Syntax Theory And Analysis Volume 3 Unknown

download

https://ebookbell.com/product/syntax-theory-and-analysis-
volume-3-unknown-50340470

Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

Syntax Theory And Analysis Volume 1 Unknown

https://ebookbell.com/product/syntax-theory-and-analysis-
volume-1-unknown-50340630

Syntax Theory And Analysis Volume 2 Tibor Kiss Editor Artemis

Alexiadou Editor

https://ebookbell.com/product/syntax-theory-and-analysis-
volume-2-tibor-kiss-editor-artemis-alexiadou-editor-50340518

Prosodic Syntax In Chinese Theory And Facts Feng Shengli

https://ebookbell.com/product/prosodic-syntax-in-chinese-theory-and-
facts-feng-shengli-10017024

Historical Syntax And Linguistic Theory Paola Crisma Giuseppe

Longobardi

https://ebookbell.com/product/historical-syntax-and-linguistic-theory-
paola-crisma-giuseppe-longobardi-1407210
Key Terms In Syntax And Syntactic Theory Silvia Luraghi Claudia Parodi

https://ebookbell.com/product/key-terms-in-syntax-and-syntactic-
theory-silvia-luraghi-claudia-parodi-4415978

A Theory Of Syntax Minimal Operations And Universal Grammar Norbert

Hornstein

https://ebookbell.com/product/a-theory-of-syntax-minimal-operations-
and-universal-grammar-norbert-hornstein-1677754

The Syntax And Semantics Of Noun Modifiers And The Theory Of Universal
Grammar A Korean Perspective 1st Ed Minjoo Kim

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-syntax-and-semantics-of-noun-
modifiers-and-the-theory-of-universal-grammar-a-korean-
perspective-1st-ed-minjoo-kim-9962614

Directival Theory Of Meaning From Syntax And Pragmatics To Narrow

Linguistic Content 1st Ed Pawe Grabarczyk

https://ebookbell.com/product/directival-theory-of-meaning-from-
syntax-and-pragmatics-to-narrow-linguistic-content-1st-ed-pawe-
grabarczyk-10487942

Essentials Of Grammatical Theory A Consensus View Of Syntax And

Morphology D J Allerton

https://ebookbell.com/product/essentials-of-grammatical-theory-a-
consensus-view-of-syntax-and-morphology-d-j-allerton-6722192
Syntax − Theory and Analysis
HSK 42.3
Handbücher zur
Sprach- und Kommunikations-
wissenschaft
Handbooks of Linguistics
and Communication Science

Manuels de linguistique et
des sciences de communication

Mitbegründet von Gerold Ungeheuer

Mitherausgegeben (1985−2001) von Hugo Steger

Herausgegeben von / Edited by / Edités par

Herbert Ernst Wiegand

Band 42.3

De Gruyter Mouton
Syntax −
Theory and Analysis
An International Handbook
Volume 3

Edited by
Tibor Kiss
Artemis Alexiadou

De Gruyter Mouton
ISBN 978-3-11-036298-5
e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-036368-5
e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-039315-6
ISSN 1861-5090

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress.

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek

The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie;
detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de.

© 2015 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Munich/Boston

Typesetting: Meta Systems Publishing & Printservices GmbH, Wustermark
Printing and binding: Hubert & Co. GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen
Cover design: Martin Zech, Bremen
앪
앝 Printed on acid-free paper
Printed in Germany
www.degruyter.com
This handbook is dedicated to the memory of our dear friend
Ursula Kleinhenz (1965−2010).
The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
Contents

Volume 3

VII. Syntactic Sketches

41. German: A Grammatical Sketch · Stefan Müller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1447
42. Hindi-Urdu: Central Issues in Syntax · Alice Davison . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1478
43. Mandarin · Lisa L.-S. Cheng and Rint Sybesma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1518
44. Japanese · Takao Gunji . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1559
45. Georgian · Alice C. Harris and Nino Amiridze . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1588
46. The Bantu Languages · Leston Chandler Buell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1622
47. Tagalog · Paul Schachter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1658
48. Warlpiri · Kenneth L. Hale, Mary Laughren and Jane Simpson . . . . . . . . 1677
49. Creole Languages · Derek Bickerton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1710
50. Northern Straits Salish · Ewa Czaykowska-Higgins and Janet Leonard . . . 1726
51. Syntactic Sketch: Bora · Frank Seifart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1764

VIII. The Cognitive Perspective

52. Syntax and Language Acquisition · Sonja Eisenbeiss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1792
53. Syntax and Language Disorders · Martina Penke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1833
54. Syntax and Language Processing · Claudia Felser . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1875

IX. Beyond Syntax

55. Syntax and Corpora · Heike Zinsmeister . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1912
56. Syntax and Stylistics · Monika Doherty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1942
57. Syntax and Lexicography · Rainer Osswald . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1963
58. Computational Syntax · Emily M. Bender, Stephen Clark and Tracy
Holloway King . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2001
59. Reference Grammars · Irina Nikolaeva . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2036
60. Language Documentation · Eva Schultze-Berndt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2063
61. Grammar in the Classroom · Anke Holler and Markus Steinbach . . . . . . . 2095

Indexes
Language index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2127
Subject index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2133
viii Contents

Volume 1
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

I. Introduction: Syntax in Linguistics

1. Syntax − The State of a Controversial Art · Tibor Kiss and Artemis
Alexiadou . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2. Syntactic Constructions · Peter Svenonius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3. Syntax and its Interfaces: An Overview · Louise Mycock . . . . . . . . . . . 24

