Artemis Alexiadou

The Subject-in-Situ Generalization and the Role of Case in Driving Computations

The article establishes a novel generalization concerning the placement of arguments by Spell-Out. It centers on the principles that force arguments to leave the VP across languages. The empirical domain consists of constructions where subject movement is not required for reasons that have to do with the Extended Projection Principle. In these environments and whenever a sentence contains both a subject and a direct object, one of the arguments must vacate the VP. We argue that argument externalization is related to Case. It is forced because movement of both arguments to a single head T0 that contains two active Case features in the covert component is banned.

Possessors, predicates and movement in the determiner phrase

1. List of Contributors 2. Introduction (by Alexiadou, Artemis) 3. On the deficient/strong Opposition in Possessive Systems (by Cardinaletti, Anna) 4. Possessors, Articles and Definiteness (by Schoorlemmer, Maaike) 5. Possession in Germanic (by Delsing, Lars-Olof) 6. Attributive Genitive Constructions in German (by Lindauer, Thomas) 7. Case Underspecification in Morphology, Syntax and the Lexicon (by Gallmann, Peter) 8. Predicate Inversion in DP (by Dikken, Marcel den) 9. Predicate Movement in Pseudopartitive Constructions (by Corver, Norbert) 10. A Theory of Kinds, Partitives and of/z Possessives (by Zamparelli, Roberto) 11. Adjectival Modification and Multiple Determiners (by Alexiadou, Artemis) 12. Fragments of Balkan Nominal Structure (by Dimitrova-Vulchanova, Mila) 13. A Note on Rigidity (by Uriagereka, Juan) 14. Subject Index

Adjective syntax and noun raising: Word order asymmetries in the DP as the result of adjective distribution

The paper investigates the triggers and the motivation for noun raising in combination with the interpretation and placement of adjectives within the DP across languages. I point out that first the nature of noun movement is empirically and conceptually problematic. Second, the post-nominal position of adjectives in languages for which it has been argued to result from noun movement is consistent with an analysis of those that capitalizes on their predicative source. Thus the cross-linguistic asymmetry concerning the relative order of nouns with respect to adjectives has its source in the syntactic configurations available in UG for adjectival modification and is not a result of syntactic head raising within the DP.

The syntactic construction of two non-active Voices: Passive and middle 1

The paper offers a theoretical characterization of the middle Voice as distinct from the passive Voice, and addresses the cross-linguistic morphological variation in realizing these two non-active Voices in different classes of languages, represented by Hebrew, Greek and English. The two non-active Voices are the morphological realization of two distinct syntactic Voice heads generating middle and passive clauses respectively. The former are cross-linguistically interpreted as (i) anticausative, (ii) reflexive (and reciprocal), (iii) dispositional middle, and (iv) medio-passive, which is distinct from passive. This variation in the interpretation of the middle Voice reflects different properties of the root rather than the application of four different lexical rules postulated by lexicalist theories.

Studies in Greek syntax

Introduction A. Alexiadou, et al. Propositional Operators Y. Agouraki. On the Properties of Some Greek Word Order Patterns A. Alexiadou. On Experiencers E. Anagnostopoulou. On Clitics, Prepositions and Case Licensing in Standard and Macedonian Greek A. Dimitriadis. Weak and Strong Polarity: Evidence from Greek A. Giannakidou. Clitic Placement and the Projection of Functional Categories M. Hegarty. On Control in Greek I. Philippaki-Warburton, G. Catsimali. Modals and the Subjunctive A. Roussou. Theta-Role Saturation in Greek Compounds A.-M. di Sciullo, A. Ralli. The Position and Serialization of APs in the DP: Evidence from Greek M. Stavrou. Cypriot Greek Clitics and Their Positioning Restrictions A. Terzi. Null Operators, Clitics and Identification: A Comparison between Greek and English I.-M. Tsimpli. Tense and Temporal Adverbials in Greek G.J. Xydopoulos. List of Contributors. Subject Index.

External arguments in transitivity alternations : a layering approach

1. Introduction 2. Event Decomposition and the causative alternation 3. Voice Morphology and the causative alternation 4. A typology of Voice 5. Adjectival passives and Voice 6. Conclusions

Studies on universal grammar and typological variation

1. Introduction (by Alexiadou, Artemis) 2. Typological Implications of a directionality constraint on projections (by Haider, Hubert) 3. Universal Grammar and the Typology of Ergative Languages (by Mahajan, Anoop K.) 4. Some Properties of Ellipsis in Coordination (by Wilder, Chris) 5. Deriving the Parametrisation of the Mapping Hypothesis (by Adger, David) 6. Syntactic Dependencies and their properties: weak islands (by Manzini, Maria Rita) 7. On Extraction, argument binding and voice morphology in Malagasy (by Law, Paul) 8. Universals and Minimalist Features (by Gelderen, Elly van) 9. Genitive Subjects and the VSO Order (by Ouhalla, Jamal) 10. Some Properties of Clitics (with special reference to Modern Greek) (by Drachman, Gaberell)

On the Properties of Some Greek Word Order Patterns

Crosslinguistic variation with respect to the syntactic positions occupied by arguments, e.g. subjects and objects, within clauses has traditionally been in the center of research within syntactic theory, and has given rise to important developments in relation to the parametrization of Universal Grammar.

Number/aspect interactions in the syntax of nominalizations: A Distributed approach 1

In this paper we focus on the ability of A rgument S upporting N ominalizations (ASNs) to realize morphological plural. We think that this aspect of their behavior is instrumental in our understanding of their properties and their syntax within one language and across languages. Our factual investigation deals with Romanian, English, German and Spanish, as well as Polish and Bulgarian ASNs. We show that the interplay between the aspectual properties – either inner or outer aspect – and the nominal/verbal characteristics, as justifying the internal structure of ASNs, allows us to characterize the ability of ASNs to accept plural marking across languages. We further argue for a flexible syntactic theory that enables us to capture the mixed properties of ASNs. We provide evidence for two parameters of variation. The first parameter is whether ASNs involve a nominalizer or not. If a nominalizer is not included, ASNs lack nominal internal properties. If a nominalizer is included, the second parameter comes into play and allows for language variation with respect to the height of attachment of the nominalizer. Specifically, a nominalizer can attach to (and thus nominalize) distinct layers of syntactic structure (VP vs. AspectP).

Perfects, Resultatives, and Auxiliaries in Earlier English

In this article, we investigate the peculiar distribution of the auxiliaries have and be in Earlier English and its consequences for theories of the perfect and auxiliary selection. We argue on the basis of a large-scale corpus study that the periphrastic construction with be was restricted to a stative resultative interpretation, whereas that with have developed a wider range of uses, crucially including the experiential perfect in addition to resultatives. Support comes from comparing the Earlier English patterns with related ones in Norwegian and German for which native-speaker judgments are available. On the basis of this insight, we propose distinct formal analyses for the two constructions and show how they account for the attested patterns and changes in Middle and Early Modern English. Of particular theoretical relevance is the premise that what has been called the perfect is not a homogeneous, monolithic category, and that certain kinds of variation can only be understood by teasing apart the pieces involved. Earlier English and German auxiliaries have distinct distributions because their perfects have disinct syntactic and semantic makeups.