Advertisement

Verb Second and Illocutionary Force

  • Stephen Wechsler
Part of the Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory book series (SNLT, volume 25)

Abstract

Among the most important syntactic feaures of a clause are the illocutionary force indicators, those features which indicate whether the proposition expressed by a clause is to be taken as the content of a question, assertion, or some other illocutionary act (Searle 1969, 30ff). In this paper we analyze the verb second (V2) constraint in Germanic, with an emphasis on Swedish, as a manifestation of the Germanic illocutionary force indicators. First we review the syntax of V2 (Section 1.1) and then the semantic constraints on V2 clauses (Sections 1.2, 1.3), leading to an account of the ‘trigger’ for verb movement in Germanic in terms of a theory of illocutionary force indicators (Section 2). In Section 2.2 we give independent evidence for our account from a constraint on extraction. A consequence of the present account is that certain features of cross-linguistic variation are best explained by parameterizing the phrase structure rules and holding the illocutionary rules constant.

Keywords

Phrase Structure Embed Clause Main Clause Subordinate Clause Semantic Constraint 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andersson, Lars-Gunnar: 1975, Form and Function of Subordinate Clauses, Monographs in Linguistics 1, Dept. of Linguistics, U. of Gothenburg.Google Scholar
  2. den Besten, Hans: 1983, ‘On the interaction of root transformations and lexical deletive rules’, in W. Abraham (ed.), On the Formal Syntax of the Westgermania, John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam, pp. 47–138.Google Scholar
  3. Clahsen, Hans and Smolka, Klaus-Dirk: 1986, ‘Psycholinguistic evidence and the description of V2 phenomena in German’, in Haider and Prinzhorn (1986), pp. 137–168.Google Scholar
  4. Chomsky, Noam: 1981, Lectures on Government and Binding, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  5. Chomsky, Noam: 1986, Barriers, MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  6. Emonds, Joseph: 1976, A Transformational Approach to English Syntax, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Gazdar, Gerald; Klein, Ewan; Pullum, Geoffrey, and Sag, Ivan: 1985. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar, Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.Google Scholar
  8. Haider, Hubert: 1986, ‘V-second in German’, in Haider and Prinzhorn (1986), pp. 49–75.Google Scholar
  9. Haider, Huber and Prinzhorn, Martin: 1986, Verb Second Phenomena in Germanic Languages, Foris, Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Holmberg, Anders: 1986, Word Order and Syntactic Features in the Scandinavian Languages and English, Department of General Linguistics, U. of Stockholm, Stockholm, Sweden.Google Scholar
  11. Hooper, Joan: 1975, ‘On assertive predicates’, in J. Kimball (ed.), Syntax and Semantics 4. Academic Press, New York, pp. 91–124.Google Scholar
  12. Hooper, Joan and Thompson, Sandra: 1973, ‘On the applicability of root transformations’, Linguistic Inquiry 4(4), 465–497.Google Scholar
  13. Horn, Laurence: 1986, ‘Presupposition, theme and variation’, Chicago Linguistic Society 22, 168–192.Google Scholar
  14. Kayne, Richard: 1982, ‘Predicates and arguments, verbs and nouns’, Abstract of GLOW colloquium talk, Paris, GLOW Newsletter 8.Google Scholar
  15. Kiparsky, Paul and Kiparsky, Carol: 1971, ‘Fact’, in M. Bierwisch and K. Heidolph (eds.), Progress in Linguistics, Mouton, The Hague.Google Scholar
  16. Koster, Jan: 1975,‘Dutch as an SOV language’, Linguistic Analysis 1, 11–136.Google Scholar
  17. Maling, Joan and Zaenen, Annie: 1982, ‘A phrase structure account of Scandinavian extraction phenomena’, in P. Jacobson and G. Pullum (eds.), The Nature of Syntactic Representation, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 229–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. van der Meer, Geart: 1988a, ‘Reported speech and the position of the finite verb (some facts from West Frisian)’, Leuvense Bijdragen 77’, 301–325.Google Scholar
  19. Platzack, Christer: 1983, ‘Germanic word order and the Comp/INFL parameter’, Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 2, Dept. of Linguistics, Trondheim.Google Scholar
  20. Searle, John: 1969, Speech Acts, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  21. Teleman, Ulf: 1967, ‘Bisatser i Talad Svenska’, in G. Holm (ed.), Svenskt Talspråk, Almqvist and Wiksell, Stockholm, Sweden.Google Scholar
  22. Thráinsson, Höskuldur: 1986, ‘V1, V2, V3 in Icelandic’, in H. Haider and M. Prinzhorn (1986), pp. 169–194.Google Scholar
  23. Wechsler, Stephen: 1990, ‘Verb Second and Illocutionary Force in Swedish’, in E. Engdahl, M. Reape, M. Mellor, and R. Cooper (eds.), Edinburgh Working Papers in Cognitive Science, Vol. 6, pp. 229–244.Google Scholar
  24. Weerman, Fred: 1989, The V2 Conspiracy, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephen Wechsler

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations