Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T08:37:37.072Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The positional tendencies of sentential noun phrases in universal grammar

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Matthew Synge Dryer
Matthew Synge Dryer*
Affiliation:
University of Alberta
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This paper is concerned with sentential subjects and sentential objects, subordinate clauses which function as subject or object of their sentence. The clause that John is tall is a sentential subject in (1) and a sentential object in (2):

  1. (1) That John is tall is obvious.

  2. (2) Bill knows that John is tall.

This paper is concerned in particular with the clause positions in which such sentential subjects and objects, henceforth sentential noun phrases (or NP’s), tend to occur in different languages. In (1), the sentential subject is in clause-initial position. In (2), the sentential object is in clause-final position. More precisely, this paper is concerned with the differences between the position of sentential NP’s and the position of simple NP’s (i.e. nonsentential NP’s). For example, the position of the sentential subject in (1) is also the normal position for simple NP subjects. If we replace the sentential subject in (1) by the simple NP the conclusion, we get (3):

(3) The conclusion is obvious.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , Fall 1980 , pp. 123 - 196
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 1980

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

Allen, J. H., Allen, W. F., and Greenough, J. B., eds. (1879) Caesar’s Gallic Wars, Books 1-4. Ginn and Heath: Boston.Google Scholar
Awbery, G. M., (1976) The Syntax of Welsh: A Transformational Study of the Passive. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, U.K. Google Scholar
Bever, T. G. (1970) “The Cognitive Basis for Linguistic Structures,” in Cognition and the Development of Language, ed. Hayes, Tohn R.. John Wiley and Sons: New York, 279–362.Google Scholar
Bever, T. G., and Langendoen, D. T. (1971) “A Dynamic Model of the Evolution of Language,” Linguistic Lnquiry 2:433–63.Google Scholar
Binnick, Robert (1977) “Mongol Syntax and Yngve’s Depth Hypothesis.” Papers in Linguistics 10: 359–74.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight (1968) “Postposed Main Phrases: an English Rule for the Romance Subjunctive,” Canadian Journal of Linguistics 14: 3–30.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam (1965) Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT Press: Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam (1975) Reflections on Language. Pantheon Books: New York.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam and Lasnik, Howard (1977) “Filters and Control.” Linguistic Inquiry 8: 425–504.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H. and Clark, E. V. (1968) “Semantic Distinctions and the Memory for Complex Sentences.” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 20: 129–38.Google Scholar
Craig, Collette (1977) The Structure of Jacaltec. University of Texas Press: Austin.Google Scholar
Creider, Chet (1975) “Thematicization and Word Order.” Paper given at the 1975 Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America.Google Scholar
Emonds, Joseph (1976) A Transformational Approach to English Syntax. Academic Press: New York.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. A., Bever, T. G. and Garrett, M. F. (1974) The Psychology of Language: An Introduction to Psycholinguistics and Generative Grammar. McGraw-Hill Book Co.: New York.Google Scholar
Frazier, Lyn (1979) On Comprehending Sentences: Syntactic Parsing Strategies. Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Gardner, Faith (1971) An Analysis of Syntactic Patterns of Old English. Janua Languarum Series Practica 140. Mouton: The Hague.Google Scholar
Gough, G. B. (1965) “Grammatical Transformations and Speed of Understanding.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 4: 107–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph (1963) “Some Universals of Grammar with Particular Reference to the Order of Meaningful Elements,” in Universals of Language, ed. Greenberg, Joseph. MIT Press: Cambridge, Mass., 73–113.Google Scholar
Grosu, Alexander and Thompson, Sandra (1977) “Constraints on the Distribution of NP Clauses.” Language 53: 104–51.Google Scholar
Hakes, D. T. (1972) “Effects of Reducing Complement Constructions on Sentence Comprehension.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11: 278–86.Google Scholar
Hashimoto, Anne (1966) Embedding Structures in Mandarin. Ohio State University Dissertation.Google Scholar
