Advertisement

On the limits of variation in Continental West-Germanic verb clusters: evidence from VP-stranding, extraposition and displaced morphology for the existence of clusters with 213 order

  • Martin SalzmannEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

Recent work on verb clusters within Continental West-Germanic has argued in favor of restrictive theories of cluster orders that only generate a subset of the logically possible orders in three-verb clusters, explicitly ruling out the 213 order. In this context it is remarkable that Swiss German features a verb cluster-like construction with an unmarked 213 order. I will argue that this construction indeed represents a proper verb cluster and not an instance of the 3rd Construction, which also allows the 213 order. Based on new diagnostics, viz., stranding of VP3 under topicalization of the governing VP2, short relative clause extraposition and displaced zu, I will show that verb clusters and Verb Projection Raising differ from the 3rd Construction with respect to the structural position of the dependent VP: while the dependent VP is contained within the projection of the governing verb in the former, it occurs outside of the projection of the governing verb in the latter. Applying the diagnostics to the Swiss German 213 construction delivers a clear result: the construction patterns with verb clusters rather than the 3rd Construction. I conclude from this that theories of verb clusters and unmarked word order more generally must be able to generate all six logically possible orders, including the 213 order.

Keywords

Verb clusters Verb Projection Raising 3rd Construction West-Germanic Swiss German Displaced zu Adjunction Extraposition VP-topicalization Remnant movement Post-syntactic morphology Local dislocation Haplology Word order Variation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

