ADJUNCT EXTRACTION IN FACTIVE, NON-FACTIVE AND SEMI-FACTIVE CONSTRUCTIONS
Main Article Content
Abstract
Whereas previous research has shown that adjunct extraction out of non-factive clauses is allowed, the results of adjunct extraction out of factive clauses were inconsistent (De Cuba & Mitrović 2008; Sekicki 2016). The main aim of the present paper is twofold: to reexamine the acceptability of adjunct extraction out of factive clauses and to offer a possible explanation for the differences in acceptability judgments. An acceptability judgment task was distributed among 90 native speakers of Serbian. As expected, the results showed that the sentences containing non-factive verbs allow long-distance extraction of adjuncts. The results also confirmed that native speakers of Serbian consider the clauses containing an adjunct extracted out of a true factive (emotive) clause unacceptable. Semi-factive (cognitive) verbs, which lose their factivity in questions, conditionals and modal environments (Karttunen, 1971), were also included in the questionnaire. The results suggest that they are mostly considered unacceptable when the extracted adjuncts are how and why, whereas they are considered more acceptable with when and where, which is in accordance with Oshima’s Scale of Extractability (2007). The conclusion is that emotive and cognitive factive verbs behave differently, with cognitive verbs allowing extraction in some cases, which is in accordance with previous research (Djärv&Romero 2021).
Downloads
Metrics
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Arsenijević, B. (2021). Situation relatives: Deriving causation, concession, counterfactuality, condition, and purpose. In Andreas Blümel, Jovana Gajić, Ljudmila Geist, Uwe Junghanns & Hagen Pitsch (eds.), Advances in formal Slavic linguistics 2018, 1–34. Berlin: Language Science Press. doi: 10.5281 / zenodo.5483092
Baunaz, L. (2015). On the various sizes of complementizers. Probus 27(2), 193-236.
Baunaz, L. (2016). Deconstructing Complementizers in Serbo-Croatian, Modern Greek and Bulgarian. In C. Hammerly & B. Prickett (eds), Proceedings of Proceedings of North Eastern Linguistic Society 46(1), 69-77.
Baunaz, L. (2018). Decomposing Complementizers: The Fseq of French, Modern Greek, Serbo-Croatian and Bulgarian Complementizers. In L. Baunaz, K. De Clercq, L. Haegeman and E. Lander (eds), Exploring Nanosyntax. Oxford Studies in Comparative Syntax, 149-179. New York: OUP.
Baunaz, L. & E. Lander (2017). Syncretisms with nominal complementizers. Studia Linguistica 72(3), 537-570.
de Cuba, C. (2006). The Adjunction Prohibition and Extraction from Non-Factive CPs. In D. Baumer, D. Montero, & M. Scanlon (Eds.), Proceedings of the 25th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 123-131. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
de Cuba, C., & Mitrović, I. (2008). Restrictions on Wh-adjunct movement in Serbian. In F. Marušič & R. Žaucer (Eds.), Studies in Formal Slavic Linguistics, 37-54. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Djärv, K., & Romero, M. (2021). (Non-) factive (non-) islands and meaning-based approaches. In Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 31, 34-56.
Karttunen, L. (1977). Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy, 1(1), 3-44. doi:10.1007/978-94-009-9509-3_6.
Kiparsky, P., & Kiparsky, C. (1970). Fact. In M. Bierwisch & K. E. Heidolph (Eds.), Progress in Linguistics, 143-173. The Hague: Mouton.
Klein, E. (1975). Two sorts of factive predicates. Pragmatics Microfiche Vol. 1, Fiche 1, B5-C14.
Oshima, D. Y. (2007). On factive islands: pragmatic anomaly vs. pragmatic infelicity. New Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 147-161. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-69902-6_14.
Urmson, J. O. (1952). Parenthetical verbs. Mind 61(244), 480-496.
Schwarz, B., & Simonenko, A. (2018). Factive islands and meaning-driven unacceptability. Natural Language Semantics, 26(3-4), 253-279. doi:10.1007/s11050-018-9146-2.
Sekicki, M. (2014). Argument and non-argument interrogative elements in the left periphery. MA thesis. University of Novi Sad.
Szabolcsi, A., & Zwarts, F. (1993). Weak islands and an algebraic semantics for scope taking. Natural Language Semantics, 1(3), 235-284. doi:10.1007/bf00263545.