Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T22:50:21.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Verbal Complex Phenomena in West Central German: Empirical Domain and Multi-Causal Account

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2010

Shannon A. Dubenion-Smith
Shannon A. Dubenion-Smith*
Affiliation:
Western Washington University
*
Department of Modern and Classical Languages, Western Washington University, 516 High St. HU 243A, Bellingham, WA 98225, [[email protected]]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper is a synchronic investigation of verbal complex phenomena in the West Central German dialects. The types of verbal complexes attested in 187 recordings of West Central German from the Zwirner Corpus are first classified and analyzed. A GoldVarb analysis reveals that in subordinate clause two-verb complexes, the factor groups syntagm and verbal prefix type have statistically significant effects on word order, while in main clause two-verb complexes the factor groups syntagm, verbal prefix type, and a grammatical correlate to focus have statistically significant effects. Taking as a point of departure Lötscher 1978 and Sapp 2007, a multi-causal account of verbal complex pheno-mena involving grammatical, functional, and performance factors is developed, with a close examination of the role of language processing in verbal complex formation. Following Hawkins' (1994, 2004) notions of Early Immediate Constituents and Minimize Domains, it is argued that the type of verbal complex known as Verb Projection Raising can be linked in part to an advantage in language production. The paper concludes with a discussion of the speaker-hearer dichotomy as it relates to German clausal structure and the role of interfaces in the analysis of verbal complexes.*

Type
ARTICLES
Information
Journal of Germanic Linguistics , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , June 2010 , pp. 99 - 191
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Germanic Linguistics 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Geerts, Guido, Haeseryn, Walter, de Rooij, Jaap, & van den Toorn, Maarten C. (eds). 1984. Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.Google Scholar
Altmann, Hans. 1981. Formen der “Herausstellung” im Deutschen: Rechtsversetzung, Linksversetzung, Freies Thema und verwandte Konstruktionen. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aoshima, Sachiko, Phillips, Colin, & Weinberg, Amy. 2003. Theoretical implications of the parsing of Japanese wh-scrambling constructions. Proceedings of the 22nd West Coast conference on formal linguistics, ed. by Garding, Gina & Tsujimura, Mimu, 29–42. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Auer, Peter. 1991. Vom Ende deutscher Sätze. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik 19. 139–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bach, Emmon, Brown, Colin, & Marslen-Wilson, William. 1986. Crossed and nested dependencies in German and Dutch: A psycholinguistic study. Language and Cognitive Processes 1. 249–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bader, Markus, & Lasser, Inge. 1994. German verb-final clauses and sentence processing: Evidence for immediate attachment. Perspectives on sentence processing, ed. by Clifton, Charles, Frazier, Lyn, & Rayner, Keith, 225–242. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Beckers, Hartmut. 1980. Westmitteldeutsch. Lexikon der germanistischen Linguistik, vol. 3, ed. by Peter Althaus, Hans, Henne, Helmut, & Ernst Wiegand, Herbert, 468–474. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Behaghel, Otto. 1891. Geschichte der deutschen Sprache. Grundriß der germanischen Philologie, vol. 1, ed. by Paul, Hermann, 526–633. Strasbourg.Google Scholar
Bernhardi, Karl. 1844. Sprachkarte von Deutschland. Kassel: J. J. Bohné.Google Scholar
Besten, Hans den, & Edmondson, Jerold A.. 1983. The verbal complex in Continental West Germanic. On the formal syntax of the Westgermanic, ed. by Abraham, Werner, 155–216. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bies, Ann. 1996. Syntax and discourse factors in Early New High German: Evidence for verb-final word order. Philadelphia, PA: UPenn MA Thesis.Google Scholar
Bornkessel, Ina, Schlesewsky, Matthias, & Friederici, Angela. 2003. Eliciting thematic reanalysis effects: The role of syntax-independent information during parsing. Language and Cognitive Processes 18. 268–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bremer, Otto. 1892. Deutsche Mundarten. Brockhaus' Konversationslexikon. 14th edn., vol. 5, 27–35. Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dikken, Marcel den, & Hoekstra, Eric. 1997. Parasitic participles. Linguistics 35. 1057–1089.Google Scholar