References

  1. Abels, Klaus. 2013. On 2-3-1. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 25: 67–101.Google Scholar
  2. Abels, Klaus. 2016. The fundamental left–right asymmetry in the Germanic verb cluster. The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 19 (3): 179–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abels, Klaus, and Ad Neeleman. 2012. Linear asymmetries and the LCA. Syntax 15 (1): 25–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bader, Markus, and Tanja Schmid. 2009. Verb clusters in Colloquial German. The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 12 (3): 175–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bader, Thomas. 1995. Missing and misplaced z’ in Bernese Swiss German. In Topics in Swiss German syntax, ed. Zvi Penner, 19–28. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  6. Barbiers, Sjef. 2005. Word order variation in three verb clusters and the division of labor between generative linguistics and sociolinguistics. In Syntax and variation. Reconciling the biological and the social, ed. Leonie Cornips, and Karen P. Corrigan, 233–264. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barbiers, Sjef. 2008. Werkwoordclusters en de grammatica van de rechterperiferie. Nederlandse Taalkunde 13 (2): 160–188.Google Scholar
  8. Barbiers, Sjef, Hans Bennis, and Lotte Dros-Hendriks. 2018. Merging verb cluster variation. Linguistic Variation 18 (1): 144–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barbiers, Sjef, Johan van der Auwera, Hans Bennis, Eefje Boef, Gunther de Vogelaer, and Margreet van der Ham. 2008. Syntactic atlas of the Dutch dialects, vol. 2. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Barss, Andrew. 1986. Chains and anaphoric dependencies. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  11. Bayer, Josef, and Jaklin Kornfilt. 1994. Against scrambling as an instance of move-alpha. In Studies on scrambling. Movement and non-movement approaches to free word-order phenomena, ed. Norbert Corver, and Henk van Riemsdijk, 17–60. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
  12. Bayer, Josef, Tanja Schmid, and Markus Bader. 2005. Clause union and clausal position. In The function of function words and functional categories, ed. Marcel den Dikken, and Christina M. Tortora, 79–113. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bech, Gunnar. 1983. Studien über das deutsche Verbum infinitum. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
  14. Biberauer, Theresa. 2013. Germanic verb clusters again—with Afrikaans center stage. Paper presented at the Comparative Germanic Syntax Workshop 28, October 3–5, Leipzig.Google Scholar
  15. Biberauer, Theresa, Anders Holmberg, and Ian Roberts. 2014. A syntactic universal and its consequences. Linguistic Inquiry 45 (2): 169–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bobaljik, Jonathan, and Susi Wurmbrand. 2005. The domain of agreement. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 23 (4): 809–865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bölsing, Friedrich. 2011. Niederdeutsche Sprachlehre: Plattdeutsch im Kirchspiel Lindhorst, Schaumburg-Lippe. Hildesheim: Olms.Google Scholar
  18. Brandner, Ellen, Martin Salzmann, and Gerhard Schaden. 2016. Zur Syntax und Semantik des doppelten Perfekt aus alemannischer Sicht. In Syntaktische Variation - areallinguistische Perspektiven, ed. Alexandra Lenz, and Franz Patocka, 13–45. Vienna: Vienna University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Broekhuis, Hans. 1993. Verb Projection Raising. Spektator 22: 28–47.Google Scholar
  20. Broekhuis, Hans, Hans den Besten, Kees Hoekstra, and Jean Rutten. 1995. Infinitival complementation in Dutch: On remnant extraposition. The Linguistic Review 12: 93–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cinque, Guglielmo. 2005. Deriving Greenberg’s Universal 20 and its exceptions. Linguistic Inquiry 36 (3): 315–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cinque, Guglielmo. 2006. Restructuring and functional structure. In Restructuring and functional heads: The cartography of syntactic structures, vol. 4, ed. Guglielmo Cinque, 11–63. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Cooper, Kathrin E. 1995. Topics in Zurich German syntax. Groningen: Germanistisch Instituut.Google Scholar
  24. Culicover, Peter. 2013. Grammar and complexity: Language at the intersection of competence and performance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. de Vries, Mark. 2002. The syntax of relativization. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
  26. den Besten, Hans, and Hans Broekhuis. 1992. Verb projection raising in het Nederlands. Spektator 21: 21–34.Google Scholar
  27. den Dikken, Marcel. 1994. Minimalist Verb (Projection) Raising. Groninger Arbeiten zur Germanistischen Linguistik 37: 71–88.Google Scholar
  28. den Dikken, Marcel. 1995. Verb (projection) raising, scope, and uniform phrase structure. Proceedings of NELS 25: 95–110.Google Scholar
  29. den Dikken, Marcel. 1996. The minimal links of Verb (Projection) Raising. In Minimal ideas. Syntactic studies in the minimalist framework, ed. Werner Abraham, Samuel David Epstein, Hoskuldur Thrainsson, and C. Jan-Wouter Zwart, 67–96. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Dros-Hendriks, Lotte. 2018. Not another book on verb raising. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
  31. Embick, David, and Rolf Noyer. 2001. Movement operations after syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 32 (4): 555–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Evers, Arnold. 1975. The transformational cycle of Dutch and German. Doctoral dissertation, University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
  33. Fanselow, Gisbert. 2001. Features, Q-roles, and free constituent order. Linguistic Inquiry 32 (3): 405–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Geilfuß-Wolfgang, Jochen. 1991. Scrambling und Pseudoscrambling. In Verb- und Verbphrasensyntax. Arbeitspapier 11 des Sonderforschungsbereichs 340 Sprachtheoretische Grundlagen für die Computerlinguistik, ed. Jochen Geilfuss-Wolfgang, 19–57. Tübingen: University of Tübingen.Google Scholar
  35. Glaser, Elvira. in preparation. Dialektsyntax des Schweizerdeutschen. Syntaktischer Atlas der Deutschen Schweiz (SADS)Google Scholar
  36. Haeberli, Eric, and Susan Pintzuk. 2012. Revisiting Verb (Projection) Raising in Old English. In Grammatical change, ed. Dianne Jonas, John Whitman, and Andrew Garret, 219–238. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Haegeman, Liliane. 1992. Theory and description in generative syntax. A case study in West Flemish. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Haegeman, Liliane. 1998. V-positions and the middle field in West Flemish. Syntax 1 (3): 259–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Haegeman, Liliane, and Henk van Riemsdijk. 1986. Verb projection raising, scope, and the typology of rules affecting verbs. Linguistic Inquiry 17 (3): 417–466.Google Scholar
  40. Haider, Hubert. 2003. V-clustering and clause union: Causes and effects. In Verb constructions in German and Dutch, ed. Pieter Seuren, and Gerard Kempen, 91–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Haider, Hubert. 2010. The syntax of German. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Heilmann, Axel. 1999. Die VP im Schwäbischen. Doctoral dissertation, University of Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  43. Hinrichs, Erhard, and Tsuneko Nakazawa. 1994. Linearizing AUXs in German verbal complexes. In German in head-driven phrase structure grammar, ed. John Nerbonne, Klaus Netter, and Carl Pollard. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  44. Hinterhölzl, Roland. 2006. Scrambling, remnant movement, and restructuring in West Germanic. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hinterhölzl, Roland. 2009. The IPP-effect, phrasal affixes and repair strategies in the syntax-morphology interface. Linguistische Berichte 2009 (218): 191–215.Google Scholar
  46. Höhle, Tilman N. 2006. Observing non-finite verbs: Some 3v phenomena in German–Dutch. In Form, structure, and grammar, ed. Patrick Brandt, and Eric Fuß, 55–77. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
  47. Koopman, Hilda, and Anna Szabolcsi. 2000. Verbal complexes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kroch, Anthony, and Beatrice Santorini. 1991. The derived constituent structure of the West-Germanic verb-raising construction. In Principles and parameters in comparative grammar, ed. Robert Freidin, 269–338. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  49. Lötscher, Andreas. 1978. Zur Verbstellung im Zürichdeutschen und in anderen Varianten des Deutschen. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik 45: 1–29.Google Scholar
  50. Louden, Mark L. 2011. Synchrony and diachrony of verb clusters in Pennsylvania Dutch. In Studies on German-language islands, ed. Michael T. Putnam, 165–185. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Müller, Gereon. 1995. A-bar syntax: A study in movement types. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Müller, Stefan. 2002. Complex predicates: Verbal complexes, resultative constructions and particle verbs in German. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  53. Neeleman, Ad. 1990. The third construction as a classical case of head-movement. Utrecht: Utrecht University.Google Scholar
  54. Reis, Marga, and Wolfgang Sternefeld. 2004. Review article: Susanne Wurmbrand: Infinitives. Restructuring and clause structure. Linguistics: An Interdisciplinary Journal of the Language Sciences 42 (2): 469–508.Google Scholar
  55. Salzmann, Martin. 2011. Resolving the movement paradox in Verb Projection Raising. In Empirical issues in syntax and semantics 8, ed. Olivier Bonami, and Patricia Cabredo Hofherr, 453–485. Paris: CNRS.Google Scholar
  56. Salzmann, Martin. 2013. New arguments for verb cluster formation at PF and a right-branching VP. Evidence from verb doubling and cluster penetrability. Linguistic Variation 13 (1): 81–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Salzmann, Martin. 2019. Displaced morphology in German verb clusters. An argument for post-syntactic morphology. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 22(1):1–53.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10828-019-09103-y.
