Cover not available

In:Crossroads Semantics: Computation, experiment and grammar
Edited by Hilke Reckman, Lisa Lai-Shen Cheng, Maarten Hijzelendoorn and Rint Sybesma
[Not in series 210] 2017
► pp. 125–137

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

Chapter 8
Kratzer’s effect in the nominal domain

Fake indexicals in Dutch and German

 | Meertens Institute Amsterdam
Published online: 12 April 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/z.210.08pos
Abstract
Fake indexicals are 1/2 person pronouns that do not have a fixed referent but vary over a set. It has been shown that fake indexicals are subject to morphological restrictions imposed by the verbal morphology. In this paper, we show that fake indexicals in the nominal domain are subject to similar morphological restrictions. Only if the morphology is invariant under 1↔3 person permutation does the sloppy reading occur. This is studied both theoretically and empirically within the Dutch dialectological space.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Fake indexicals
  • 3. Kratzer (2009)
  • 4.Problems and extensions
  • 5.Theoretical implementation
  • 6.Application in English
  • 7.Variational semantics
  • 8.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
References (24)
References
Boskovic, Z. 2007. On the locality and motivation of Move and Agree: An even more minimal theory. Linguistic Inquiry 38. 589–644. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1993. A minimalist program for linguistic theory. In: Kenneth Hale & Samuel J. Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20, 1–52. MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coetsem, Frans van. 1988. Loan phonology and the two transfer types in language contact. Dordrecht: Foris. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Emonds, Jospeh. 1978. The verbal complex V'-V" in French. Linguistic Inquiry 29. 151–175.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
GTRP – Goeman, Taeldeman, Van Reenen-Project. Digital dialect database, accesible through [URL]. Amsterdam: Meertens Instituut.
Guéron, Jacqueline. 1985. Inalienable Possession, PRO-inclusion, and lexical chains. In J. Guéron (ed.), Grammatical representation. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heim, Irene. 1994. Puzzling reflexive pronouns in de se reports. Paper presented at Bielefeld Conference on Indexicals. University of Bielefeld.
Kratzer, Angelika. 1998. More structural analogies between pronouns and tenses. In Devon Strolovitch and Aaron Lawson (eds.), Proceedings of SALT VIII, 92–109. Ithaca: Cornell University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Making a pronoun: Fake indexicals as windows into the properties of pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 40. 187–237. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lasnik, Howard. 1999. Verbal morphology: Syntactic structures meets the minimalist program. In H. Lasnik (ed.), Minimalist Analysis, 97–119. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maier, Emar & Kees de Schepper. 2011. Fake indexicals in Dutch – A challenge for Kratzer (2009). Ms Radboud University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
May, Robert. 1985. Logical form: its structure and derivation. MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nunes, Jairo & Cynthia Zocca. 2009. Lack of morphological identity and ellipsis resolution in Brazilian Portuguese. In Jairo Nunes (ed.), Minimalist essays on Brazilian Portuguese syntax, 215–236. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Partee, Barbara. 1989. Binding implicit variables in quantified contexts. In Caroline Wiltshire, Randolph Graczyk and Bradley Music (eds), 342–65. Papers from the 25th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Part One: The General Session.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Platzack, C. & A. Holmberg. 1989. The role of AGR and finiteness in Germanic SVO language. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 43. 51–76.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pollock, Jean-Yves. 1989. Verb Movement, Universal Grammar, and the Structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20. 365–424.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Postma, Gertjan. 2006. Toward a syntactic theory of number neutralization: The Dutch pronouns je ‘you’ and ze ‘them’. In Jutta M. Hartmann and László Molnárfi (eds.), From Afrikaans to Zurich German – Comparative studies in Germanic syntax. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Clause-typing by [2] – The loss of the 2nd person pronoun du ‘you’ in Dutch, Frisian and Limburgian dialects. In Victoria Camacho-Taboada, Ángel L. Jiménez-Fernández, Javier Martín-González & Mariano Reyes-Tejedor (eds.), Information Structure and Agreement, 217–254. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya & Eric Reuland. 1993. Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry 24. 657–720.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ross, John R. 1970. On declarative sentences. In R. A. Jacobs & P. S. Rosenbaum (eds.), Readings in English transformational grammar, 222–272. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rullmann, Hotze. 2004. First and second person pronouns as bound variables. Linguistic Inquiry 35. 159–68. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schwartz, Bonnie & Rex Sprouse. 1996. L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model. Second Language Research 12. 40–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stechow, Arnim von. 2003. Feature deletion under semantic binding. In Makoto Kadowaki & Shigeto Kawahara (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 33, 377–403.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue