LINGUIST List 10.1838

Wed Dec 1 1999

Sum: 10.1801 Eng.Complementizer

Editor for this issue: Naomi Ogasawara <naomilinguistlist.org>


Directory

  1. Neil.Salmond, Sum: Eng.Complementizer

Message 1: Sum: Eng.Complementizer

Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 09:57:13 +0000
From: Neil.Salmond <Neil.Salmonddurham.ac.uk>
Subject: Sum: Eng.Complementizer

Thanks for my many helpers. Here's some of what they said:

Arne Martinus Lindstad <arnelilf.uio.no>
>>>
There is a new book out by Peter W. Culicover "Syntactic
Nuts" (Oxford University Press 1999), where he among other
things discusses the syntactic category of certain
complementisers and/or prepositions.
<<<

Anthea Fraser Gupta <a.f.guptaleeds.ac.uk>
>>>
In many languages they [complementizers] are drawn from
other, more basic word classes.
(snip)
In the Indo-European languages in general the interrogative
words tend to be used as complementizers.
(snip)
In Old-English (as in other IE languages) there was a link
between pronouns and demonstratives. In OE many
conjunctions were made up of 
combinations of prepositions and demonstratives. A good
book to read on the history of English in general is the one
by Pyles & Algeo, which also has an accompanying workbook
that explores some of these issues.
<<<

William Morris <wmorriscs.ucsd.edu>
>>>
I highly recommend the following paper:

Dan Jackson (1998) The historical origins of the that-trace
effect. (0.9Megs) To appear in Linguistic Notes from La
Jolla, UCSD.

http://ling.ucsd.edu/~jackson/
<<<

Elly VanGeldern? <ellyvangelderenasu.edu>
>>>
Complementizers typically derive (grammaticalize) from
determiners and prepositions.
<<<

Thanks again and have a very merry Christmas!
- Neil
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue