Projecting Subjects in Spanish and English

Simple item page
dc.contributor.advisorUriagereka, Juanen_US
dc.contributor.authorOrtega-Santos, Ivanen_US
dc.contributor.departmentLinguisticsen_US
dc.contributor.publisherDigital Repository at the University of Marylanden_US
dc.contributor.publisherUniversity of Maryland (College Park, Md.)en_US
dc.date.accessioned2008-06-20T05:37:28Z
dc.date.available2008-06-20T05:37:28Z
dc.date.issued2008-04-26en_US
dc.description.abstractThe focus of this dissertation is syntactic movement and its relationship to surface semantics, morphology, and licensing relations in syntax, with an emphasis on Spanish and English. Chapter 2 argues that Herburger's (2000) Neo-Davidsonian approach to the semantics of focus, as syntactically implemented by Uriagereka (2005), allows for a unified treatment of new information focus and contrastive focus (focus movement to the left periphery and in situ focus) in Spanish. The diverse positions that the focused element can take in the sentence are claimed to be determined by contextual anchoring mechanisms of Raposo and Uriagereka (1995). This entails a remnant movement approach in cases of new information focus in Spanish (Ordóñez 2000). It is suggested that these processes take place covertly in English, contra Kayne (1998). Chapter 3 and Chapter 4 focus on the relationship between syntactic movement and surface semantics by looking at the syntax of preverbal subject in Spanish and English, respectively. According to Chomsky (2001, and subsequent work) and Uriagereka (2008) a.o., movement yields (at least) scopal and discourse-related properties. Movement to Spec,TP in so-called 'flexible word order' languages, like Spanish (contra Alexiadou and Anagnostopoulou 1998, a.o.), and in so-called 'strict' word order languages, like English, provides the testing ground for this hypothesis. It is argued here that both Spanish and English show surface semantics effects correlating with movement into Spec,TP, in keeping with the idea that syntactic movement has an effect on semantics. Chapter 5 explores a number of challenges for the phase-based system dispensing with grammatically significant Spec,H relations. It is proposed here that under a mixed system adopting phases and Long Distance Agreement and, crucially, a Multiple Spell-Out system (Uriagereka 1999), conceptual arguments against Spec,H relations can be circumvented. This is shown to solve a number of problems that the phase-based framework faces.en_US
dc.format.extent595251 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1903/8182
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.subject.pqcontrolledLanguage, Linguisticsen_US
dc.subject.pqcontrolledLanguage, Linguisticsen_US
dc.subject.pquncontrolledEnglish and Spanish syntaxen_US
dc.subject.pquncontrolledsubjecthooden_US
dc.subject.pquncontrolledsyntactic movementen_US
dc.subject.pquncontrolledSpecifier-Head relationsen_US
dc.subject.pquncontrolledfocusen_US
dc.subject.pquncontrolledRomanceen_US
dc.titleProjecting Subjects in Spanish and Englishen_US
dc.typeDissertationen_US

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
umi-umd-5365.pdf
Size:
581.3 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download

Collections

UMD Theses and Dissertations
Linguistics Theses and Dissertations