordorderandtheuseofcorpus-basedmethods.He istheauthorofthemonographs LatinEmbeddedClauses:TheLeftPeriphery (John Benjamins,2012)and TheDevelopmentofLatinClauseStructure (OxfordUniversity Press,2017).Heisalsoaco-editorofthevolume BridgingtheGapbetweenLateLatin andEarlyOldFrench,tobepublishedbyDeGruyter(forthcoming,2022).
ÉvaDékány isaseniorresearcherattheResearchInstituteforLinguisticsoftheHungarian AcademyofSciences.ShereceivedherPhDinTheoreticalLinguisticsfromtheUniversity ofTromsøin2012andhaspublishedonthestructureofnominalandadpositionalphrases aswellasthehistoryofHungarian.Sheiscurrentlyworkingon finiteandnon-finite subordinationinvariousFinno-Ugriclanguages.
KatalinÉ.Kiss isprofessoroftheResearchInstituteforLinguisticsoftheHungarian AcademyofSciences.SheisamemberoftheHungarianAcademyofSciencesandof AcademiaEuropaea.Herresearchareasincludegenerativesyntax,especiallythesyntaxof HungarianandotherUraliclanguages,informationstructure,andthesyntax–semantics interface.Shehaspublishedsixbooksand250articles.
ThórhallurEythórsson isProfessorofLinguisticsattheUniversityofIceland.Hismain researchinterestslieinwordorder,cliticization,andverbalsyntaxinGermanicfroma diachronicperspective;case,argumentstructure,andvoiceinIcelandicandotheroldand modernGermaniclanguages;thedevelopmentofovertandcovertpronominals,reflexives, andexpletivesinIcelandic;andprefixationinGermanicfromahistoricalandcomparative perspective.
MelissaFarasyn isapostdoctoralresearcheratGhentUniversity,withinthe ΔiaLing researchgroup,fundedbytheResearchFoundation Flanders(FWO).Herresearch focusesonsyntacticvariationandchangeinGermanicdialectsandonbuildingand usingparsedcorpora.SheobtainedherPhD,inwhichshestudiedagreementphenomena, in2018asamemberoftheprojectteamoftheCorpusofHistoricalLowGerman.Currently, sheworksonaprojectonV>2inthemoribundFrenchFlemishdialects,whichincludesthe creationofaparsedandtaggedcorpusofFrenchFlemishspokendatafrom91different locations.
ChiaraGianollo isAssociateProfessorofGeneralLinguisticsattheUniversityofBologna. SheobtainedherMAandPhDfromtheUniversityofPisaandhasheldappointmentsas lecturerandresearcherattheUniversitiesofTrieste,Konstanz,Stuttgart,andCologne.Her mainresearchareasarediachronicsyntaxandsemantics,withspecificfocusontheuseof formaltheoreticallinguisticstoinvestigatethehistoryofGreek,Latin,andOldRomance. Sheistheauthorof IndefinitesbetweenLatinandRomance (OxfordUniversityPress, 2018).
MarkHale isaProfessorofLinguisticsintheDepartmentofClassics,ModernLanguages, andLinguisticsatConcordiaUniversityinMontreal.Hehaswrittenbooks,bookchapters, andarticlesondiachronicmethodology,phonologicaltheory,andIndo-European historicalsyntax,aswellasarticlestreatingvariousaspectsofIndo-Europeanand Oceanichistoricalgrammar.
DanielCurrieHall (PhD2007,UniversityofToronto)isanAssociateProfessorand CoordinatorofthePrograminLinguisticsatSaintMary’sUniversityinHalifax,Nova Scotia.HehaspreviouslytaughtattheUniversityofTorontoandatQueen’sUniversity, andhasworkedasaresearcherattheMeertensInstituutoftheRoyalNetherlandsAcademy ofArtsandSciences.Hisresearchfocusesprimarilyoncontrastivefeaturesand representationsinphonologyandmorphosyntax,andhasappearedinjournalssuchas Phonology, Glossa, Nordlyd, LinguisticVariation,and Lingueelinguaggio.Heisaco-editor of Phonology
VirginiaHill isProfessorofLinguisticsattheUniversityofNewBrunswick–SaintJohn. Herresearchinterestsconcernthesyntax–pragmaticsinterface(thesyntaxofparticlesof directaddressandvocatives),andcomparativeanddiachronicsyntax,withafocuson
Romanian,Romance,andBalkanlanguages.Shehaspublishednumerouspapersin internationaljournalsandauthored/editedtenbooks,amongwhich Vocatives:How SyntaxMeetswithPragmatics (Brill,2014)and,togetherwithGabrielaAlboiu, Verb MovementandClauseStructureinOldRomanian (OxfordUniversityPress,2016).
AntonKarlIngason isanAssistantProfessor(lektor)ofIcelandiclinguisticsandlanguage technologyattheUniversityofIceland.HecompletedhisPhDinlinguisticsfromthe UniversityofPennsylvaniain2016andhehasworkedextensivelyontheoreticalsyntax, thesyntax–semanticsinterface,andlanguagevariationandchange,especiallywiththe frameworkofDistributedMorphology,aswellastheapplicationoflanguagetechnologyin thedigitalhumanities.HeisoneoftheauthorsofIcePaHC,theIcelandicParsedHistorical Corpus.
JóhannesGísliJónsson isProfessorofIcelandicLinguisticsattheUniversityofIceland.His workfocusesontheoreticalanddiachronicsyntax,andparticularlyoncasemarking, passives,ObjectShift,andtheleftperipheryinIcelandicandFaroese.Heiscurrentlythe principalinvestigator,alongwithCherlonUssery,onaresearchprojectexploring ditransitivesinInsularScandinavian.
HakyungJung isAssociateProfessorofRussianLinguisticsintheDepartmentofRussian LanguageandLiteratureatSeoulNationalUniversity.HakyungJungreceivedherPhDin SlavicLinguisticsatHarvardUniversity.Heracademicinterestliesinformalsyntaxand historicallinguisticswithafocusonthemorphosyntacticrealizationofargumentstructure inRussian.ShehaspublishedsubstantialworksonSlavicsyntax,including ‘Nullsubjects andpersoninOldNorthRussian’ (2018), ‘Onthecliticanalysisofthe be-auxiliaryinOld NorthRussian’ (2017),and TheSyntaxoftheBe-Possessive:ParametricVariationand SurfaceDiversities (LinguistikAktuell172,2011).
MadelynKissock isAssociateProfessorofLinguisticsandChairoftheDepartmentof Classics,ModernLanguages,andLinguisticsatConcordiaUniversityinMontreal.Her researchfocussesprimarilyonthephonologyandsyntaxofDravidianlanguages, particularlyTelugu,aswellasonphonologicalacquisition.Recentworkincludesarticles on finitenessinTeluguandonlinguistictheoryandtheperception–productionlink.
KrzysztofMigdalski isanAssociateProfessorattheInstituteofEnglishStudies,University ofWrocław,Poland.HestudiedlinguisticsattheUniversityofTromsø;hethenworkedasa researchassistantatTilburgUniversity,wherehedefendedhisdoctoraldissertation ‘The SyntaxofCompoundTensesinSlavic’ in2006.From2006until2008hewasapostdoctoralresearcherattheUniversityofConnecticut.In2016hepublishedahabilitation thesis ‘SecondPositionEffectsintheSyntaxofGermanicandSlavicLanguages’.Heis interestedinacomparativesyntaxofBalkanandSlaviclanguagesandhistoricallinguistics.
IrisEddaNowenstein isaPhDcandidateattheUniversityofIceland.Shecompletedher MAingenerallinguisticsfromtheUniversityofIcelandin2014andherMSinspeech pathologyfromthesameuniversityin2016.Herworkfocusesonacquisitionandattrition inthecontextof(morpho)syntacticvariationandchange.Withinthesetopics,shehas workedon firstandsecondlanguageacquisition,North-AmericanheritageIcelandic,and ageingeffectsinattrition.HerworkputsthediversecasesystempatternsofInsular
Scandinavianforwardasatestcasefortheoriesonlanguageacquisitionandthedynamics ofvariation.
ChristinaSevdali isaSeniorLecturerinlinguisticsatUlsterUniversityspecializingin diachronicgenerativesyntaxandmultilingualism.ShestudiedattheUniversityofCrete andattheUniversityofCambridge.ShejoinedUlsterUniversityin2009,andin2017she securedanEarlyCareerArtsandHumanitiesResearchCouncilgrantwithElena Anagnostopoulouon ‘InvestigatingVariationandChange:CaseinDiachrony’.Shehas publishedinanumberofjournalssuchas Language, Syntax, Lingua, JournalofHistorical Syntax, LingueeLinguaggio,and JournalofComparativeGermanicLinguistics.Shehascoedited SyntaxandItsLimits (OxfordUniversityPress,2013)andisontheadvisoryboardof the JournalofHistoricalSyntax.
IoannaSitaridou isReaderinSpanishandHistoricalLinguisticsattheFacultyofModern andMedievalLanguagesandLinguistics,UniversityofCambridge,wheresheiscurrently DirectoroftheSpanishandPortugueseSection.SheisalsoFellowandDirectorofStudies inLinguisticsandModernandMedievalLanguagesatQueens’ College,Cambridge.Her mainareasofresearcharecomparativeanddiachronicsyntaxoftheRomancelanguages anddialectalGreek,especiallyRomeyka.Sheisparticularlyinterestedintherelationship betweensyntacticchangeandacquisition,languagecontact,micro-variation,and phylogenies,especiallywhatshecalls ‘cue-basedreconstructioninasociolinguistically informedmanner’
RebeccaTollan completedherPhDinLinguisticsattheUniversityofTorontoin2019,and iscurrentlyanAssistantProfessorintheDepartmentofLinguisticsandCognitiveScience attheUniversityofDelaware.Herprimaryresearchinterestsareinsyntaxandsentence processing.Hermostrecentworkfocusedoneffectsofcasemarkingandargument structureintheprocessingof wh-questionsinNiuean(Polynesian),andsheiscurrently investigatingdifferingcross-linguisticpatternsinagreementascomparedwithmovement.
1 Introduction Syntacticfeaturesandthelimits ofsyntacticchange JóhannesGísliJónssonandThórhallurEythórsson
1.1Generativesyntax:theoryanddiachrony
Thisvolumecontains fifteenchaptersonvariousphenomenaindiachronicsyntax, allofwhicharecouchedwithinagenerativeframeworkinabroadsense.Asthe titleindicates,thevolumeisspecificallyconcernedwithsyntacticfeaturesand theirroleinrestrictingsyntacticchange.Thus,itisnecessaryattheoutsettooutline thebasicideasofthegenerativeapproach,includingthecentralroleofsyntactic featuresinarichstructuralarchitectureandhowthisrelatestodiachronicsyntax.
Acentraltaskwithingenerativesyntaxistodefinepossiblegrammarsacross languagesbyexplicitformulationsoftheprinciplesandoperationsofUniversal Grammar(UG).Thus,generativesyntaxmakesacrucialdistinctionbetween possibleandimpossiblegrammars.Thisisinclearcontrasttofunctionalistapproaches tosyntax,whichoftenrejectthisdistinctionandfocusinsteadonthecommunicative functionoflanguageanditsroleinshapingthegrammarandthefrequencyofvarious syntacticphenomena.Importantly,UGrestrictsnotonlyindividuallanguages anddialectsbutalsodifferentdiachronicstagesofthesamelanguageordialect.This meansthatUGimposesseverelimitsonpossiblesyntacticchange,astheoutcome mustbeapossiblegrammar.Thesameisalsotrueofanyintermediatestagethata syntacticchangemayinvolve,aseverystagemustinstantiateapossiblegrammar.
Thegenerativeparadigmemphasizesthefundamentalunityofallhuman languages.Still,diversityisanimportantfactaboutlanguage,andthewaysin whichlanguagesmaydifferfromoneanothermustbeaccountedforinsomeway. InthePrinciplesandParametersframework,whichcametotheforeinthewake ofChomsky(1981),differencesbetweenlanguageswerederivedbypostulating variousparametersaspartofUG.Theseparameterswereassociatedwithgeneral propertiesofgrammars,forexamplethelevelofapplicationfor wh-movement (Huang1982)orthechoiceofboundingnodesforSubjacency(Rizzi1982).Some oftheseparameterswereineffect ‘macro-parameters’ connectinganumberof
JóhannesGísliJónssonandThórhallurEythórsson, Introduction:Syntacticfeaturesandthelimitsofsyntacticchange In: SyntacticFeaturesandtheLimitsofSyntacticChange.Editedby:JóhannesGísliJónssonandThórhallur Eythórsson,OxfordUniversityPress(2021).©JóhannesGísliJónssonandThórhallurEythórsson.
syntacticphenomenawithinthesamelanguage.Probably,themostcelebrated exampleofthisistheNullSubjectParameter(Rizzi1982),whichlinks pro-dropin languageslikeItalianandSpanishwiththelackofexpletivesubjects,freesubject inversion,andtheabsenceof that-traceeffects.Inthelasttwodecades,the classicalparametricmodelhasbeencontestedonempiricalaswellastheoretical grounds(see,e.g.,Newmeyer2005andBoeckx2011)andhasgraduallybeen replacedbyamore fine-grainedapproach,theso-calledBorer–Chomsky Conjecture.ThisconjectureisformulatedasfollowsbyBaker(2008:353):
TheBorer–ChomskyConjecture (BCC) Allparametersofvariationareattributabletodifferencesinthefeaturesof particularitems(e.g.thefunctionalheads)inthelexicon.
TheoriginalintuitionbehindtheBCCisduetoBorer(1984),butChomsky(1995) suggestedthatvariationberestrictedtoformalfeaturesoffunctionalheads(see alsoFukui1988).Thetermconjectureisappropriateandreflectsthecurrentstate ofknowledge,astheBCCisstillanuncorroboratedhypothesisdespiteallthe advancesthathavebeenmadeincomparativesyntaxwithinthelastfortyyearsor so.InthewordsofChomsky(1995:6),discussingpossibleparametersofvaration, ‘toolittleisunderstoodtoventureanystronghypotheses,asfarasIcansee’ Biberauer(2008:28)expressesasimilarviewbyclaiming ‘thattheBCCisa hypothesiswhichrequiresmorecriticalexamination’.Nevertheless,theBCCis widelyassumedincurrentworkwithinthegenerativeparadigm,althoughitisnot uncontroversial,aswewilldiscussfurtherbelow.
AsformulatedbyBaker(2008),theBCCreferstoparametersofvariation. Indeed,thetermparametercontinuestobeusedasageneraltermforpointsof contrastbetweenlanguagesinviewoftheconceptualsimilaritiesbetweenearlyand morerecentapproachestopossiblesyntacticvariationdiscussedbyRizzi(2017). However,itshouldbenotedthatparameterisoftenprefixedwith micro-or macrotodifferentiatebetweensmall-scaleparametersversuslarge-scaleparametersthat affectasignificantpartofthegrammar.Toavoidconfusion,wewillusetheseterms todistinguishparametersthatadheretotheBCC(micro-parameters)fromparametersthatdonot(macro-parameters),althoughdifferentmicro-parametricchoices mayyieldmarkedlydifferentgrammars.AgoodexampleofthisisHolmberg’ s (2010b)analysisofvarioussyntacticcontrastsbetweenInsularandMainland Scandinavian,whichheattributestothefeaturecompositionofT.
FeaturesoffunctionalitemsconstituteacrucialpartoftheBCC.Accordingto Roberts(2016),thesefeaturesfallintoatleastthreeclasses:(a)structuralcaseand phi-features(person,number,andgender),(b)categorialfeatures,and(c)attractionfeatures(e.g.EPPfeaturesandedgefeatures).Thelasttypeisintendedto capturedifferencesbetweenlanguageswithrespecttothepresenceorabsence ofvariousmovementoperationssuchasV-to-Tmovementor wh-movement.
However,sincelinearizationisnotobviouslypartofnarrowsyntax,itmaynotbe apropertythatisspecifiedonfunctionalheadsinthelexicon(seeBiberauer2008 andreferencescitedthereformuchrelevantdiscussion).Ontheotherhand,the lasttwodecadeshaveseenaproliferationoffunctionalheadsandfunctional featuresthroughthecartographicapproachinitiatedbyRizzi(1997)andCinque (1999).ThisraisesthequestionofhowrestrictivetheBCCreallyis,asthenumber ofpossiblegrammarswithinsucharichfunctionalarchitectureisprobablyfar beyondthenumberofattestedgrammarsinthelanguagesoftheworld.Thismay notbeaproblem,though,asRizzi(2017)claimsthattheformatofparameters onlydeterminesstructurebuilding,movement,andSpell-Out.Allofthesephenomenaarehighlylocalinthattheycanonlyapplytotheimmediateenvironment oftherelevantfunctionalhead.Rizzi’sconclusionisthattheformatofparameters yieldsahighlyrestrictivesystemofsyntaxsothatnolearnabilityproblemsarise forthelanguagelearnerevenifthetotalnumberoftheparametricoptionsisvery high(onthisissue,seealsoKayne2005).
TheBCCexcludesvariationwithrespecttotheprinciplesofUGandthebasic operationsofthecomputationalsystem,suchasMergeorAgree.Sincethelocus ofvariationisstrictlyconfinedtothefunctionallexicon,theBCCisincompatible withtheviewadvocatedbyBaker(2008)thatmacro-parametersexistalongside micro-parameters.Baker(2008)claimstohavefoundsupportforamacroparametricviewofheaddirectionalityandpolysynthesisandhealsosuggests twomacro-parametersrelatingtoagreementinwhichIndo-Europeanlanguages systematicallycontrastwiththeNiger-Congolanguages.Theargumentsfora polysynthesisparameterarediscussedindetailinBaker(1996)andtheyinvolve aclusteringofpropertiesinpolysyntheticlanguagesthatappearstobenonaccidental,includingsyntacticnounincorporation,objectagreement,freeprodrop,andrelativelyfreewordorder.Fortheheaddirectionalityparameter,Baker (2008)adducesevidencefromtypologyshowingastrongbiasacrosslanguagesfor harmonicordersofverbsandadpositionswithrespecttotheircomplements, ordersthatareconsistentlyhead-initialorhead-final.Mixedorders(VOand NP PorOVandP NP)occurbuttheyarefarlesscommon.Inasimilarvein, ReintgesandCyrin(2016)arguethatmacro-parametersplayaroleindiachronic syntax,asshownbychangesintheverbaltense-aspectsystemsofBrazilian PortugueseandCopticEgyptian.Ontheotherhand,whileRobertsand Holmberg(2010)andRoberts(2012,2016)recognizetheneedformacroparameters,theytrytoreconcileBaker’s(2008)viewswiththeBCCbyarguing thatmacro-parametersarepossible,butonlyasaggregatesofmicro-parameters affectingformalfeaturesoffunctionalcategories.Onthisapproach,macroparametersarisethroughalearningstrategywhichleadslanguagelearnersto choosethemostgeneraloptionconsistentwiththeavailableinputdata.
TheBCChasbeenhighlyinfluentialincomparativesyntax,especiallyinstudies comparingcloselyrelatedlanguagesinthespiritofKayne(2005).Theimpacton
diachronicgenerativesyntaxhasalsobeensubstantial.BiberauerandWalkden (2015)observethattheBCChastriggeredashiftfrom ‘macro-diachronic’ syntax to ‘micro-diachronic’ syntax.Soratherthanfocusingonlarge-scalechanges, diachronicsyntacticianshaveincreasinglyturnedtheirattentiontopropertiesof smallerunits,inparticularthefeaturespecificationsofvariousfunctionalheads. Thiscanbeseeninvirtuallyeverychapterofthisvolume,especiallythosethatdeal withchangesaffectingasmallclassoflexicalitemsorevenjustoneitem.There hasalsobeenashiftinthewayparticularchangesareanalysed.Forinstance, Costa(2011)arguesthatcertaindifferencesbetweenBrazilianandEuropean Portuguesestemfrommicro-diachronicchangesintheformerlanguagerather thanawholesalechangetotopic-prominence,assomepreviousauthorshad claimed.Moreover,theBCChasopenedthewayforformalisttreatmentsof grammaticalizationintermsofsyntacticfeatures,animportantdevelopment, sincethisphenomenonusedtobeoutsidethegraspofgenerativesyntax (RobertsandRoussou2003).
AlthoughtheBCCitselfdoesnotdistinguishbetweendifferentkindsoffunctionalfeatures,suchadistinctionhasbeenarguedtobeimportantforthe understandingofthetriggerofsyntacticchange.Thiscanbeseenincases whereonepartofaparticularsyntacticdomainremainsstableoveralongperiod oftimewhileanotherpartundergoeschange.Thus,basinghisanalysisonthe diachronicdevelopmentofnominalphrasesinthelonghistoryofGreek, Panagiotidis(2008)claimsthatuninterpretablefeaturesaremorevulnerableto changethanLF-interpretablefeatures.Panagiotidis(2008:454)statestherelevant patternasfollows: ‘Diachronicprocesseseliminateuninterpretablefeatures (responsible,interalia,foragreementandmovement)moreeasilythanthey eliminateinterpretablefeaturesonfunctionalelementsorthantheyrearrange themacrossnovelfunctionalcategories’.Morerecently,WalkdenandBreitbarth (2019)makeaweakerclaimbyarguingthattheL2-difficultyofuninterpretable featurescanleadtothediachroniclossofsuchfeaturesinsituationsoflanguage contact.SincePanagiotidis(2008)isnotparticularlyconcernedwithsucha scenario,itiseasiertothinkofpotentialproblemswithhisapproach,forexample thestrongpreservationoftheuninterpretablefeature(s)triggeringV2inallthe GermaniclanguagesexceptEnglish.Inanycase,proposalslinkinguninterpretable featureswithdiachronicinstabilityarelikelytoinspirealotofinterestingresearch inthefuture.
1.2Individualchapters Thesyntactictopicsaddressedinthisvolumecanbedividedintofourtypes: (i)theleftperiphery(theexpandedCP-system),(ii)theT-domain(ormore exactly,theareabetweenTPandvP),(iii)casemarkingofarguments,and
(iv)thereconstructionofearliersyntacticsystems.Thephenomenadiscussed inparts(i)to(iii)reflectdifferentdomainsoftheclause,thatis,theC-domain, theT-domain,andthevP/VP-domain,butthechaptersonsyntacticreconstruction inpart(iv)aremoreconcernedwithestablishingmethodologyindiachronicsyntax andmodellinglinguisticcorrespondencesratherthanaparticularsyntacticchange. Thecontributionsmainlyfocussingontheleftperipherycomprisethoseby Bacskai-Atkari,Bacskai-AtkariandDékány,AlboiuandHill,andFarasynand Breitbarth.TheT-domainisdiscussedinGianollo,JungandMigdalski,Sitaridou, Danckaert,andCowperetal.,whilecasemarkingisthetopicofthechaptersby AnagnostopoulouandSevdali,Aldridge,andNowensteinandIngason.Finally, syntacticreconstructionistreatedbyÉ.Kiss,andHaleandKissock.
Discussingtheindividualchapters,webeginwithanalysesinvolvingtheleft peripheryoftheclause.JuliaBacskai-Atkari(Degreesemantics,polarity,andthe grammaticalizationofcomparativeoperatorsintocomplementizers)presentsa cross-linguisticstudy,mostlyonthebasisofHungarianandGerman,ofthe diachronicdevelopmentofcomparatives,providingaformalaccountofwhy comparativeoperatorsgenerallygrammaticalizeintocomplementizersin -clauses morereadilythanin -clauses.Sheclaimsthatthisisbecause -clauses encodedegreeinequalitywhichincludesanegationfeaturewhichmustbelexicalizedintheleftperipheryoftheclause.Thisfeaturemustbeacquiredbythe originaloperatorduringgrammaticalization,whiletheoperatorin -clauseshas allthefeaturesnecessaryforgrammaticalizationandmustonlyloseanyadditionalfeaturesincompatiblewithacomplementizer.Bacskai-Atkariarguesthat theextensionofan -complementizerintoageneralcomparativecomplementizerispossibleonlyiftherelevantfunctionalheadundergoesfeaturechange,in linewiththeBCC.Inessence,thisviewhypothesizesthatsyntacticchangeexists onlyasareflexofchangesinothercomponentsoflanguage(seeBiberauerand Walkden2015).
Intheirjointchapter(CyclicchangesinHungarianrelativeclauses)Julia Bacskai-AtkariandÉvaDékányproposethatinHungarian,contrarytoEnglish, thereanalysisof wh-operatorsintorelativeoperatorsprecededthereanalysisof thematrixdemonstrativepronoun.Moreover,since wh -basedrelativeoperators didnotgrammaticalizeintocomplementizers,theonlywayforthedemonstrativetobereanalysedintoSpec,CPwasviacliticizationontothe wh-based relativepronoun.InthiswayHungarian developedmorphologicallycomplex relativepronouns.Theauthorsarguethatthishadtwoimportantprerequisites, bothrelatedtofeatures.First,theoriginal wh -basedrelativeoperatordidnot loseitslexicalfeaturesandwasnotgrammaticalizedintoafunctionalhead. Second,thematrixdemonstrativelostitsoriginalde fi nitenessfeature,[+def], andbecameunspeci fi edforthisfeature.InaccordancewiththeBCC,itisthis featurechangethatultimatelybroughtabouttheemergenceofanewmorphosyntacticparadigm.
GabrielaAlboiuandVirginiaHill(Diachronicchangeandfeatureinstability: ThecyclesofFininRomanianobligatorycontrol)focusonthediachronic changeofobligatorycontrol(OC)constructionsinthehistoryofRomanian. ThemainobservationisthatthesettingfortheOCparameterhasremained unchangedsincetheearlieststageofwrittenOldRomanian,sotherehasbeenno diachronicchangeinCsize,whereastheparametricsettingsconcerningthevalues ofthefeaturesassociatedwiththeC/T/AgrsysteminOCconstructionsshow systematicchangeandoverlapping.These findingssupporttheBCCthatsees variationasbeingrestrictedtoformalfeaturesoffunctionalheads(Baker2008). AlboiuandHillconcludethattheOCparameterisconstant,andthereforethereis nochangeinthesizeoftheCPlayer,whereasthefeaturespecificationsintheC/T/ Agrfeaturesystemareinconstant flux.
Intheircontribution(NullsubjectsinMiddleLowGerman:Diachronic stabilityandchange)MelissaFarasynandAnneBreitbarthpresentaformal analysisofnoveldataonnullreferentialsubjectsinMiddleLowGerman (MLG),stillalittle-knownvarietyintermsofsyntax.Usinganextensivedata set,FarasynandBreitbarthshowthatnullreferentialsubjectscanbefound throughoutthewholeMLGattestedperiod;theyquantitativelyanalysethefactors influencingthevariationintheiroccurrence,whichisbothdiachronicand diatopic.FarasynandBreitbarthclaimthatmostMLGnullreferentialsubjects patternwithstrongovertpronounsandthuscanbeanalysedasfullDPs,which arephoneticallynullduetoa[uD]-featuretheycarry.Asmallerclassofnull referentialsubjectsoccursinthesecond(Wackernagel)position,followingC/Fin andpatterningwithovertcliticpronouns.ThissplitinthenullpronounsinMLG istakentopointtoasyntacticchange,showinganincipienttransitionfromthe OldNorthwestGermanicsituationpreservingthenullsubjectpropertytoatopicdroplanguageofthemodernV2-Germanictype.
Next,weturntothe fivechaptersdealingwithdiachronicchangesinthe T-domain.Inthe firstofthesechapters(FeaturereanalysisandtheLatinorigin ofRomanceNegativeConcord)ChiaraGianollopresentsapenetratinganalysis ofchangesinthenegationsystemofLatinanditsvarieddevelopmentin Romance.AsGianollodiscusses,ClassicalLatinhasDoubleNegation,whereas theearliestRomancevarietiesshowaNegativeConcordgrammar.Sheaccounts fortheapparentlyparadoxicaldevelopmentbypositingtheprerequisitesfor NegativeConcordalreadyinLateLatin.Atthisstage,sheargues,thenegative markerunderwentfeaturereanalysis,activatingaprojectionintheclausewhere sententialnegationhadtobeidentified.This,inturn,triggeredthegrammaticalizationofnewnegativeindefiniteswhichestablishedasyntacticrelationwiththe functionalprojectionsFocusPhraseandNegationPhrase,resultinginNegative Concord.ThedevelopmentfromDoubleNegationtoNegativeConcordwould seemtobeaperfectexampleofamacro-changecommontothewholebranchof Romance,ontheonehand,andahostofindependentmicro-changesmanifested
