Cover not available

In:Approaches to Hungarian: Volume 14: Papers from the 2013 Piliscsaba Conference
Edited by Katalin É. Kiss, Balázs Surányi and Éva Dékány
[Approaches to Hungarian 14] 2015
► pp. 5–36

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Arguments for arguments in the complement zone of the Hungarian nominal head

 | Department of Linguistics, Pécs
 | Research Institute for Linguistics, HAS
Published online: 3 June 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/atoh.14.01alb
This paper argues that a Hungarian nominal head may have a phonetically non-empty complement zone — if certain “felicity conditions” are satisfied. Our approach relies on the introduction of two new constituency tests (based on certain properties of the contrastive topic and on the order of certain functional heads), instead of the earlier ones. Another crucial element to our solution is the reinterpretation of É. Kiss’s Constraint on Case Assignment as a Behaghel-type phonetic rule, which prevails in a graded way, instead of providing a black and white picture. Our approach can also be put into the cross-linguistic discussion of branchingness. It is claimed on the basis of our data that branchingness in Hungarian can be accounted for by a generalized version of Hinterhölzl’s (“Germanic”) weight condition; and the differences between Hungarian and, for instance, German in branchingness can simply be attributed to differences between these languages in the prosodic sensitivity of phases.
References (24)
References
Abeillé, Anne and Godard, Danièle. 2000 “French word order and lexical weight”. In The Nature and Function of Syntactic Categories, Syntax and Semantics, Robert Borsley (ed), 325–358. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alberti, Gábor. 1997. “Restrictions on the Degree of Referentiality of Arguments in Hungarian Sentences”. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 44 (3-4): 341–362.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. “Climbing for Aspect – with no Rucksack.” In Verb Clusters; A study of Hungarian, German and Dutch. Linguistics Today 69, Katalin É. Kiss and Henk van Riemsdijk (eds), 253–289. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alberti, Gábor, and Farkas, Judit. 2013. “Book review: Syntax of Dutch, Nouns and Noun Phrases”. Lingua 133: 375–384. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alberti Gábor and Medve Anna. 2000. “Focus Constructions and the “Scope–Inversion Puzzle” in Hungarian”. Approaches to Hungarian 7, Gábor Alberti and István Kenesei (eds), 93–118. Szeged: JATE Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002/2005. Generatív grammatikai gyakorlókönyv. Budapest: Janus Books / Gondolat.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bartos Huba. 2000 “Az inflexiós jelenségek szintaktikai háttere.” In Strukturális magyar nyelvtan. I. Mondattan, Kiefer Ferenc (ed), 653–762. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Broekhuis, Hans and Keizer, Evelien and Dikken, Marcel den. 2012. Syntax of Dutch – Nouns and Noun Phrases, Vol I-II. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2001 “Derivation by phase.” In Ken Hale: a life in language, Michael Kenstowitz (ed), 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
É. Kiss Katalin. 1992 “Az egyszerű mondat szerkezete”. In Strukturális magyar nyelvtan. I. Mondattan, Kiefer Ferenc (ed), 79–179. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1998 “Mondattan”. In Új magyar nyelvtan, É. Kiss Katalin and Kiefer Ferenc and Siptár Péter (eds), 15–184. Budapest: Osiris.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
É. Kiss, Katalin. 2000. “The Hungarian Noun Phrase is like the English Noun Phrase”. Approaches to Hungarian 7, Gábor Alberti and István Kenesei (eds), 119–149. Szeged: JATE Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. The Syntax of Hungarian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 119–149. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009 “Is free postverbal order in Hungarian a syntactic or a PF phenomenon?” In: The Sound Pattern of Syntax, Nomi Erteschik-Shir and Lisa Rochman (eds), 53–71. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hinterhölzl, Roland. 2010. “Collapsing the Head Final Filter and the Head Complement Parameter”. Working Papers in Linguistics 20: 35–65. Venice: University of Venice.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kiefer, Ferenc(ed.). 1992. Strukturális magyar nyelvtan I. Mondattan. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koopman, Hilda and Szabolcsi, Anna. 1998. Verbal complexes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laczkó Tibor. 2000 “Az ige argumentumszerkezetét megőrző főnévképzés.” In Strukturális magyar nyelvtan. III. Morfológia, Kiefer Ferenc (ed), 293–452. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1988 “On the Function of Agreement”. In Agreement in Natural Languages. Approaches, Theories, Descriptions, M. Barlow and Charles A. Ferguson (eds.), 55–65. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lipták, Anikó K. 2011. “A fragmentumok mondattana a magyarban”. Általános Nyelvészeti Tanulmányok XXIII, Bartos Huba (ed), 317–349.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rákosi, György. 2009. “Ablative causes in Hungarian”. Approaches to Hungarian 11, Marcel den Dikken and Robert M. Vago (eds.), 167–196. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Szabolcsi, Anna and Laczkó, Tibor. 1992 “A főnévi csoport szerkezete”. In Strukturális magyar nyelvtan. I. Mondattan, Kiefer Ferenc (ed), 179–298. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Szendrői, Kriszta. 2003. “A strees-based approach to the syntax of Hungarian focus”. The Linguistic Review 20. 37–78. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Williams, Edwin. 1982. “Another argument that passive is transformational”. Linguistic Inquiry 13: 160–163.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Dékány, Éva
2021. Possessive DPs. In The Hungarian Nominal Functional Sequence [Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 100], ► pp. 159 ff. DOI logo
Alberti, Gábor, Judit Farkas & Veronika Szabó
2017. Internal-scope taking arguments in the information structure of deverbal nominals in Hungarian. In Approaches to Hungarian [Approaches to Hungarian, 15], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Alberti, Gábor & Judit Farkas
2015. Az elidegeníthető birtoklást kifejező -j- képző esete a -(Vt)t főnévképzővel és más főnévképzőkkel. Jelentés és Nyelvhasználat 2:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue