Discourse-related V1 declaratives in Dutch

This paper discusses two types of discourse-related V1 declaratives in Dutch. The first type involves a missing argument. In the position before the finite verb a referential 3rd person pronoun is deleted. The deletion of the pronoun is constrained by the recoverability condition, which requires that its referential features can be reconstructed from context. I will argue that only the deletion of a d(emonstrative)-pronoun is “topic drop”. Deleted topic d-pronouns are subject to the same syntactic conditions as overt topic d-pronouns. Like the overt d-pronoun, the deleted d-pronoun refers to the focus constituent of the preceding sentence. A deleted p(ersonal)-pronoun, by contrast, does not have a uniquely determined antecedent. The second type of V1 declarative is found in so-called “narrative inversion” in which all arguments are present, and no empty element needs to be postulated. Various types of narrative inversion and the kind of discourse relation they imply are discussed.

A description of bare noun phrases in Reunion Creole

This paper discusses the general distribution and interpretation of bare noun phrases (BNPs) in Reunion Creole (RC). To set the required background for this description, it also discusses the count-mass distinction and offers an insight into the determiner system since elements such as prenominal lo and postnominal -la have received rather divergent designations and analyses in the literature. Observations rely on oral data and felicity judgments. We show that RC BNPs can occupy the same positions as noun phrases (NPs) modified by a determiner and that they can be left-dislocated, clefted and topicalized. We provide evidence that, except for some specific contexts, monosyllabic BNPs are not licensed and that the form lo is mandatory to build a grammatical NP out of nouns formed by a unique light syllable.1 We also demonstrate that, in these cases, lo is actually a semantically empty element. BNPs are number-neutral; we argue that existential BNPs are pseudo-incorporated in some cases but that they always have weak reference. BNPs can receive generic and kind readings, as well as an existential and a certain definite interpretation: they are weak definites, i.e. they are semantically, never pragmatically definite (following Löbner 1985, 1998, 2011, 2015).

Three Models to Measure Information Security Compliance

This work introduces three models to measure information security compliance. These are the cardinality model, the second’s model, which is based on vector space, and the last model is based on the priority principle. Each of these models will be presented with definitions, basic operations, and examples. All three models are based on a new theory to understand information security called the Information Security Sets Theory (ISST). The ISST is based on four basic sets: external sets, local strategy sets, local standard sets, and local implementation sets. It should be noted that two sets are used to create local standard sets—local expansion and local creation. The major differences between the Zermelo Fraenkel set theory and the ISST are the elimination of using empty element and empty set. This assumption is based on “there is not empty security” measure and the is substituted to be and is defined as “minimum security (or system default security)”. The main objective of this article is to achieve new modeling system for information security compliance. The compliance measurement is defined in the first model as the cardinality between local strategy sets and the actual local implementation. The second model is looking at the security compliance as the angle between two sets, local implementation and local standard. The third model is based on the priority philosophy for local security standard.

Three Models to Measure Information Security Compliance

This work introduces three models to measure information security compliance. These are the cardinality model, the second’s model, which is based on vector space, and the last model is based on the priority principle. Each of these models will be presented with definitions, basic operations, and examples. All three models are based on a new theory to understand information security called the Information Security Sets Theory (ISST). The ISST is based on four basic sets: external sets, local strategy sets, local standard sets, and local implementation sets. It should be noted that two sets are used to create local standard sets—local expansion and local creation. The major differences between the Zermelo Fraenkel set theory and the ISST are the elimination of using empty element and empty set. This assumption is based on “there is not empty security” measure and the is substituted to be and is defined as “minimum security (or system default security)”. The main objective of this article is to achieve new modeling system for information security compliance. The compliance measurement is defined in the first model as the cardinality between local strategy sets and the actual local implementation. The second model is looking at the security compliance as the angle between two sets, local implementation and local standard. The third model is based on the priority philosophy for local security standard.

Knowledge of expletive and pronominal subjects by learners of Spanish

Abstract A number of studies investigating second language acquisition (SLA) from the perspective of Principles and Parameters Theory (P&P, CHOMSKY, 1981, 1995) have focused on the pro-drop parameter, and have argued that older second language learners are sensitive to the different, properties it purportedly covers (e.g., AL-KASEY & PÉREZ-LEROUX, 1998; LICERAS, 1989; PHINNEY, 1987; WHITE, 1986). In this paper we extend this work by investigating two of its syntactic corollaries, namely, referential pronominal subjects (ProS) and expletive pronominal subjects (ExpS). In so-called [+pro-drop] languages both may be realised as an empty element (pro). While on the surface these forms are identical, referential subject pro is different from expletive subject pro both syntactically and semantically; syntactically because referential pro co-exists with a set of overt subject pronouns (yo 'I' , tú 'you', etc), whereas there are no overt expletive pronouns; semantically because referential pro is distinguished for 3 persons, number and gender features, whereas expletive pro would appear to be a third person, singular, gender-neutral pronoun. We will examine whether older L2 learners are sensitive to these differences by using paired grammaticality judgement tests (PGJT). Results are consistent with the claim that learners have different mental representations for ProS and ExpS.

Theses

A description of 1600 French verbs shows that three types of control verbs should be distinguished in French: subject control, object control, and variable control verbs. The control properties of these verbs can be related to their syntactic or distributional characteristics. It appears that object control verbs and the different subclasses of variable control verbs are semantically coherent: each class of variable control verbs can be described as a particular type of transfer (promettre, garantir/ demander supplier/ proposer, offrir). These types of transfer are described by a highly elaborate semantic description that allows for deontically and temporally defined Source / Goal relations. This semantic approach also incorporates a description of the agentive properties necessary for a complement to qualify as a controller by the introduction of the notion of direct and indirect agentivity. Thus, we are able to explain why the subject of object control verbs cannot qualify as a controller, and how control shifts come about. On the theoretical side, this analysis shows that the GB distinction between obligatory and non obligatory control is not relevant, and that the empty element PRO is superfluous.