Sten Vikner

Obligatory Adjuncts and the Structure of Events

It is generally held that while arguments can be obligatory or optional, depending upon the predicates which select them, adjuncts are always optional. However, this is not strictly true. With certain passive predicates, a by-phrase, which usually is optional, appears to be obligatory, as shown in the examples in (1). (The existence of obligatory by-phrases was noted in Gross (1979, p. 864).)

Reichenbach revisited: One, two, or three temporal relations?

Abstract Reichenbach (1947:287–298) is widely recognized as the classical attempt at a symbolization of semantic values of verbal tenses.

Scandinavian object shift and optimality theory

PART I: OBJECT SHIFT 1. Introduction 2. Object Shift 3. Optimality Theory 4. An Optimality Theory Analysis of Object Shift 5. Conclusion PART II: OBJECT SHIFT IN REMNANT VP-TOPICALISATION CONSTRUCTIONS 6. Introduction 7. V -Topicalisation vs. Remnant VP-topicalisation 8. Object Shift and Remnant VP-topicalisation in Optimality Theory 9. Conclusion

An Optimality-Theoretic Analysis of Scandinavian Object Shift and Remnant VP-Topicalisation

Holmberg (1997, 1999) assumes that Holmbergs generalisation (HG) is derivational, prohibiting Object Shift (OS) across an intervening non-adverbial element at any point in the derivation. Counterexamples to this hypothesis are given in Fox & Pesetsky (2005) which show that remnant VP-topicalisations are possible in Scandinavian as long as the VP-internal order relations are maintained. Extending the empirical basis concerning remnant VP-topicalisations, we argue that HG and the restrictions on object stranding result from the same, more general condition on order preservation. Considering this condition to be violable and to interact with various constraints on movement in an Optimality-theoretic fashion, we suggest an account for various asymmetries in the interaction between remnant VP-topicalisations and both OS and other movement operations (especially subject raising) as to their order preserving characteristics and stranding abilities.

Object Shift and remnant VP-topicalisation: Danish and Swedish verb particles and 'let'-causatives

On the basis of an examination of remnant VP-topicalisation constructions, this paper argues for an order preservation analysis of Scandinavian Object Shift. Extending the empirical database, we account for the phenomena in an Optimality Theoretic framework. The paper focusses on two particular constructions in Danish and Swedish, namely particle verb constructions and causative constructions with Danish lade and Swedish l˚ ata ‘let’. It is shown how differences in the VP-internal object position give rise to mirror image sequences concerning Object Shift in connection with verb second (V ◦ -to-I ◦ -to-C ◦ movement) and with remnant VP-topicalisation.

CP-recursion in Danish: A cP/CP-analysis

Abstract Based on data from extraction, embedded V2, and complementizer stacking, this paper proposes a cP/CP-analysis of CP-recursion in Danish. Because extraction can be shown to be possible from relative clauses, wh-islands, and adverbial clauses, and given that long extraction is successive-cyclic, an extra specifier position has to be available as an escape hatch. Consequently, such extractions require a CP-recursion analysis, as has been argued for embedded V2 and for complementizer stacking. Given that CP-recursion in embedded V2 clauses does not allow extraction, whereas other types of CP-recursion do, we suggest that embedded V2 is fundamentally different, in that main clause V2 and embedded V2 involve a CP (“big CP”), whereas all other clausal projections above IP are instances of cP (“little cP”). The topmost “little” c° has an occurrence feature that enables extraction but bars spell-out of its specifier.

Object Shift and Remnant VP-Topicalisation in Optimality Theory

This chapter shows how object shift in remnant VP-topicalisation constructions can be accounted for in the optimality-theoretical analysis of object shift set out in Part I of the book. Sections 8.2–8.7 discuss various asymmetries related to object shift during remnant topicalisation: between object shift of a DO and object shift of an IO (section 8.2), between Danish and Swedish particle verb and let-constructions (sections 8.3 and 8.4), between stranding of a subject and stranding of an object (section 8.6), and between remnant topicalisation out of a main clause and remnant topicalisation out of an embedded clause (section 8.7). In addition, the excursus in section 8.5 shows that object shift is not only order preserving but also clause-bound.

An Optimality Theory Analysis of Object Shift

This chapter presents an account of the observed phenomena in terms of the interaction between violable constraints. Taking object shift to be triggered by the constraint Shift, it is shown how differences in its ranking relative to Stay and StayBranch can account for variation as to the syntactic complexity of the constituents that may undergo object shift (section 4.1) as well as variation as to the obligatoriness of object shift (section 4.2). Section 4.3 lays out how much less variation is actually predicted by the analysis than might be expected, given the free interaction of the three constraints. Section 4.4 adds a further constraint (StayBranchNoCase) in order to account for differences in object shift of arguments and object shift of adverbials in Icelandic. Section 4.5 accounts for Holmberg’s generalisation by introducing the constraint Order Preservation , which predicts object shift not only to be blocked by a verb in situ but also by other intervening VP-internal constituents. Finally, section 4.6 shows how the linear conception of Order Preservation allows an analysis of Continental West Germanic scrambling along the same lines.

V°-Topicalisation vs Remnant VP-Topicalisation

This chapter argues in favour of a remnant VP-topicalisation approach, rejecting Holmberg’s (1997, 1999) V°-topicalisation approach on empirical grounds in section 7.1. Section 7.2 presents Fox and Pesetsky’s (2003, 2005a,b) cyclic linearisation approach to object shift, which radically differs from other types of (A- and A-bar-) movement, such as wh-movement or subject raising, in that object shift may not result in a reversal of the order of elements. This fact is captured by simply positing that most movements, but crucially not object shift, have to proceed successively cyclically via the left edge of VP in their analysis. Furthermore, section 7.2 also shows Fox and Pesetsky’s approach to make incorrect predictions as to remnant VP-topicalisation in constructions with an auxiliary verb in situ.