Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vpsfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T21:14:47.811Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Long Head Movement and Information Packaging in Breton

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Robin J. Schafer
Robin J. Schafer*
Affiliation:
University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article explores long head movement configurations in Breton. Its purpose is twofold. First it contributes to existing work by demonstrating that Breton long head movement is motivated by information structure. The operation of general economy principles, made sensitive to information structure, determines many of the properties of the Breton construction. Secondly, it is argued that the derivation of the Breton construction does not involve movement per se; minimality conditions on movement are not central to the derivation. Instead, the remaining properties of the construction are attributed to a semantic property of tense-aspect markers which is represented at the LF interface. This work bears on the issue of how to model the interpretive dependency between auxiliaries and main verbs and raises questions concerning the interaction between the stylistic component, information structure, and the LF interface.

Résumé

Résumé

Cet article, qui examine les configurations à mouvement de tête à distance en breton, poursuit deux buts principaux. Premièrement, il contribue aux travaux existants en démontrant que le mouvement de tête à distance du breton est motivé par la structure de l’information. L’opération de principes généraux d’économie, rendus sensibles à la structure de l’information, détermine plusieurs des propriétés de la construction en breton. Deuxièmement, il est argumenté que la dérivation de la construction en breton n’implique pas nécessairement un déplacement; les conditions de minimalité sur le mouvement ne sont pas essentielles à cette dérivation. Les autres propriétés de la construction sont plutôt attribuées à une propriété sémantique des marqueurs de temps et aspect représentée à l’interface de la Forme Logique. Cette étude porte sur la question de la représentation de la dépendance d’interprétation des auxiliaires et des verbes principaux et soulève des questions par rapport à l’interaction entre la composante stylistique, l’information de la structure et l’interface de la Forme Logique.

Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 42 , Special Issue 1-2: Topics in Celtic Syntax , June 1997 , pp. 169 - 203
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 1997

