Results found: 2

Search results

Sort By:

Limit search:

Pre-D non-possessor positions in Hungarian

100%

Farkas J., Karácsonyi K.

Linguistics Beyond and Within

2018

vol. 4

38-50

The paper investigates pre-D non-possessor positions in Hungarian. In Hungarian, non-deverbal nominal constructions containing pre-D non-possessor positions are acceptable only if they contain a demonstrative pronoun and also an adjective, and the appearance of a pre-D possessor does not impact the acceptability of the sentence. The paper also gives a brief discussion of similar constructions with pre-D non-possessors in German, mainly to shed light on the Hungarian data. Although German also allows for pre-D non-possessors, it does so under different conditions. A short topicalized element can readily appear in German sentences as a non-possessor dependent, but in this language a possessor can never appear in the same noun phrase. The paper also discusses deverbal nominal constructions with pre-D non-possessor dependents in Hungarian. In these constructions the presence of a possessor argument is indispensable. This is due to the fact that the placement of the non-possessor argument in a position preceding the possessor is legitimized by the fact that the former takes scope over the latter within the internal information structure of the matrix noun phrase. The paper also deals with the syntactic structure of said deverbal nominals.

Similarities and differences between two Hungarian particles for also: szintén and is

61%

Farkas J., Futó B., Huszics A., Kleiber J., Dóla M., Alberti G.

Linguistics Beyond and Within

2020

vol. 6

74-91

The paper provides a comparative analysis of the syntax, semantics and pragmatics of two Hungarian particles with the same logical core meaning also: is and szintén. The analysis yields important theoretical implications since it demonstrates how two particles sharing the same logical-propositional/truth-functional core meaning can expand into two different markers. In discourse, is acts as an intensional/metacognitive pragmatic marker in the sense as proposed by Aijmer et al. (2006), while szintén functions as a coherence-signaling discourse marker. The two particles share certain syntactic-semantic properties: neither of them can be followed by a topic, they both have distributive meaning, and both of them can pertain to the noun phrase that they immediately follow, as well as to ordered n-tuples of noun phrases. However, there are also syntactic and pragmasemantic differences between them. Namely, their ordered n-tuples have different word orders; is can function as a pragmatic marker while szintén cannot; szintén can appear as a separate clause, while is cannot (this is presumably related to the fact that szintén can be stressed, while is is obligatorily unstressed); and finally, szintén can have a peculiar discourse-preserving function. We explain the syntactic differences between the two particles using the partial spell-out technique of minimalist generative syntacticians (first applied to Hungarian by Surányi 2009), and the Cinque-hierarchy-based approach to Hungarian sentence- and predicate-adverbials (Surányi 2008). We account for the pragmasemantic properties of the pragmatic-marker variant of is in the formal representational dynamic theory of interpretation called ReALIS, already presented in the LingBaW series (Alberti et al. 2016, Kleiber and Alberti 2017, Viszket et al. 2019).

Refine search results

2 Linguistics Beyond and Within

2 Farkas J.

1 Alberti G.

1 Dóla M.

1 Futó B.

1 Huszics A.

1 Karácsonyi K.

1 Kleiber J.

1 2020

1 2018

Search results

Pre-D non-possessor positions in Hungarian

Similarities and differences between two Hungarian particles for also: szintén and is