Dubenion-Smith, Shannon A. 2008. Verbal complex phenomena in the West Central German dialects. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin–Madison dissertation.Google Scholar
Duden–Grammatik der deutschen Gegenwartsprache. Der Duden in zwölf Bänden. 2005. 7th edn., vol. 4. Mannheim: Bibliographisches Institut.Google Scholar
Ebert, Robert Peter. 1981. Social and stylistic variation in the order of auxiliary and non-finite verb in dependent clauses in Early New High German. Beiträge zur Geschichte der Deutschen Sprache und Literatur 103. 204–237.Google Scholar
Ebert, Robert Peter. 1992. Word order change in the usage of adolescents and young adults in 16th-century Nuremberg: The position of auxiliary and verb in dependent clauses. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Manuscript.Google Scholar
Engel, Ulrich. 1994. Syntax der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.Google Scholar
Evers, Arnold. 1975. The transformational cycle of Dutch and German. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Utrecht University dissertation.Google Scholar
Ferreira, Victor, & Dell, Gary. 2000. The effect of ambiguity and lexical availability on syntactic and lexical production. Cognitive Psychology 40. 296–340.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frey, Werner, & Pittner, Karin. 1998. Zur Positionierung der Adverbiale im deutschen Mittelfeld. Linguistische Berichte 176. 489–534.Google Scholar
Gaumann, Ulrike. 1983. Weil die machen jetzt bald zu: Angabe- und Junktivsatz in der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Göppingen: Kümmerle.Google Scholar
Günther, Susanne. 1993. …weil–man kann es ja wissenschaftlich untersuchen–Diskurspragmatische Aspekte der Wortstellung in WEIL-Sätzen. Linguistische Berichte 143. 37–59.Google Scholar
Haas, Walter, & Wagener, Peter (eds.). 1992. Gesamtkatalog der Tonaufnahmen des Deutschen Spracharchivs. (Phonai, 38/39) Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 1992. Theory and description in generative syntax: A case study in West Flemish. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 1995. IPP constructions and V-movement in West Flemish. Geneva Generative Papers, vol. 3.1, ed. by Starke, Michal, Haeberli, Eric, & Laenzlinger, Christopher, 50–76. Geneva: Department of Linguistics, University of Geneva.Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 1998a. V-positions and the middle field in West Flemish. Syntax 1. 259–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 1998b. Verb movement in embedded clauses in West Flemish. Linguistic Inquiry 29. 631–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane, & van Riemsdijk, Henk. 1986. Verb projection raising, scope, and the typology of rules affecting verbs. Linguistic Inquiry 17. 417–466.Google Scholar
Haider, Hubert. 2003. V-clustering and clause unions. Verb constructions in German and Dutch, ed. by Seuren, Pieter & Kempen, Gerard, 90–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Haider, Hubert, & Rosengren, Inger. 2003. Scrambing: Nontriggered chain formation in OV languages. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 15. 203–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2002. On understanding word order asymmetries. Theoretical Linguistics 28. 159–170.Google Scholar
Hawkins, John. 1990. A parsing theory of word order universals. Linguistic Inquiry 21. 223–261.Google Scholar
Hawkins, John. 1994. A performance theory of order and constituency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, John. 1998. Some issues in a performance theory of word order. Constituent order in the languages of Europe, ed. by Anna Siewierska, 729–781. Berlin: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, John. 2001. Why are categories adjacent? Journal of Linguistics 37. 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, John. 2002. Issues at the performance-grammar interface: Some comments on the commentaries. Theoretical Linguistics 28. 211–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, John. 2003. Efficiency and complexity in grammars: Three general principles. The nature of explanation in linguistic theory, ed. by Moore, John & Polinsky, Maria, 121–152. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Hawkins, John. 2004. Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heilmann, Axel. 1999. Die VP im Schwäbischen. Stuttgart: University of Stuttgart dissertation.Google Scholar
Hinrichs, Erhard, & Nakezawa, Tsuneko. 1994. Linearizing finite AUX in German verbal complexes. German in head-driven phrase structure grammar, ed. by Nerbonne, John, Netter, Klaus, & Pollard, Carl, 11–38. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Hodler, Werner. 1969. Berndeutsche Syntax. Berne: Francke.Google Scholar
