Functional Projection Meet Adverbs
The aim of this paper is to prove that a linguistic theory combining Functional Categories and Incorporation may capture the lexical and syntactic properties of non agreeing elements, namely prepositions (PS), prepositive locutions (PLocs) and adverbs (Advs). We will focus our attention on lexically...
| Autores: | , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 1992 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya) |
| Repositorio: | Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:recercat.cat:10256/12151 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10256/12151 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Gramàtica comparada i general -- Adverbi Grammar, Comparative and general -- Adverb |
| Sumario: | The aim of this paper is to prove that a linguistic theory combining Functional Categories and Incorporation may capture the lexical and syntactic properties of non agreeing elements, namely prepositions (PS), prepositive locutions (PLocs) and adverbs (Advs). We will focus our attention on lexically related elements such as Sp. [P bajo]lIpL,d ebajo] 'under' and [~abdajo~] 'do wn' or Cat. [p rera]/& darrera] 'behind' and [~enddar~rer a] 'back'. We will argue that all the categorial labels concemed are derived, therefore the differeoces among members of the same paradigm should be attributed to the way in which the functional architecture selecting one single lexical item ( baj-] or rer-] respectively) Case marks the internal argument. The main theoretical consequence that follows is that categorial labels such as Adv or P are in fact epiphenomena with no real grammatical import. Most PPs may be analysed as Case licensing FCs selecting an NPlDP complement. whereas Advs may be considered as non categoriaiiy defd lexicai items selected by a licensing FC. According to this view, PPs and Advs are in a sense syntactically equivalent and properties traditionally considered as "adverbial" (intransitivity, nou argumental status, etc.) follow naturally |
|---|