起初是一个至短语

IF 1.6 1区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Javier Ormazabal, Juan Romero
{"title":"起初是一个至短语","authors":"Javier Ormazabal, Juan Romero","doi":"10.1162/ling_a_00534","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In this paper we reply to the objections raised against a connection between Double Object Constructions (DOC) and to-constructions and present new arguments showing the empirical and theoretical advantages of derivational analyses over non-derivational ones. We argue that to-constructions and DOCs share a common substructure—where the theme is higher than the goal—that construction-based analyses fail to capture, both crosslinguistically and English-internally. We also argue that variation on the lexical properties of verbs and adpositions is the right tool to account for the alternation.","PeriodicalId":48044,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Inquiry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In the Beginning Was a to-Phrase\",\"authors\":\"Javier Ormazabal, Juan Romero\",\"doi\":\"10.1162/ling_a_00534\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n In this paper we reply to the objections raised against a connection between Double Object Constructions (DOC) and to-constructions and present new arguments showing the empirical and theoretical advantages of derivational analyses over non-derivational ones. We argue that to-constructions and DOCs share a common substructure—where the theme is higher than the goal—that construction-based analyses fail to capture, both crosslinguistically and English-internally. We also argue that variation on the lexical properties of verbs and adpositions is the right tool to account for the alternation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48044,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Linguistic Inquiry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Linguistic Inquiry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00534\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistic Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00534","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在本文中,我们对反对将双宾语结构(Double Object Constructions,DOC)与 to-constructions 联系起来的观点进行了回应,并提出了新的论据,显示了派生分析相对于非派生分析在经验和理论上的优势。我们认为,to 结构和 DOC 有一个共同的子结构--主题高于目标--基于结构的分析在跨语言和英语内部都未能捕捉到这一点。我们还认为,动词和副词词性的变化是解释这种交替的正确工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
In the Beginning Was a to-Phrase
In this paper we reply to the objections raised against a connection between Double Object Constructions (DOC) and to-constructions and present new arguments showing the empirical and theoretical advantages of derivational analyses over non-derivational ones. We argue that to-constructions and DOCs share a common substructure—where the theme is higher than the goal—that construction-based analyses fail to capture, both crosslinguistically and English-internally. We also argue that variation on the lexical properties of verbs and adpositions is the right tool to account for the alternation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Linguistic Inquiry
Linguistic Inquiry Multiple-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: Linguistic Inquiry leads the field in research on current topics in linguistics. This key resource explores new theoretical developments based on the latest international scholarship, capturing the excitement of contemporary debate in full-scale articles as well as shorter contributions (Squibs and Discussion) and more extensive commentary (Remarks and Replies).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信