Abstract
The chapter discusses the questions in our language groups that have been left unanswered in the previous chapter. In particular we focus on emotive factive predicates and on their embedded clauses. We argue that (1) language variation boils down to lexico-syntactic differences and that (2) given the right focus of our lens of analysis, the so-called problematic cases disappear. In order to do this, we propose a refining of the complementizer/subjunctive marker system in Modern Greek, which is transposable to other Balkan languages. We show how this system is compatible with the Romance complementizer system, and how it can also be transposed to Hungarian. In essence, we argue that different (non-) veridical predicates select different complementizers, which may lexicalize a smaller or bigger portion of a functional sequence (fseq), composed of presuppositional features of different sorts. We also argue that the emotive feature may be encoded either on the predicate or be part of the set of features of the complementizer. This approach accounts for the differences between languages in terms of variation in the lexicalization of the fseq.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
There are probably more features involved – we are only focusing on veridicality here.
- 2.
Baunaz uses a terminology developed independently to account for wh-extractions, and wh in-situ constructions (see Baunaz 2008, 2011, 2016; Starke 2001). She argues that wh-words receive three different interpretations corresponding to three different discursive contexts: partitive wh-words involve individuals which belong to a closed set of presupposed alternatives. Specific wh-words narrow down a presupposed context to familiar individuals, excluding alternatives. Non-presupposed wh-words without specificity or partitivity do not involve existential presupposition. Crucially wh-phrases like qui ‘who’, que ‘what’ can be syncretic.
- 3.
The reader is referred to Baunaz 2018 for further details about the analysis.
- 4.
In addition, some predicates, typically non-factive verbs, select for non-presuppositional2 complementizers: Modern Greek and Bulgarian select for oti and če here, Serbian and Croatian select for da. These complementizers, as argued above, are syncretic with the partitive complementizers.
- 5.
Note that the same applies to English that vs -ing complements to factive predicates. This is clearly brought out in the pair below:
-
(i)
Leon remembers that Georges ran around the house naked (but he may be wrong).
-
(ii)
Leon remembers Georges running around the house naked (# but he may be wrong).
-
(i)
- 6.
Clearly, in a situation where the embedded subject is coreferential with the matrix one, the claim that the presupposition is ascribed to the matrix subject seems vacuous (Pavlos can only presuppose he read the book if he regrets reading it) and hence forces to attribute the presupposition to the Speaker. But recall our discussion in Chap. 3 (Sect. 3.1.2) where we show that while the Subject may presuppose p, the latter may still be denied by the Speaker. This was designated as ‘relative veridicality’.
- 7.
Note that while we argue that the emotive feature is associated with the external argument of the predicate and is therefore located on the higher portion of the predicate’s fseq, we hypothesize that features such as ‘factive’ will merge lower in the structure, where they can be associated with the complement. The details of this will need to be developed in further research.
- 8.
Note that this implies that emotive factive and non-emotive factive predicates trigger different presuppositions. In other words, regret that embeds a proposition that is specific and uniquely presupposed by the subject, while know that embeds a proposition which has alternatives, and is therefore interpreted as partitive (see Baunaz 2015, and also Roussou 2010 for a similar view).
- 9.
Giannakidou 2009 for instance claims on the basis of MG that PNP is tense deficient. It associated with a (future-referring) tense variable. This variable must be bound by a tense operator, typically na, which provides the variable with default ‘now’ (or time of utterance) interpretation. See also Sočanac 2017 for a similar analysis of South Slavic da.
- 10.
“The idea then is that oti and the like take a propositional complement, while na and the like leave the embedded proposition open, with certain effects regarding the realization and interpretation of the embedded subject” (Roussou 2010, p. 584).
- 11.
- 12.
Note that the complementizer-like mood particles in Balkan languages are syncretic with a non-modal variant which appears in control constructions (equivalent to English and French infinitival markers to/de).
Recall from Chap. 2, fn.19, that the range of subjunctive(−like) clauses in (Slavic and non-Slavic) Balkan languages is wider than that of non-Balkan Slavic languages and Romance languages. Sočanac 2017, in particular, observes that Balkan languages show da morphology under control predicates (including aspectuals and implicatives), where non-Balkan languages (Russian and Romance) involve infinitive marking.
1.
Modern Greek (Roussou 2009, p. 1815, (8a))
2.
Arxizo na grafo.
I begin na write.1sg.
‘I begin to write.’
3.
Bulgarian (Sočanac 2017, p. 144, (160))
Ivan zapochva da kara kolata.
John begins da drive.3sg. car-the
‘John begins to drive the car.’
4.
Serbian
5.
Pochinje da vozi auto.
begin.3sg da drive.3sg. car
‘He begins to drive the car’
Since these particles appear in Control environments (and not obviation environments), and because they are syncretic with the subjunctive particle, we claim that they are the realization of Tfuturate in the fseq in (27). This is possible thanks to the Superset Principle. In other words, there is one lexical item, spelled out as na, but two realizations.
- 13.
Most modal constructions actually prefer the (inflected) infinitive form, but modal predicates proper are also possible with an embedded clause.
- 14.
- 15.
Note that the infinitive embedding version of lehetséges can only have a deontic reading, while the tensed clause embedding version is preferably epistemic (the deontic reading may be brought out with an appropriate context).
- 16.
It is indeed not uncommon to hear utterances as in (57b) in modern vernacular French. Note that this never occurs in clauses embedded under desire/future-oriented verbs.
References
Angelopoulos, N. (2019). Complementizers and Prepositions as Probes: Insights from Greek. (PhD dissertation). UCLA.
Arsenijević, B. (2020a). Situation relatives: Deriving causation, concession, counterfactuality, condition and purpose. In H. Pitsch et al. (Eds.), Advances in formal Slavic linguistics 2018. Language Science Press.
