Volume 19, Winter 1997

Permanent URI for this collection

https://prism.ucalgary.ca/handle/1880/100050

Browse

Browsing Volume 19, Winter 1997 by Subject "Distinctive features (Linguistics)"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Calgary Working Papers in Linguistics, Volume 19, Winter 1997
    (University of Calgary, 1997-01) Pasquini, Ana; Rowsell, Lorna V; Smith, Laura Catharine
    The editors of this issue, Ana Pasquini, Loma Rowsell and Laura Catharine Smith, are pleased to present the nineteenth issue of the Calgary Working Papers in Linguistics published by the Department of Linguistics at the University of Calgary. The papers contained in this volume represent works in progress and as such should not be considered in any way final or definitive.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Double-object perception verbs and cross-clausal anaphoricity
    (University of Calgary, 1997-01) Alexandrova, Gaila
    In this paper perception verbs (PVs) in Bulgarian, Greek and Spanish are argued to allow for double-object subcategorization frames consisting of a phrasal object and a finite clausal complement. In all three languages an obligatory link of coreference is shown to project between the phrasal object and an external(ized) or internal argument of the clausal complement. As inter-object PV-coreference is obligatory and so is argument status of the participants in the relation the data reviewed support a comprehensive Theory of Control where obligatory referential dependence of an argument is compatible with Standard (as well as Null) Case. The analysis outlined here extends proposals by Suñer (1984/1984) for compatibility of Control and Nominative Case to compatibility of Control and Accusative/Dative Case. Theory-internal considerations and empirical evidence invalidate alternative approaches developed for Greek Control subjunctives which have been argued to license Null Case against a temporally deficient Infl (Varlokosta & Hornstein 1993) or against subjunctive particles heading MoodP (Terzi 1992/3). Neither traditional Case-deficiency formalized as Null Case (Chomsky & Lasnik ( 1993) and related-work) nor nonlexical status of the controllee (Siguroson 1991) can be defined in absolute terms vis a vis Control. Both lexicalization of the controlled ec and its Case specification are viewed as parametrizable, as opposed to coreferentiality which underlies Control universally and, subsuming it under Binding, is crucial for Full Interpretation. To ensure proper identification of controller and controllee it is proposed that their Interpretable φ-features are juxtaposed via Move-F(eature) in a designated Head-Head checking configuration for the licensing of [Ctrl]. [Ctrl] is thus treated as a sub label of Comp of the clausal complement of PVs, as a tribute to their special Control subcategorization properties.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Null object constructions in standard Spanish revisited*
    (University of Calgary, 1997-01) Jevenois, Marta
    Most of the literature of null objects has accounted for the categorial status of these empty constituents by resorting to categories such as PRO, pro, NP-trace or wh-trace, and most recently, null epithet (Lasnik & Stowell, 1991). These categories are shown to be insufficient to describe null objects in standard Spanish. Therefore, a new type of empty category seems to be necessary in this language to account for null non-definite bare direct object constructions. This paper also specifically examines subjunctive and indicative constructions that contain null objects in complement clauses. The difference between these two types of constructions is looked at in terms of operator-variable binding and subjacency effects. In this regard, it is shown, following a suggestion by Campos (1986), that subjunctive and infinitive costructions constitute a weak bounding node for subjacency while indicative constructions constitute a strong bounding node. I claim that subjunctive and indicative constructions are better characterized as [-Tense] by being devoid of time features whereas indicative is characterized as [+Tense]. A number of reasons and relevant data are put forward to support the conjoined analysis of subjunctive-infinitive as opposed to indicative.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The role of L1 feature geometry in the acquisition of L2 segmental phonology: acquiring /θ/ and /ð/ in English
    (University of Calgary, 1997-01) Smith, Laura Catharine
    Why do second language learners fail to acquire certain L2 phonemic contrasts even long after they have "mastered" the L2 syntax? In this paper, I seek to provide an answer to this question. Research by Brown (1993) indicates that the learner's L1 feature geometry plays a role in the acquisition of L2 segmental phonology. This hypothesis is tested by examining the inability of Japanese, German, Turkish and French (Canadian and European) learners of English to correctly perceive /θ/ and /ð/. I argue that the lack of the feature [distributed] in these languages is the source of these errors. This feature marks the contrast between /θ-ð/ and /s-z/ in English. Although feature geometry cannot predict the specific errors for each language, I argue that it can constrain the list of possible candidates which will be substituted for the interdentals. The error phones perceived share the same structure or have minimally less structure than that of the target phone. I suggest that the specific error phone is then determined at the phonetic level of the learner's L1.