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

Ackerman, Farrell, and Webelhuth, Gert. 1995. Topicalizatíon, complex predicates and functional uncertainty in German. Ms., University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Besten, Hans den, and Webelhuth, Gert: 1987. Remnant topicalizatíon and the constituent structure of VP in the Germanic SOV languages. Paper presented at the GLOW Colloquium, Venice. [Also distributed in 1989 as Adjunction and remnant topicalizatíon in the Germanic SOV languages.]Google Scholar
Borsley, Robert, Rivero, María-Luisa, and Stephens, Janig. 1996. Long head movement in Breton. In The syntax of the Celtic languages: A comparative perspective, ed. Borsley, Robert D. and Roberts, Ian, 53–74. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Boáković, Zeljko. 1995. Participle movement and second position cliticization in Serbo-Croatian. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, New Orleans.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1993. A minimalist program for linguistic theory. In The view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, ed. Hale, Kenneth and Keyser, Samuel Jay, 1–52. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995a. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995b. The minimalist approach. Paper presented at the NELS Conference, Cambridge, Mass. [Available on video from Harvard University.]Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam, and Lasnik, Howard. 1993. Principles and parameters theory. In Syntax: An international handbook of contemporary research, ed. Jacobs, Joachim, Stechow, Armin van, Sternefeld, Wolfgang, and Vennemann, Theo. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Denez, Per. 1977. Brezhoneg buan hag aes. Adapted by Delaporte, Raymond. Cork: Cork University Press.Google Scholar
Desbordes, Yann. 1983. Petite grammaire du breton moderne. Lesneven: Mouladurioù Hor Yezh.Google Scholar
Embick, David, and Izvorski, Roumyana. 1995. Long head movement constructions in Slavic. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, New Orleans.Google Scholar
Gazdar, Gerald, Klein, Ewan, Pullum, Geoffrey, and Sag, Ivan. 1985. Generalized phrase structure grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, Jane. 1991. Extended projection. Ms., Brandeis University and Rutgers University.Google Scholar
Gros, Jules. 1984. Le trésor du Breton parlé. Troisième Partie. Brest: Emgleo Breiz.Google Scholar
Hardie, D.W.F. 1948. A handbook of Modern Breton. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.Google Scholar
Heim, Irene. 1982. The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. Doctoral dissertation, University of Mannachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd. 1993. Auxiliaries: Cognitive forces and grammaticalization. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hemon, . 1975. A historical morphology and syntax of Breton. University Press, Oxford: The Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.Google Scholar
Hendrick, Randall. 1988. Anaphora in Celtic and universal grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.Google Scholar
King, Phyllis G. 1980. Breton relativization. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
King, Tracy. 1996. Slavic clitics, long head movement, and prosodic inversion. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, San Diego.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. 1987. Sentence focus, information structure, and the thetic-categorical distinction. In Proceedings of the 13th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, ed. Aske, Jon, Beery, Natasha, Michaelis, Laura, and Filip, Hana, 366–82. Berkeley Linguistics Society, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. 1993. Information structure and sentence form. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lasnik, Howard. 1995. Case and expletives revisited: On greed and other human failings. Linguistic Inquiry 26:615–633.Google Scholar
Lema, José, and Rivero, María-Luisa. 1989. Inverted conjugations and V-second effects in Romance. Paper presented at the 19th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Lema, José, and Rivero, María-Luisa. 1992. Inverted conjugations and V-second effects in Romance. In Theoretical analyses in Romance linguistics: Selected papers from the Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages XIX, 1989, ed. Lauefer, Christiane and Morgan, Terrell A., 311–328. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Lema, José, and Rivero, María-Luisa. 1991. Types of verbal movement in Old Spanish: Modais, futures, and perfects. Probus 3:237–278.Google Scholar
Li, Yafei. 1990. X0-binding and verb incorporation. Linguistic Inquiry 21:399–426.Google Scholar
Mohanan, Tara. 1995. Wordhood and lexicality: Noun incorporation in Hindi. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 13:75–134.Google Scholar
Moore, John. 1994. Romance cliticization and relativized minimality. Linguistic Inquiry 25:335–344.Google Scholar
Ouhalla, Jamal. 1990. Sentential negation, relativized minimality and the aspectual status of auxiliaries. Linguistic Review 7:183–231.Google Scholar
Ouhalla, Jamal. 1993. Subject-extraction, negation and the anti-agreement effect. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 11:477–518.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David. 1982. Paths and categories. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Press, Ian. 1986. A grammmar of Modern Breton. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Rivero, María-Luisa. 1991. Long head movement and negation: Serbo-Croatian vs. Slovak and Czech. The Linguistic Review 8:319–351.Google Scholar
Rivero, Maria-Luisa. 1994. Clause structure and V-movement in the languages of the Balkans. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 12:63–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rivero, María-Luisa. 1995. Verb movement and economy: Last resort. In The Proceedings of the First Conference on Formal Approaches to South Slavic Lanugages. Trondheim Working Papers in Linguistics, University of Trondheim, Norway.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1990. Relativized minimality. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi, and Roberts, Ian. 1989. Complex inversion in French. Probus 1:1–30.Google Scholar
Roberts, Ian. 1994. Two types of head movement in Romance. In Verb Movement, ed. Lightfoot, David and Hornstein, Norbert, 207–242. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rosen, Sara Thomas. 1989. Argument structure and complex predicates. Doctoral dissertation, Brandeis University.Google Scholar
Schafer, Robin. 1994. Non-Finite predicate initial constructions in Breton. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
Schafer, Robin. 1995a. Negation and verb second in Breton. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 13:135–172.Google Scholar
Schafer, Robin. 1995b. What Breton reveals about the analysis of long head movement. Paper presented at the Celtic Linguistics Conference, Dublin.Google Scholar
Schafer, Robin. 1995c. Doing without a do-er: the repercussions of nonagentive subjects in the analysis of the Breton ober conjugation. Paper presented at the Kentucky Foreign Language Conference, Lexington.Google Scholar
Stephens, Janig. 1982. Word order in Breton. Doctoral dissertation, University of London.Google Scholar
Stump, Gregory. 1989. Further remarks on Breton agreement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 7:429–471.Google Scholar
Travis, Lisa. 1984. Parameters and effects of word order variation. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Trépos, Pierre. 1980. Grammaire bretonne. Rennes: Ouest-France.Google Scholar
Uhel, Fañch an. 1984. Kontadennoù arbobl. Vols. 1 and 2. La Baule: Al Liamm.Google Scholar
Vallduvi, Enric. 1990. The informational component. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Vallduvi, Enric. 1995. Structural properties of information packaging in Catalan. In Discourse Configurational Languages, ed. Kiss, Katalin É., 122–152. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wilder, Chris, and Cavar, Damir. 1994a. Word order variation, verb movement, and economy principles. Studia Linguistica 48:46–86.Google Scholar
Wilder, Chris, and Cavar, Damir. 1994b. Long head movement? Verb movement and cliticization in Croatian. Lingua 93:1–58.Google Scholar
Wojcik, Richard. 1976. Verb fronting and auxiliary do in Breton. In Papers from the Sixth Meeting of the North Eastern Linguistic Society, ed. Ford, Alan, Reighard, John, and Singh, Rajendra, 259–278. Montreal Working Papers in Linguistics, McGill University, Université de Montréal, Université du Québec à Montréal.Google Scholar