ENGLISH LINGUISTICS
Online ISSN : 1884-3107
Print ISSN : 0918-3701
ISSN-L : 0918-3701
Search
Advanced search
OR
Browse
Search
Volume 28, Issue 1
Displaying 1-9 of 9 articles from this issue
Show all abstracts
    • |<
    • <
    • 1
    • >
    • >|
Invited Article
  • RELATIONS IN MINIMALISM
    HISATSUGU KITAHARA
    2011 Volume 28 Issue 1 Pages 1-22
    Published: 2011
    Released on J-STAGE: May 29, 2014
    DOIhttps://doi.org/10.9793/elsj.28.1_1
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    Show abstractHide abstract
    In this paper, after reviewing two distinct approaches to syntactic relations, Epstein et al.’s (1998) derivational approach and Chomsky’s (2000) compositional approach, I show that, given Epstein, Kitahara, and Seely’s (2010) analysis of structure-building (based on Merge (X, Y) => {X, Y}), the main empirical difference between these two approaches disappears. I then discuss Chomsky’s (2007, 2008) suggestion that c-command is eliminable in favor of probe-goal and minimal search conditions. If probe-goal and minimal search conditions are sufficient to characterize not only the empirically desirable aspects of c-command, but also other syntactically significant relations, then any further characterization of such relations appears to be superfluous.
    View full abstract
    Download PDF (390K)
Article
  • ON BOUND PRONOUN-LIKE INDEFINITES IN ENGLISH: AN EXTENSION OF THE THEORY OF INTER-N-BAR ANAPHORA
    KOICHI NISHIDA
    2011 Volume 28 Issue 1 Pages 23-55
    Published: 2011
    Released on J-STAGE: May 29, 2014
    DOIhttps://doi.org/10.9793/elsj.28.1_23
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    Show abstractHide abstract
    It is argued that possessive indefinites in sentences like John enjoys a student’s life share common properties with bound pronouns in sentences like Every man loves his wife. The properties of indefinites of this kind are explained by the theory of inter-N-bar anaphora, proposed by Tsurusaki (1985) and developed by Hirose (1997). They are shown to have the status of N-bar constituents rather than full noun phrases (NPs), to describe the representative part of the subject referent, and to take a null determiner whose features are bound by a partitive operator involved in specific types of verb phrases. A new typology is given on the basis of the distinction between indefinite NPs and what are called “N-bar indefinites.”
    View full abstract
    Download PDF (553K)
  • ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE USE OF BE ABOUT TO IN THE HISTORY OF ENGLISH WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO LATE MODERN ENGLISH
    TAKUTO WATANABE
    2011 Volume 28 Issue 1 Pages 56-90
    Published: 2011
    Released on J-STAGE: May 29, 2014
    DOIhttps://doi.org/10.9793/elsj.28.1_56
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    Show abstractHide abstract
    This paper addresses the grammaticalisation of be about to in the history of English. After showing that be about to was grammaticalised as an immediate future expression around the turn of the nineteenth century and that there was at the same time a sudden increase in its textual frequency, the paper provides a detailed survey of three text genres (drama, fiction, and newspaper) in Late Modern English to determine the factors that caused the change. Results indicate that (1) the sudden increase was led by a diffusion of be about to across individuals, and (2) semantic change has arisen out of repeated use in contexts ambiguous between intention and future.
    View full abstract
    Download PDF (571K)
Brief Article
  • ON THE CATEGORIAL STATUS OF JAPANESE RELATIVE CLAUSES
    NAOYUKI AKASO, TOMOKO HARAGUCHI
    2011 Volume 28 Issue 1 Pages 91-106
    Published: 2011
    Released on J-STAGE: May 29, 2014
    DOIhttps://doi.org/10.9793/elsj.28.1_91
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    Show abstractHide abstract
    This paper claims that the syntactic category of Japanese relative clauses can be larger than TP. The fact that Focus Particles can be found within Japanese relative clauses shows that the licenser, Focus-head, should be located at the CP-zone, adopting Rizzi’s (1997, 2004) cartographic analysis, on the assumption that Focus Particles can be licensed in situ. However, not every relative clause is larger than TP. We will present new data on Nominative/Genitive Conversion, which lead to a generalization that Focus Particles cannot appear in Japanese relative clauses where genitive subjects are allowed. This can be explained straightforwardly if we assume that Focus Phrase is missing in this type of relative clause. We will try to explore the mechanism of the case alternation phenomenon, with the refinement of Saito’s (2004) dichotomy of T (declarative T and adnominal T).
    View full abstract
    Download PDF (451K)
Notes and Discussion
Review
    • |<
    • <
    • 1
    • >
    • >|
feedback
 Top