LINGUIST List 21.2722|
Fri Jun 25 2010
Calls: Semantics, Syntax/Germany
Editor for this issue: Elyssa Winzeler
LINGUIST is pleased to announce the launch of an exciting new feature: Easy Abstracts! Easy Abs is a free abstract submission and review facility designed to help conference organizers and reviewers accept and process abstracts online. Just go to: http://www.linguistlist.org/confcustom, and begin your conference customization process today! With Easy Abstracts, submission and review will be as easy as 1-2-3!
Inner-sentential Propositional Pro-forms
Message 1: Inner-sentential Propositional Pro-forms
From: Werner Frey <freyzas.gwz-berlin.de>
Subject: Inner-sentential Propositional Pro-forms
E-mail this message to a friend
Full Title: Inner-sentential Propositional Pro-forms
Date: 23-Feb-2011 - 25-Feb-2011
Location: Göttingen, Germany
Contact Person: Kerstin Schwabe
Meeting Email: schwabezas.gwz-berlin.de
Web Site: http://www.zas.gwz-berlin.de/workshop_proforms.html
Linguistic Field(s): Semantics; Syntax
Call Deadline: 15-Aug-2010
Inner-sentential Propositional Pro-forms: Syntactic Properties and
Workshop organised as part of the Annual Conference of the German
Linguistic Society (DGfS) to be held in Göttingen, Germany, February 23-
Organisers: Werner Frey, André Meinunger, Kerstin Schwabe (ZAS, Berlin)
Propositional pro-elements that relate to clauses within complex sentences
as in the German examples i. to iii. are a topic that arises in different
languages and that holds a lot of open questions within nearly all domains
Fred hat's /es akzeptiert, [dass Eva nach Rom fährt].
Fred has'it-CL/it accepted that Eva to Rom goes
Fred hat das akzeptiert, [dass Eva nach Rom fährt].
Fred has that accepted that Eva to Rom goes
Fred wird es bedauern, [wenn Eva nach Rom fährt].
Fred will it regret if Eva to Rom goes
In the literature sometimes (Pütz 1986, Sudhoff 2003) three types of pro-
forms are distinguished: i. 'Platzhalter' (place holders), which are
phonologically reducible and which seem to replace their clausal correlate
in the argument position, ii. 'Bezugselemente' (relating elements), which are
not reducible and which may form a constituent together with their clausal
correlate, and iii. proper pro-forms, which can neither be regarded as place
holders nor as relating elements (cf. for German, e.g. Breindl 1989, and,
diachronically, Axel 2009).
The workshop aims to contribute to the most challenging issues arising in
this area, some of them stemming from longstanding, yet not satisfyingly
explained observations; e.g.: What are the syntactic relations between the
pro-elements and their clausal correlates? Why are certain pro-elements
obligatorily present in the IP-domain with the related clause moved to the
front whereas other pro-elements are illegitimate (e.g. Fabricius-Hansen
1980, Sternefeld 2006):
a. Wenn Eva nicht kommt, wird *(es) Fred sehr bedauern.
When Eva not comes will it Fred very regret
'If Eva will not come, Fred will regret this very much.'
b.Dass Eva nicht kommen kann, bedauert/sagt (*es) Fred.
That Eva not come can regrets /says (*it) Fred
'Fred regrets/says that Eva cannot come.'
c. *(Darüber), dass Udo kam, hat sich Fred (*darüber) gefreut.
About-it that Udo came has himself Fred about-it be-glad
'That Udo came - Fred was very glad about this'
Why can certain pro-elements be left behind under 'VP-topicalisation,' but
a. Interessiert, ob Max gewonnen hat, hat es mich sehr.
Interested if Max won has has it me very
'I was very keen on knowing whether Max had won.'
b.*Behauptet, dass Max gewonnen hat, hat es Eva oft.
Claimed that Max won has has it Eva often
'Eva often claimed that Max had won.'
Why do pro-forms usually block extraction out of the associated clause?
Which matrix predicates select which pro-forms, and why? What are the
contributions of the pro-forms to the semantics or to the information
structural properties of the constructions (cf. Schwabe & Fittler 2009)?
Such questions and related ones are addressed to researchers involved in
this topic synchronically and diachronically. Given the research tradition of
pronoun-clause linkage for languages other than German, we encourage
prospective speakers to contribute to the workshop with respect to the
issues raised above. We think of languages as close as Dutch (Bennis
1987) and English (cf. the classic Postal & Pullum 1988), but also as
different as Hungarian (e.g., de Cuba & Ürögdi 2010).
Call for Papers
Proposals are invited for 30-minute talks (including discussion). Abstracts
should be anonymous and confined to two pages (including examples and
references) not smaller than 12-point font.
Abstracts should be sent to:
The subject of the message should specify 'Abstract', and the body should
include the following information:
- Author's Name(s) and Contact Information
- Title of the Abstract
- E-mail Address
Upon acceptance, authors will be asked to submit a named, camera-ready
Submission Deadline: August 15, 2010
Contact person: Kerstin Schwabe
Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Page Updated: 25-Jun-2010
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.