The Control Relation in German

1983 ◽  
pp. 217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Werner Abraham
Keyword(s):  
Control Relation

scholarly journals Breaking the symmetry of geminates in diachrony and synchrony

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 164-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michela Russo ◽  
Shanti Ulfsbjorninn
Keyword(s):  
Consonant Cluster ◽  
Structural Units ◽  
True Nature ◽  
Internal Forces ◽  
The Asymmetry ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Control Relation

Autosegmentalism invariably represents geminates in a symmetrical one-to-many relationship — as feature bundles or root nodes attached to two structural units: x-slots, moras, or C-slots. This symmetry, however, is often not reflected in their diachronic origin. For instance, in Blevins’ (2008) Type 1 pathway, only the second C of a consonant cluster (CC) ever determines the geminate: CxCy > CyCy, *CxCx (e.g. Latin > Italian). Moreover, although most synchronic processes identify geminates as symmetrical, there is an exception: geminate integrity. Unlike CCs and long vowels (LVs), geminates never ‘break’ by epenthesis: *CyCy > CyVCy. We propose that this is central to understanding the true nature of geminates, and present analyses in two frameworks. The first is ‘control by contiguity’, which uses head-dependent ‘control chains’ (Russo 2013). A control relation applies between a specified and an unspecified position: -C. Inalterability and integrity result from the asymmetry of the geminate’s positions. The second is based on Strict CV. This restricts a geminate’s melody to one of its two skeletal positions. Unlike CC and LVs, geminates do not involve a ‘trapped’ empty V position that could host epenthesis and cause breaking; the difference between LVs and geminates follows from framework-internal forces and suggests that melodic branching always requires licensing. These two approaches share the insight that the representation of geminates is not symmetrical, like that of long vowels.

scholarly journals Semantic constraints on case assignment in secondary adjectival predicates in Russian

2001 ◽  
Vol 22 ◽  
pp. 99-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roland Hinterholzl
Keyword(s):  
Case Assignment ◽  
Semantic Constraints ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Secondary Predicates ◽  
Control Relation ◽  
Case Frames

Adjectival secondary predicates can enter into two Case frames in Russian, the agreeing form and the Instrumental. The paper argues that these Case frames go together with two syntactic positions in the clause which are correlated with two different interpretations, the true depictive and the temporally restricted reading, respectively. The availability of the two readings depends on the houndedness of the secondary predicate. Only bounded predicates can enter into both Case frames and only partially non-bounded predicates can appear in the Instrumental. The paper therefore argues that the pertinent two-way SL/IL-contrast is to he replaced by a three-way distinction in terms of boundedness. The paper outlines the syntax and semantics of the true depictive and the temporally restricted interpretation and discusses how adjectival secondary predicates whose salient properties involve a cotemporary interpretation with the matrix predicate and a control relation of an individual argument, differ from temporal adjuncts as well as from non-finite clauses.  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document