Hooper, Joan and Thompson, Sandra (1973) “On the Applicability of Root Transformations.” Linguistic Inquiry 4: 465–98.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward (1976a) “Towards a Universal Definition of ‘Subject’,” in Li (1976): 303–33.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward (1976b) “Remarkable Subjects in Malagasy,” in Li (1976): 247–301.Google Scholar
Kimball, John (1973) “Seven Principles of Surface Structure Parsing in Natural Language.” Cognition 2: 15–47.Google Scholar
Kimenyi, Alexandre (1976) A Relational Grammar of Kinyarwanda. UCLA Dissertation.Google Scholar
Klaiman, M. H. (1976) “A Functional View of Some Syntactic Movement Typologies.” University of Chicago Master’s Essay.Google Scholar
Kuno, Susumo (1972) “Functional Sentence Perspective.” Linguistic Inquiry 3: 269–320.Google Scholar
Kuno, Susumo (1973a) The Structure of the Japanese Language. MIT Press: Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Kuno, Susumo (1973b) “Constraints on Internal Clauses and Sentential Subjects.” Linguistic Inquiry 4: 363–85.Google Scholar
Kuno, Susumo (1974) “The Position of Relative Clauses and Conjunctions.” Linguistic Inquiry 5: 117–36.Google Scholar
Lakoff, Robin (1968) Abstract Syntax and Latin Complementation. Research Monograph 49. MIT Press: Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald (1977) An Overview of Uto-Aztecan Grammar. Uto-Aztecan Grammar, Vol. I, edited by Langacker, Ronald. Summer Institute of Linguistics Publications in Linguistics, No. 56.Google Scholar
Lawler, John (1974) “Ample Negatives,” in Papers From the Tenth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 357–77.Google Scholar
Lehmann, W. P. (1978) Syntactic Typology. University of Texas Press: Austin.Google Scholar
Li, Charles, ed. (1976) Subject and Topic. Academic Press: New York.Google Scholar
Li, Charles and Thompson, Sandra (1975) “The Semantic Function of Word Order: A Case Study in Mandarin,” in Word Order and Word Order Change, ed. Li, Charles. University of Texas Press: Austin, 163–95.Google Scholar
Li, Charles N., Thompson, Sandra A. and Sawyer, Jesse O. (1977) “Subject and Word Order in Wappo.” International Journal of American Linguistics 43: 85–100.Google Scholar
Lindenfeld, Jacquelin (1973) Yaqui Syntax. University of California Publications in Linguistics, No. 76. University of California Press: Berkeley.Google Scholar
McMahon, L. (1963) Grammatical Analysis as Part of Understanding a Sentence. Harvard University Dissertation.Google Scholar
Miller, George A. (1956) “Human Memory and the Storage of Information.” I.R.E. Transaction on Information Theory, IT-2: 129–37.Google Scholar
Munro, Pamela (1974) Topics in Mojave Syntax. UCSD Dissertation.Google Scholar
Postal, Paul (1974) On Raising. MIT Press: Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Rood, David (1973) “Aspects of Subordination in Lakhota and Wichita,” in You Take the High Node and I’ll Take the Low Node. Chicago Linguistic Society: Chicago, 71–78.Google Scholar
Rood, David (1976) Wichita Grammar. Garland Press: New York.Google Scholar
Ross, John Robert (1973a) “Slifting,” in Formal Analysis of Natural Languages, eds. Gross, Maurice, Halle, Morris, and Schützenberger, Marcel. Mouton: The Hague, 133–69.Google Scholar
Ross, John Robert (1973b) “The Same Side Filter,” in Papers from the Ninth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago Linguistic Society: Chicago, 549–67.Google Scholar
Smiley, Elizabeth (1913) “A Study in Latin Order.” Classical Journal 8: 364–65.Google Scholar
Sohn, Ho-min (1975) Woleaian Reference Grammar. PALI Language Texts. University Press at Hawaii: Honolulu.Google Scholar
Taylor, B. C. and Prentice, K. E. (1966) Our Latin Legacy, Book I. Clark, Irwin and Co.: Toronto.Google Scholar
Tomlin, Russ and Rhodes, Rich (1979) “An Introduction to Information Distribution in Ojibwa,” in Papers from the Fifteenth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago Linguistic Society: Chicago.Google Scholar
Walker, Arthur (1918) “Some Facts of Latin Word Order.” Classical Journal 13: 644–57.Google Scholar
Weksel, W. and Bever, T. G. (1966) Harvard Cognitive Studies Progress Report.Google Scholar
Wilkins, Mother Myrtle (1940) “Word Order in Selected Sermons of the Fifth and Sixth Centuries.” Catholic University of America Patristic Studies, vol. 61.Google Scholar
Williams, Marianne Mithun (1976) A Grammar of Tuscarora. Garland Press: New York.Google Scholar
Wise, Hilary (1975) A Transformational Grammar of Spoken Arabic. Blackwell: Oxford.Google Scholar
Yngve, Victor H. (1960) “A Model and an Hypothesis for Language Structure.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 104: 444–66.Google Scholar