Kamide, Yuki, & Mitchell, Don C.. 1999. Incremental pre-head attachment in Japanese parsing. Language and Cognitive Process 14. 631–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaufmann, Göz. 2007. The verb cluster in Mennonite Low German: A new approach to an old topic. Linguistische Berichte 210. 147–207.Google Scholar
Kirby, Simon. 1999. Function, selection, and innateness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koh, Sungryong. 1997. The resolution of the dative NP ambiguity in Korean. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 26. 265–273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koopman, Hilda, & Szabolcsi, Anna. 2000. Verbal complexes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Louden, Mark L. 2000. Pragmatics of verb-second in German. Talk given at the Germanic Linguistics Annual Conference (GLAC–6), University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee.Google Scholar
Louden, Mark L. 2007. Synchronic and diachronic aspects of verb clusters in Pennsylvania Dutch. Talk given at the Germanic Linguistics Annual Conference (GLAC–13), Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
Louden, Mark L. Forthcoming. Synchrony and diachrony of verb clusters in Pennsylvania Dutch. German language islands: Generative and structural perspectives, ed. by Putnam, Michael T.. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Lötscher, Andreas. 1978. Zur Verbstellung im Zürichdeutschen und in anderen Varianten des Deutschen. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik 45. 1–29.Google Scholar
Martin, Bernhard. 1959. Die deutschen Mundarten mit 21 Karten im Text. 2nd revised edn. Marburg: Elwert.Google Scholar
Mitzka, Walter. 1943. Deutsche Mundarten. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Moore, John, & Polinsky, Maria. 2003. Explanations in linguistics. The nature of explanation in linguistic theory, ed. by Moore, John & Polinsky, Maria, 1–30. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Niebaum, Hermann, & Macha, Jürgen. 2005. Einführung in die Dialektologie des Deutschen. 2nd edn. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Nübling, Damaris. 2006. Syntaktischer Wandel. Historische Sprachwissenschaft des Deutschen: Eine Einführung in die Prinzipien des Sprachwandels, 90–105. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Paolillo, John C. 2002. Analyzing linguistic variation: Statistical models and methods. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Patocka, Franz. 1997. Satzgliedstellung in den bairischen Dialekten Österreichs. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Polinsky, Maria. 2002. Efficiency preferences: Refinements, rankings, and unresolved questions. Theoretical Linguistics 28. 177–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pritchett, Bradley. 1991. Head position and parsing ambiguity. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 20. 251–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robbers, Karin. 1997. Non-finite verbal complements in Afrikaans: A comparative approach. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam dissertation.Google Scholar
Robinson, John, Lawrence, Helen, & Tagliamonte, Sali. 2001. GoldVarb 2001: A multivariate analysis application for Windows. Available at http://courses.essex.ac.uk/lg/lg654/GoldVarb2001forPCmanual.htm. Accessed June 20, 2008.Google Scholar
Ronneberger-Sibold, Elke. 1980. Sprachverwendung–Sprachsystem: Ökonomie und Wandel. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ronneberger-Sibold, Elke. 1991. Funktionale Betrachtungen zu Diskontinuität und Klammerbildung im Deutschen. Sprachwandel und seine Prinzipien: Beiträge zum 8. Bochum-Essener Kolloquium über “Sprachwandel und seine Prinzipien” vom 19.10–21.10.1990 an der Ruhruniversität Bochum, ed. by Boretzky, Norbert, Enninger, Werner, Jeßling, Benedikt, & Stolz, Thomas, 206–236. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Ronneberger-Sibold, Elke. 1994. Konservative Nominalflexion und “klammerndes Verfahren” im Deutschen. Funktionale Untersuchungen zur deutschen Nominal- und Verbalmorphologie, ed. by Köpcke, Klaus-Michael, 115–130. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SADS–Syntaktischer Atlas der deutschen Schweiz. Research project at the University of Zurich, Department of German (project director: Elvira Glaser). Swiss National Science Foundation 1114-57121.99.Google Scholar
