{"title":"Changes in argument structure","authors":"Gea Dreschler","doi":"10.1075/AVT.00027.DRE","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/AVT.00027.DRE","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 English is often contrasted with German and Dutch when it comes\u0000 to the semantic roles that the subject can express (Hawkins 1986; Los\u0000 & Dreschler 2012). Specifically, English seems to have more\u0000 middles (She photographs well) and allows for unusual inanimate\u0000 subjects (The cottage sleeps four). However, it seems that the\u0000 semantics of the grammatical subject in Dutch are also changing, as witnessed by\u0000 recent examples from websites and advertisements, such as Uw\u0000 fietsenstalling verbetert and Presikhaaf\u0000 vernieuwt. Although these sentences do not have the adverb that is\u0000 typical of middles in Dutch (Broekhuis,\u0000 Corver & Vos 2015: 455ff.), they meet several other requirements\u0000 for middle formation. In this paper, I analyse examples with one such verb,\u0000 vernieuwen, and identify two different types of\u0000 intransitive uses for this predominantly transitive verb. I argue that\u0000 ambiguity, analogy and genre all play an important role in this change in\u0000 argument structure.","PeriodicalId":35138,"journal":{"name":"Linguistics in the Netherlands","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42613383","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Does reported speech influence listeners’ choice of perspective in\u0000 the interpretation of spatial prepositions?","authors":"Ariska I. Bonnema, Vera Hukker, P. Hendriks","doi":"10.1075/avt.00025.bon","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.00025.bon","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Linguistic cues can encourage adults to adopt an other-centric\u0000 rather than an egocentric perspective. This study investigated whether the\u0000 presence of direct speech compared to indirect speech influences listeners’\u0000 choice of perspective when interpreting the Dutch spatial prepositions\u0000 voor ‘in front of’ and achter ‘behind’.\u0000 Dutch adults and 10 to 12-year-old children were tested in a sentence-picture\u0000 verification task. Contrary to expectations, we found no difference between\u0000 direct and indirect speech (Study 1), nor did we find a difference between\u0000 reported and non-reported speech (Study 2). Most adult listeners adopted the\u0000 contrasting perspective of the speaker, irrespective of how the information\u0000 about the reported speech was expressed. We did find a difference between adults\u0000 and children: children adopted the other person’s perspective less often than\u0000 adults did. Overall, the results suggest that the mere presence of a reported\u0000 speaker already is a cue for taking this speaker’s perspective.","PeriodicalId":35138,"journal":{"name":"Linguistics in the Netherlands","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49341656","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}