Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (5)
- Article (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (9)
Keywords
- Akkusativ (9) (remove)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (3)
- Peer-Review (2)
Publisher
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (2)
- Schwann (2)
- IDS-Verlag (1)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (1)
- Narr (1)
- University of Ostrava (1)
The relative order of dative and accusative objects in older German is less free than it is today. The reason for this could be that speakers of the direct predecessor of Old High German organized the referents according to the Thematic Hierarchy. If one applies a Case Hierarchy Nom>Acc>Dat to this, the order Nom - Dat - Acc falls out. It becomes apparent that the status of the Thematic Hierarchy is not a factor governing underlying word order, but a factor inducing scrambling. Arguments from binding theory, whose validity is discussed, indicate that the underlying order is ‘accusative before dative’
In G, E, I, and H there are constructions with accusative NPs being the external argument of an infinitival, (1) to (4). In P these accusative NPs can only co-occur with an adjectival participle, (5), a construction also occurring in E, (6). The talk compares the syntactic and semantic structure of these constructions focussing on the syntactic category of the nonfinite clause, the status of the accusative NP, the status of the infinitive, restructuring effects, and embedding predicates (including aspect).
i. As to G, E, I, and H, the infinitival clause is regarded as a TP, i.e., a small clause. Its accusative NP and infinitival predicate form a unit – [4], [12], [8]. The AcI denotes, according to [4], an eventuality, which prevents it from being negated. Its subject is case marked by the matrix predicate, either by ECM or subject-to-object raising – [9] and [10]. AcI-constructions can show clause union effects, (7). H additionally allows Dative subjects in infinitive clauses, the latter only being licensed by impersonal predicates and co-occurring with an agreeing infinitive, (8a), – [3]. In case there is no agreeing infinitive, the Dative NP is the experiencer of the matrix clause, (8b). As for Italian, it allows Nominative subject NPs in the infinitive clause, (9a, b).
ii. As to P, small clause constructions differ structurally from E, G, I and H ones – [6], [7]. P small clauses are realizable by copula constructions with verbal być ‘be’ pronominal to ‘it’, (10), or “dual” copula elements, (cooccurrence of a pronominal and a verbal element, [1]), varying with respect to selectional restrictions (part of speech or case within complement phrases, extraction possibilities, [1]). The P counterpart to the AcI-constructions is the secondary predication over an accusative object via an adjectival present participle, (5), (11) and (12). The adjectival participle construction is systematically paraphrasable via clauses introduced by jak ‘how’ (11’) and (12’). In Polish, adjectival phrases like recytującego wiersz ‘reciting’, (11), and wracającego z podróży ‘returning’, (12), clearly function as adjuncts of the accusative object go ‘him’. In our talk, we will compare this P view to languages with typical AcI-constructions, where the AcI-clause is standardly analyzed as a complement of a matrix verb.
Central complements: good arguments are self-explanatory.
Together with its central complements, verbs model basic patterns of interaction. The constellations of these complements in turn correspond to central patterns of the argument structure. Nominative and accusative complements formally occupy the first and second positions (subject and object), but they also have certain semantic preferences. The formal function of the dative is less pronounced, where it occurs (ditransitive verbs) the semantic imprint of the frame („transfer“) is very strong. This corresponds to the meaning of a core group of corresponding verbs. Other verbs that allow this pattern are used more often in other valence structures and the ditransitive use appears as a systematic way of personal extension of object‑related activities. This will be discussed with reference to the verbs zeigen and (in a different way) lehren.
Beim Lesen stolpert man über den unscheinbaren Artikel den. Muss das nicht dem heißen? Richtig. Die lokale Angabe am Stadioneingang und die temporale Angabe am Sonntag stehen im Dativ, wie sich eindeutig an dem definiten Artikel dem erkennen lässt, der hier mit der Präposition an zu am verschmolzen ist. Und der Artikel, der nach dem Komma folgt und den ‚lockere‘ oder
‚lose Apposition‘ genannten Nachtrag einleitet, bezieht sich ebenfalls auf Stadioneingang bzw. Sonntag und sollte mit diesem Bezugsnomen kongruieren, das heißt ebenfalls im Dativ – und nicht wie in den Beispielen in im Akkusativ – stehen.