  58. Sapp, Christopher D. 2011. The verbal complex in subordinate clauses from medieval to modern German. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sauerland, Uli, and Paul Elbourne. 2002. Total reconstruction, PF movement, and derivational order. Linguistic Inquiry 33 (2): 283–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Schallert, Oliver. 2012. Untersuchungen zu Ersatzinfinitivkonstruktionen in den Vorarlberger und Liechtensteiner Dialekten. Doctoral dissertation, University of Marburg.Google Scholar
  61. Schallert, Oliver. 2014. Zur Syntax der Ersatzinfinitivkonstruktion: Typologie und Variation. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
  62. Schmid, Tanja. 2005. Infinitival syntax. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Schmid, Tanja, and Ralf Vogel. 2004. Dialectal variation in German 3-verb clusters: A surface-oriented optimality theoretic account. The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 7 (3): 235–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Schwalm, Johanna. 2013. Verbalsyntax in den Mundarten Hessens: eine Untersuchung anhand der SyHD-Materialien. Master’s thesis, Marburg University.Google Scholar
  65. Seiler, Guido. 2004. On three types of dialect variation and their implications for linguistic theory: Evidence from verb clusters in Swiss German dialects. In Dialectology meets typology, ed. Bernd Kortmann, 367–399. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  66. Sternefeld, Wolfgang. 2006. Syntax: eine morphologisch motivierte generative Beschreibung des Deutschen. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.Google Scholar
  67. ter Beek, Janneke. 2008. Restructuring and infinitival complements in Dutch. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
  68. Vanden Wyngaerd, Guido. 1989. Verb Projection Raising and the status of infinitival complements. In Sentential complementation and the lexicon. Studies in honour of Wim de Geest, ed. Dany Jaspers, Yvan Putseys, Wim Klooster, and Pieter Seuren, 423–438. Dordrecht: Foris. Linguistic models.Google Scholar
  69. Vogel, Ralf. 2009. Skandal im Verbkomplex. Betrachtungen zur scheinbar inkorrekten Morphologie in infiniten Verbkomplexen des Deutschen. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 28 (2): 307–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Weber, Albert. 1987. Zürichdeutsche Grammatik: ein Wegweiser zur guten Mundart. Zürich: Schweizer Spiegel Verlag.Google Scholar
  71. Wild, Katharina. 1991. Zur Satzgliedstellung in den “Fuldaer” deutschen Dialekten Südungarns. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik 58: 24–43.Google Scholar
  72. Wöllstein-Leisten, Angelika. 2001. Die Syntax der dritten Konstruktion: eine repräsentationelle Analyse zur Monosententialität von “zu”-Infinitiven im Deutschen. Tübingen: Stauffenburg-Verlag.Google Scholar
  73. Wurmbrand, Susi. 2001. Infinitives: Restructuring and clause structure. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  74. Wurmbrand, Susi. 2004a. Syntactic vs. post-syntactic movement. In Proceedings of the 2003 annual conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association, eds. Sophie Burelle and Stanca Somesfalean, 284–295. Montreal: Université du Québec à Montréal.Google Scholar
  75. Wurmbrand, Susi. 2004b. Two types of restructuring-lexical vs. functional. Lingua 114 (8): 991–1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Wurmbrand, Susi. 2004c. West Germanic verb clusters: The empirical domain. In Verb clusters: A study of Hungarian, German, and Dutch, ed. Katalin É Kiss, and Henk van Riemsdijk, 43–85. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Wurmbrand, Susi. 2007. How complex are complex predicates? Syntax 10 (3): 243–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Wurmbrand, Susi. 2017. Verb clusters, verb raising, and restructuring. In The Blackwell companion to syntax, 2nd ed, ed. Martin Everaert, and Henk van Riemsdijk. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  79. Zwart, Jan-Wouter. 1993. Dutch syntax. A minimalist approach. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Groningen.Google Scholar
  80. Zwart, Jan-Wouter. 1995. A note on verb clusters in the Stellingwerf dialect. In Linguistics in the Netherlands 1995, ed. Marcel den Dikken, and Kees Hengeveld, 215–226. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  81. Zwart, Jan-Wouter. 1996. Verb clusters in continental West Germanic dialects. In Microparametric syntax and dialect variation, ed. James R. Black, and Virginia Motapanyane, 229–258. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Zwart, Jan-Wouter. 2007. Some notes on the origin and distribution of the IPP-effect. Groninger Arbeiten zur Germanistischen Linguistik 45: 77–99.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsLeipzig UniversityLeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations