Spelling out of scope taking arguments in (de-)verbal constructions in Hungarian
The paper systematically investigates operators in post-head positions within the three constructions referring to states of affairs in Hungarian, that is, within verbal, deverbal nominal and infinitival phrases. Hungarian is well-known to be a language in which all types of operator can be, and ar...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin
2022-12-01
|
| Series: | LingBaW |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://czasopisma.kul.pl/index.php/LingBaW/article/view/14957 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832592730870513664 |
|---|---|
| author | Judit Farkas Gábor Alberti |
| author_facet | Judit Farkas Gábor Alberti |
| author_sort | Judit Farkas |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
The paper systematically investigates operators in post-head positions within the three constructions referring to states of affairs in Hungarian, that is, within verbal, deverbal nominal and infinitival phrases. Hungarian is well-known to be a language in which all types of operator can be, and are usually, spelt out in the pre-head zone. However, it has not been discussed in a systematic and comprehensive way earlier whether operators can appear in post-head positions. The paper points out that this is partially possible via a systematic overview of six basic operator types. It also illustrates that while spelling out operators in the pre-head zone results in unambiguous constructions, placing them in post-head positions yields different types of ambiguity. As for the acceptability of scope taking arguments, finite verbal constructions show a black-and-white picture while infinitival and deverbal nominal constructions can be characterized by gray zones in respect of the readiness of arguments to take scope from post-head position. In these “gray zones”, a somewhat speaker-dependent variation can be observed, presumably with underlying microvariation. To represent and interpret our findings, we use Grohmann’s (2000, 2003) phase-theoretic approach with its pragmasemantics-based three Spell-Out domains per cycle.
|
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-919d7f52f226400287dd663996ff820d |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2450-5188 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2022-12-01 |
| publisher | The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin |
| record_format | Article |
| series | LingBaW |
| spelling | doaj-art-919d7f52f226400287dd663996ff820d2025-01-21T05:13:45ZengThe John Paul II Catholic University of LublinLingBaW2450-51882022-12-01810.31743/lingbaw.14957Spelling out of scope taking arguments in (de-)verbal constructions in HungarianJudit Farkas0Gábor Alberti1University of PécsUniversity of Pécs The paper systematically investigates operators in post-head positions within the three constructions referring to states of affairs in Hungarian, that is, within verbal, deverbal nominal and infinitival phrases. Hungarian is well-known to be a language in which all types of operator can be, and are usually, spelt out in the pre-head zone. However, it has not been discussed in a systematic and comprehensive way earlier whether operators can appear in post-head positions. The paper points out that this is partially possible via a systematic overview of six basic operator types. It also illustrates that while spelling out operators in the pre-head zone results in unambiguous constructions, placing them in post-head positions yields different types of ambiguity. As for the acceptability of scope taking arguments, finite verbal constructions show a black-and-white picture while infinitival and deverbal nominal constructions can be characterized by gray zones in respect of the readiness of arguments to take scope from post-head position. In these “gray zones”, a somewhat speaker-dependent variation can be observed, presumably with underlying microvariation. To represent and interpret our findings, we use Grohmann’s (2000, 2003) phase-theoretic approach with its pragmasemantics-based three Spell-Out domains per cycle. https://czasopisma.kul.pl/index.php/LingBaW/article/view/14957(de-)verbal phrasesHungarianoperatorsSpell-Out positions |
| spellingShingle | Judit Farkas Gábor Alberti Spelling out of scope taking arguments in (de-)verbal constructions in Hungarian LingBaW (de-)verbal phrases Hungarian operators Spell-Out positions |
| title | Spelling out of scope taking arguments in (de-)verbal constructions in Hungarian |
| title_full | Spelling out of scope taking arguments in (de-)verbal constructions in Hungarian |
| title_fullStr | Spelling out of scope taking arguments in (de-)verbal constructions in Hungarian |
| title_full_unstemmed | Spelling out of scope taking arguments in (de-)verbal constructions in Hungarian |
| title_short | Spelling out of scope taking arguments in (de-)verbal constructions in Hungarian |
| title_sort | spelling out of scope taking arguments in de verbal constructions in hungarian |
| topic | (de-)verbal phrases Hungarian operators Spell-Out positions |
| url | https://czasopisma.kul.pl/index.php/LingBaW/article/view/14957 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT juditfarkas spellingoutofscopetakingargumentsindeverbalconstructionsinhungarian AT gaboralberti spellingoutofscopetakingargumentsindeverbalconstructionsinhungarian |