Arsenijević, B. (2020b). Referential properties of subordinate clauses in Serbo-Croatian. In T. Radeva-Bork & P. Kosta (Eds.), Current developments in Slavic linguistics. Twenty years after (pp. 341–353). Peter Lang.
Baunaz, L., de Clercq, K., Haegeman, L., & Lander, E. (2018). Exploring nanosyntax. Oxford studies in comparative syntax (p. 360). Oxford University Press.
Baunaz, L., & Lander, E. (submitted). A nanosyntactic view on mood selection in French and Balkan. In Monelle Guertin, Yoann Leveillé and Reine Pinsonneault. In Proceedings of the conference “50 years of linguistics at UQAM”.
Baunaz, L. (2015). On the various sizes of complementizers. Probus, 27(2), 193–236.
Baunaz, L. (2016). Deconstructing Complementizers in Serbo- Croatian, modern Greek and Bulgarian. In C. Hammerly & B. Prickett (Eds.), Proceedings of NELS 46 (1) (pp. 69–77). Graduate linguistics student associatio.
Baunaz, L. (2018). Decomposing complementizers : The Fseq of French, modern Greek, Serbo-Croatian and Bulgarian Complementizers. In L. Baunaz, K. De Clercq, L. Haegeman, & E. Lander (Eds.), Exploring nanosyntax (pp. 149–179). Oxford University Press.
Baunaz, L., & Lander, E. (2021a). A nanosyntactic analysis of mood selection in French and Balkan languages. In Colloquium 50 ans de linguistique à UQAM. UQAM.
Baunaz, L., & Lander, E. (2021b). Factive Islands in nanosyntax. In Proceedings of NELS52.
Baunaz, L., & Puskás, G. (2014). The selection of French mood. In M.-H. Côté & E. Mathieu (Eds.), Variation within and across romance languages: Selected papers from the 41th linguistic symposium on romance languages. John Benjamins.
Christidis, A. P. (1982). ότι/πως-που: επιλογή δεικτών συμπληρωμάτων στα νέα ελληνικά [Oti/pos – Pu: Complementizer choice in modern Greek]. Studies in Greek Linguistics, 2, 113–177.
Cinque, G. (1999). Adverbs and inflectional heads. Oxford University Press.
Giannakidou, A. (1998). Polarity sensitivity as (non)veridical dependency. John Benjamins.
Giannakidou, A. (2009). The dependency of the subjunctive revisited: Temporal semantics and polarity. Lingua, 119(12), 1883–1908.
Giannakidou, A. (2013). The subjunctive as evaluation— Nonveridicality, epistemic subjunctive, and emotive-as-expressive. Ms. University of Illinois at Chicago.
Giannakidou, A., & Mari, A. (2016a). The semantic roots of positive polarity with epistemic modal adverbs and verbs: Evidence from Greek and Italian. Ms. University of Chicago.
Giannakidou, A., & Mari, A. (2016b). Emotive predicates and the subjunctive: A flexible mood OT account based on non-veridicality. Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung, 20, 288–305.
Krapova, I. (2010). Bulgarian relative and factive clauses with an invariant complementizer. Lingua, 120, 1240–1272.
Ledgeway, A. (2015). Parallels in romance nominal and clausal microvariation. In Revue roumaine de linguistique, LX (pp. 105–127). Bucarest.
Manzini, M. R., & Savoia, L. (2003). The nature of complementizers. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa, 28, 87–110.
Rizzi, L. (2004a). Locality and left periphery. In A. Belletti (Ed.), Structures and beyond: The cartography of syntactic structures (Vol. 3, pp. 223–251). Oxford University Press.
Rizzi, L. (Ed.). (2004b). The structure of CP and IP: The cartography of syntactic structures (Vol. 2). Oxford University Press.
Rizzi, L. (2013). Syntactic cartography and the Syntacticisation of scope- discourse semantics. In A. Reboul (Ed.), Mind, values and metaphysics— Philosophical papers dedicated to Kevin mulligan (pp. 517–533). Springer.
Roussou, A. (2009). In the mood for control. Lingua, 119(12), 1811–1836.
Roussou, A. (2010). Selecting complementizers. Lingua, 120, 582–603.
Siegel, L. (2009). Mood selection in romance and Balkan. Lingua, 119, 1859–1882.
Simon, E., & Vincze, V. (2016). Universal morphology for Old Hungarian. In Proceedings of the 10th SIGHUM Workshop on Language Technology for Cultural Heritage, Social Sciences, and Humanities. Association for Computational Linguistics.
Sočanac, T. (2017). Subjunctive Complements in Slavic Languages: A Syntax- Semantics Interface Approach (Doctoral dissertation). University of Geneva.
Starke, M. (2001). Move dissolves into merge: A theory of locality (PhD dissertation). University of Geneva.
Szabolcsi, A. (2021). Obviation in Hungarian: What is its scope, and is it due to competition? Glossa: A Journal Of General Linguistics, 6(1), 57. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1421
Todorovic, N. (2012). The subjunctive and indicative Da-complements in Serbian: A syntactic-semantic approach (PhD dissertation). University of Illinois.
Tóth, E. (2008). Mood choice in complement clauses. Peter Lang.
Tóth, E. (2014). The imperative and the subjunctive proper: Two distinct grammatical moods in Hungarian. Argumentum, 10(2014), 631–644.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Baunaz, L., Puskás, G. (2022). Subjunctive and Complementizers. In: A Cross-linguistic Approach to the Syntax of Subjunctive Mood. Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, vol 101. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04540-0_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04540-0_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-04539-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-04540-0
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)