In:Discourse-oriented Syntax
Edited by Josef Bayer, Roland Hinterhölzl and Andreas Trotzke
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 226] 2015
► pp. 175–210
The cartography of yes and no in West Flemish
Published online: 16 December 2015
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.226.08hae
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.226.08hae
We make an in-depth study of the response particles ja/nee (‘yes/no’) in the Lapscheure dialect of Dutch. These particles show overt phi-feature marking corresponding to what would be the subject of a response clause. Additionally, in ‘reversal answers’, the particles bear additional morphology. We develop a cartographic analysis, arguing that ja/nee represent TP proforms (Krifka 2013). We analyze the pronominal marking as a reflex of phi-features which are merged in Fin to satisfy the Subject Criterion (Rizzi & Shlonsky 2007). We argue that this analysis accounts for a number of facts concerning the distribution of ja/nee, including their incompatibility with (most) clausemate material, and the co-occurrence restrictions between ja/nee, the discourse particle ba, and ‘reversal doet’ (Van Craenenbroeck 2010).
References (49)
Authier, Jean-Marc. 2013. Phase-edge features and the syntax of polarity particles. Linguistic Inquiry 44: 345-89.
Barbiers, Sjef, Bennis, Hans, de Vogelaer, Gunther, Devos, Magda & van der Ham, Margreet. 2005. Syntactic Atlas of the Dutch Dialects, Vol. I: Commentary. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Cardinaletti, Anna. 1997. Subjects and clause structure. In The New Comparative Syntax, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 33-63. London: Longman.
. 2004. Towards a cartography of subject positions. In The Structure of CP and IP, Luigi Rizzi (ed.), 115-165. Oxford: OUP.
Chomsky, Noam. 1993. A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory [MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 1]. Cambridge MA: MITWPL.
Culbertson, Jennifer. 2010. Convergent evidence for categorial change in French: From subject clitic to agreement marker. Language 86: 85-132.
de Schutter, Georges & Taeldeman, Johan. 1986. Assimilatie van stem in de zuidelijke Nederlandse dialekten. In Vruchten van z’n akker: opstellen van (oud-) medewerkers en oud-studenten voor Prof. V. F. Vanacker, Magda Devos & Johan Taeldeman (eds), 91-133. Ghent: Seminaire voor Nederlands Taalkunde.
de Vogelaer, Gunther & van der Auwera, Johan. 2010. When typological rara generate rarissima: Analogical extension of verbal agreement in Dutch dialects. In: Rara & Rarissima. Collecting and Interpreting Unusual Characteristics of Human Language, Jan Wohlgemuth & Michael Cysouw (eds), 47-73. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Devos, Magda. 1986. Het persoonlijk voornaamwoord 2e pers enk in het Westvlaams. Geografie en historiek. In Vruchten van z’n akker: opstellen van (oud-) medewerkers en oud-studenten voor Prof. V. F. Vanacker, Magda Devos & Johan Taeldeman (eds), 167-189. Ghent: Seminaire voor Nederlands Taalkunde.
Farkas, Donka F. & Bruce, Kim B. 2010. On reacting to assertions and polar questions. Journal of Semantics 27: 81-118.
Gribanova, Vera. 2014. Discourse-driven head movement, VSO and ellipsis in Russian. Presentation at
NELS 45
, MIT, October 31.
Haegeman, Liliane. 1991. Subject pronouns and subject clitics in West-Flemish. The Linguistic Review 7: 333-364.
. 1996. Verb second, the split CP and null subjects in early Dutch finite clauses. GenGenP. <[URL]>
. 2002. West Flemish negation and the derivation of SOV order in West Germanic. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 25: 154-189.
Hardt, Daniel. 1993. Verb Phrase Ellipsis: Form, Meaning, and Processing. PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
Hoeksema, Jack. 2006. Hij zei van niet, maar knikte van ja: Distributie en diachronie van bijwoorden van polariteit ingeleid door van
. Tabu 35: 135-158.
Kramer, Ruth & Rawlins, Kyle. 2011. Polarity particles: An ellipsis account. In Proceedings of NELS 39, Suzi Lima, Kevin Mullin, & Brian Smith (eds). Amherst MA: GLSA.
Krifka, Manfred. 2013. Response particles as propositional anaphors. In Proceedings of SALT 23, Todd Snider (ed.), 1-18. Ithaca NY: CLC Publications.
Laka, Itziar. 1990. Negation in English: On the Nature of Functional Categories and Projections. PhD dissertation, MIT.
. 2003. Subject-auxiliary inversion in comparatives and PF output constraints. In The Interfaces: Deriving and Interpreting Omitted Structures [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 61], Kerstin Schwabe & Susanne Winkler (eds), 55-77. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Miyagawa, Shigeru. 2013. Agreements that occur mainly in the main clause. In Main Clause Phenomena: New Horizons [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 190], Lobke Aelbrecht, Liliane Haegeman & Rachel Nye (eds), 79-112. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Muysken, Pieter & van Riemsdijk, Henk. 1986. Projecting features and featuring projections. In Features and Projections, Pieter Muysken & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds), 1-30. Dordrecht: Foris.
Pollock, Jean-Yves. 1989. Verb movement, Universal Grammar, and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20: 365-424.
Progovac, Ljiljana. 1993. Negative polarity: Entailment and binding. Linguistics and Philosophy 16: 149-180.
. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of Grammar: Handbook in Generative Syntax, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
. 2006. On the form of chains: Criterial positions and ECP effects. In Wh-Movement: Moving on, Lisa Cheng & Norbert Corver (eds), 97-133. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Rizzi, Luigi & Shlonsky, Ur. 2006. Satisfying the subject criterion by a non-subject: English locative inversion and heavy NP shift. In Phases of Interpretation, Mara Frascarelli (ed.), 341-361. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
. 2007. Strategies of subject extraction. In Interfaces + Recursion = Language? Chomsky's Minimalism and the View from Syntax-Semantics, Hans-Martin Gärtner & Uli Sauerland (eds), 115-160. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Roberts, Ian. 2010. Agreement and Head Movement: Clitics, Incorporation, and Defective Goals. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Servidio, Emilio. 2014. Polarity Particles in Italian: Focus, Fragments, Tags. PhD dissertation, University of Siena.
Simon, Ellen. 2010. Phonological transfer of voicing and devoicing rules: Evidence from L1 Dutch and L2 English conversational speech. Language Sciences 32: 63–86.
Taraldsen, K. Tarald. 2001. Subject extraction, the distribution of expletives and stylistic inversion. In Subject Inversion in Romance and the Theory of Universal Grammar, Aafke Hulk & Jean-Yves Pollock (eds), 163-182. Oxford: OUP.
Van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen. 2002.
Van as a marker of dissociation: Microvariation in Dutch. In Studies in Comparative Germanic Syntax [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 53], C. Jan-Wouter Zwart & Werner Abraham (eds), 41-68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cited by (5)
Cited by five other publications
Munaro, Nicola
Davidse, Kristin, Ngum Meyuhnsi Njende & Gerard O’Grady
Karen De Clercq, Liliane Haegeman, Terje Lohndal & Christine Meklenborg
Vasilescu, Andra
2023. Yes(Rom.Da). Usages and functions in L2 proficiency examinations. Language and Dialogue 13:3 ► pp. 427 ff.
Shyu, Shu-ing & Lio̍k-san N̂g
2022. Non-veridical kaN in Taiwanese Southern Min. In New Explorations in Chinese Theoretical Syntax [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 272], ► pp. 479 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 november 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.
