Re: ? how would you classify this language ?
| From: | David Peterson <thatbluecat@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Thursday, September 16, 2004, 20:54 |
|---|
gwalla@DESPAMMED.COM wrote:
<<AIUI, that's SVO in both clauses. The relative pronoun is considered
part of the main clause, while the relative clause has a "gap": in
English, the argument that corresponds to the relative pronoun is left out.
full sentence: That is what (I want).
main clause: That is what
S V O
relative clause: I want [...]
S V (O)>>
No. The whole reason that they proposed gaps and movement was that
their syntax didn't match up with the extent word order. So when they
talk about "word order", they mean surface word order--otherwise all
languages would have the same word order (at least, according to some
linguists). And technically, there's another gap in this sentence--the WH-
word has to move "covertly" to be in proper position. (Or is that the
empty operator...? Geez, I've forgotten my old school syntax already...)
-David
*******************************************************************
"sunly eleSkarez ygralleryf ydZZixelje je ox2mejze."
"No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn."
-Jim Morrison
http://dedalvs.free.fr/
Replies