SAND–Syntactische Atlas van de Nederlandse Dialecten. 2009. Vol. 2. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Sapp, Christopher. 2006. Verb order in subordinate clauses: From Early New High German to modern German. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University doctoral dissertation.Google Scholar
Sapp, Christopher. 2007. Focus and verb order in Early New High German: Historical and contemporary evidence. Roots: Linguistics in search of its evidential base, ed. by Featherston, Sam & Sternefeld, Wolfgang, 299–318. Berlin: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlesewsky, Matthias, Fanselow, Gisbert, & Frisch, Stefan. 2003. Case as a trigger for reanalysis: Some arguments from the processing of double case ungrammaticalities in German. Experimental studies in linguistics 1, ed. by Fischer, Susann, van de Vijver, Ruben, & Vogel, Ralf, 31–60. (Linguistics in Potsdam 21). Potsdam: Potsdam University Press.Google Scholar
Schmid, Tanja, & Vogel, Ralf. 2004. Dialectal variation in German 3-verb clusters: A surface-oriented optimality theoretic account. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 7. 235–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwitalla, Johannes. 2003. Gesprochenes Deutsch: Eine Einführung. Berlin: Erich Schmidt.Google Scholar
Stallings, Lynn. 1998. Evaluating heaviness: Relative weight in the spoken production of Heavy-NP Shift. Los Angeles, CA: University of Southern California doctoral dissertation.Google Scholar
Starke, Günther. 1965. Ausrahmung oder Nachtrag? Ein Beitrag zur Begriffsbestimmung von Erscheinungen der Auflockerung im modernen deutschen Satzbau. Sprachpflege 1. 7–12.Google Scholar
Steedman, Mark. 1985. Dependency and coordination in the grammar of Dutch and English. Language 61. 523–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szczepaniak, Renata. 2006. Phonologischer Wandel. Historische Sprachwissenschaft des Deutschen: Eine Einführung in die Prinzipien des Sprachwandels, 11–42. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. 2006. Analysing sociolinguistic variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wasow, Thomas. 1997. Remarks on grammatical weight. Language Variation and Change 9. 81–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wasow, Thomas. 2002. Postverbal behavior. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Wegener, Heide. 1993. weil–das hat schon seinen Grund. Zur Verbstellung in Kausalsätzen mit weil im gegenwärtigen Deutsch. Deutsche Sprache 21. 289–305.Google Scholar
Weiß, Helmut. 1998. Syntax des Bairischen: Studien zur Grammatik einer natürlichen Sprache. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiesinger, Peter. 1983. Die Einteilung der deutschen Dialekte. Dialektologie: Ein Handbuch zur deutschen und allgemeinen Dialektforschung. 2. Halbband, ed. by Besch, Werner, Knoop, Ulrich, Putschke, Wolfgang, & Wiegand, Herbert Ernst, 807–900. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Williams, Edwin. 2004. The structure of clusters. Verb clusters: A study of Hungarian, German, and Dutch, ed. by Kiss, Katalin É. & van Riemsdijk, Henk, 173–201. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susanne. 1999. Where do verbs cluster: West Germanic perspectives. Presentation at the workshop on Verb Clusters, Öttevény, Hungary.Google Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susanne. 2000a. Verb clusters: Variation at the right periphery. Talk given at the workshop on Syntactic Microvariation, Meertens Institute, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susanne. 2000b. Summary of verb cluster questionnaire. Talk given at the Third Workshop on Verb Clusters, Budapest.Google Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susanne. 2002. Empirische Dialektstudien. Talk given at the University of Vienna, Übungen zur Grammatik des Deutschen: Dialektsyntax.Google Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susanne. 2004. West Germanic verb clusters: The empirical domain. Verb clusters: A study of Hungarian, German, and Dutch, ed. by Kiss, Katalin É. & van Riemsdijk, Henk, 43–85. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susanne. 2006. Verb clusters, verb raising, and restructuring. The Blackwell companion to syntax, vol. 5, ed. by Everaert, Martin & van Riemsdijk, Henk, 229–343. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, Richard, & Bayley, Robert. 1996. VARBRUL analysis for second language acquisition research. Second language acquisition and linguistic variation, ed. by Bayley, Robert & Preston, Dennis, 253–306. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zwart, C. Jan-Wouter. 1996. Verb clusters in Continental West Germanic Dialects. Microparametric syntax and dialect variation, ed. by Black, James & Motapanyane, Virginia, 229–258. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar