Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T07:42:22.028Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Danish non-specific free relatives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 May 2014

Anne Bjerre
Anne Bjerre*
Affiliation:
Department of Design and Communication, University of Southern Denmark, Engstien 1, DK-6000, Kolding, Denmark. bjerre@sdu.dk
Get access

Abstract

Within the Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG) community, one part of the Base Hypothesis concerning free relatives proposed by Bresnan & Grimshaw (1978) has gained wide support, namely that free relatives are headed by the wh-phrase. The second part of the hypothesis is that the wh-phrase is base-generated, and this has not gained support. In this paper, we will consider a subset of free relative constructions, i.e. non-specific free relatives, and provide support for this second part, restated in HPSG terms as a claim that there is no filler–gap relation between a free relative pronoun filler and a gap in the sister clause of the free relative pronoun.

Keywords

DanishHPSGfree relativessyntax
Type
Research Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 37 , Issue 1 , May 2014 , pp. 5 - 27
Copyright
Copyright © Nordic Association of Linguistics 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bjerre, Anne. 2011a. Extraction from relative and embedded interrogative clauses in Danish. In Pedersen, Bolette Sandford, Nĕspore, Gunta & Skadiṇa, Inguna (eds.), 18th Nordic Conference of Computational Linguistics NODALIDA 2011, Riga, Latvia (NEALT Proceedings Series), vol. 11, 42–49. Northern European Association for Language Technology.Google Scholar
Bjerre, Anne. 2011b. Topic and focus in local subject extractions in Danish. In Müller, Stefan (ed.), 18th International Conference on Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Department of Linguistics, University of Washington, 270–288. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Bjerre, Anne. 2012. An analysis of Danish free relatives. In Müller, Stefan (ed.), 19th International Conference on Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Chungnam National University Daejeon, 45–63. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Bjerre, Anne. 2013. The locality of expletive der in Danish embedded interrogative and relative clauses. Reports and Studies in Education, Humanities and Theology 5, 23–36. [University of Eastern Finland]Google Scholar
Borsley, Robert D. 2008. On some Welsh unbounded dependency constructions. Essex Research Reports in Linguistics 57 (4), 1–21.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan & Grimshaw, Jane. 1978. The syntax of free relatives in English. Linguistic Inquiry 9 (3), 331–391.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1973. Conditions on transformations. In Anderson, Stephen R. & Kiparsky, Paul (eds.), Festschrift for Morris Halle, 232–286. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Diderichsen, Paul. 1957. Elementær dansk grammatik [Elementary Danish grammar], 2nd edn.Copenhagen: Gyldendal.Google Scholar
Ginzburg, Jonathan & Sag, Ivan A.. 2000. Interrogative Investigations: The Form, Meaning and Use of English Interrogatives. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Gross, Anneke & van Riemsdijk, Henk C.. 1981. Matching effects in free relatives: A parameter of core grammar. In Belletti, Adriana, Brandi, Luciana & Rizzi, Luigi (eds.), Theory of Markedness in Generative Grammar (1979 GLOW Conference), 171–216. Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa.Google Scholar
Hansen, Aage. 1967. Moderne dansk [Modern Danish], vol. 2. Gjerlev: Grafisk Forlag.Google Scholar
Hansen, Erik & Lars, Heltoft. 2011. Grammatik over det danske sprog, vol. 3. Copenhagen: Det Danske Sprog- og Litteraturselskab.Google Scholar
Iatridou, Sabine & Varlokosta, Spyridoula. 1996. A crosslinguistic perspective on pseudoclefts. In Kusumoto, Kiyomi (ed.), Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society 26 (NELS 26), 117–131. Amherst: GLSA.Google Scholar
Kim, Jong-Bok. 2001. Constructional constraints in English free relative constructions. Language and Information 5 (1), 35–53.Google Scholar
Kim, Jong-Bok & Wechsler, Stephen (eds.). 2003. 9th International Conference on Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Kyung Hee University, Seoul. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Kubota, Yusuke. 2003. Yet another HPSG-analysis for free relative clauses in German. In Kim & Wechsler (eds.), 147–167.Google Scholar
Larson, Richard. 1987. ‘Missing prepositions’ and the analysis of English free relative clauses. Linguistic Inquiry 18, 239–266.Google Scholar
Mikkelsen, Kr. 1911. Dansk ordføjningslære [Danish syntax]. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag.Google Scholar
Müller, Stefan. 1999. An HPSG-analysis for free relative clauses in German. Grammars 2 (1), 53–105.Google Scholar
Sag, Ivan A. 1997. English relative clause constructions. Journal of Linguistics 33 (3), 431–484.Google Scholar
Taghvaipour, Mehran. 2005. Persian free relatives. In Müller, Stefan (ed.), 12th International Conference on Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Department of Informatics, University of Lisbon, 364–374. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Tredinnick, Victoria. 1994. On the distribution and interpretation of the suffix -ever in English free relatives. In Eckardt, Regine & van Geenhoven, Veerle (eds.), CONSOLE II, Tübingen, 253–268. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.Google Scholar
Wright, Abby & Kathol, Andreas. 2003. When a head is not a head: A constructional approach to exocentricity in English. In Kim & Wechsler (eds.), 373–389.Google Scholar