II. The Syntactic Tradition

4. The Indian Grammatical Tradition · Peter Raster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
5. Arabic Syntactic Research · Jonathan Owens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
6. Prestructuralist and Structuralist Approaches to Syntax · Pieter A. M. Seuren 134

III. Syntactic Phenomena

7. Syntactic Categories and Subcategories · Hans-Jürgen Sasse . . . . . . . . . 158
8. Grammatical Relations · Beatrice Primus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
9. Arguments and Adjuncts · Peter Ackema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
10. The Morpho-Syntactic Realisation of Negation · Hedde Zeijlstra . . . . . . . 274
11. The Syntactic Role of Agreement · Stephen Wechsler . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
12. Verb Second · Anders Holmberg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 342
13. Discourse Configurationality · Katalin É. Kiss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383
14. Control · Barbara Stiebels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 412
15. Pronominal Anaphora · Silke Fischer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 446
16. Coordination · Katharina Hartmann . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 478
17. Word Order · Werner Frey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514
18. Ellipsis · Lobke Aelbrecht . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 562
19. Syntactic Effects of Cliticization · Anna Cardinaletti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 595
20. Ergativity · Amy Rose Deal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 654
21. Relative Clauses and Correlatives · Rajesh Bhatt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 708
22. Voice and Valence Change · Edit Doron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 749
23. Syntax and Grammar of Idioms and Collocations · Christiane Fellbaum . . . 777

Volume 2

IV. Syntactic Models

24. Minimalism · Marc Richards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803
25. Lexical-Functional Grammar · Miriam Butt and Tracy Holloway King . . . 839
26. Optimality-Theoretic Syntax · Gereon Müller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875
27. HPSG − A Synopsis · Stefan Müller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937
Contents ix

28. Construction Grammar · Mirjam Fried . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974

29. Foundations of Dependency and Valency Theory · Michael Klotz . . . . . . 1004
30. Dependency Grammar · Timothy Osborne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1027
31. Categorial Grammar · Jason Baldridge and Frederick Hoyt . . . . . . . . . . 1045

V. Interfaces
32. Syntax and the Lexicon · Artemis Alexiadou . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1088
33. The Syntax-Morphology Interface · Heidi Harley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128
34. Phonological Evidence in Syntax · Michael Wagner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154
35. The Syntax-Semantics Interface · Winfried Lechner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1198
36. The Syntax-Pragmatics Interface · George Tsoulas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1256

VI. Theoretical Approaches to Selected Syntactic

Phenomena
37. Arguments and Adjuncts · Daniel Hole . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1284
38. Models of Control · Tibor Kiss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1321
39. Theories of Binding · Silke Fischer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1357
40. Word Order · Klaus Abels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1400
VII. Syntactic Sketches

41. German: A Grammatical Sketch

1. Topological fields for description
2. German as an SOV language
3. German as a verb second language
4. The order of elements in the Mittelfeld
5. Extraposition
6. Subjects, passive, case, and agreement
7. Summary
8. Abbreviations
9. References (selected)

Abstract
This paper provides an overview of the most important grammatical properties of Ger-
man. A large part of the paper is concerend with the basic clause types of German. I
start with the Topological Fields Model, which is very useful as a descriptive tool, but −
as will be shown − not sufficient for a thorough account of German clausal structure. I
therefore explain additional theoretical assumptions that were made in order to assign
structure to the observable linear sequences. After a sketch of an analysis of the basic
sentence patterns in the sections 2−5, I give an account of passive, case assignment,
and subject-verb agreement in section 6.

1. Topological fields for description

Drach (1937) developed terminology for talking about regions in the German clause.
The terminology was changed and adapted over the years. More recent and more appro-
priate variants can be found in Reis (1980) and Höhle (1986). The starting point for the
motivation of topological fields is the sentences in (1). The verbs are realized adjacent
to each other only in subordinated sentences like (1a). In finite sentences without a
complementizer the finite verb occurs to the left of other verbs and of non-verbal argu-
ments and adjuncts (1b).

(1) a. dass Max gestern das Eis gegessen hat [German]

that Max yesterday the ice.cream eaten has
‘that Max ate the ice cream yesterday’
b. Hat Max gestern das Eis gegessen?
has Max yesterday the ice.cream eaten
‘Did Max eat the ice cream yesterday?’
1448 VII. Syntactic Sketches

Since all examples in this text are in German, the language tag [German] is omitted in
the remainder of the text.
The complementizer in (1a) and the finite verb in (1b) on the one side and the remain-
ing verbal material on the other side form a bracket around the non-verbal material. The
part of the clause which hosts gestern das Eis ‘yesterday the ice cream’ is called the
Mittelfeld ‘middle field’, that hosting dass/hat is called the linke Satzklammer ‘left sen-
tence bracket’ and that hosting gegessen hat/gegessen is called the rechte Satzklammer
‘right sentence bracket’. The rechte Satzklammer can contain non-finite verbs, the finite
verb, or a verbal particle as in (2b).

(2) a. dass Max das Eis aufisst

that Max the ice.cream up.eats
‘that Max eats up the ice cream’
b. Isst Max das Eis auf?
eats Max the ice.cream up
‘Does Max eat up the ice cream?’

Predicative adjectives in copula constructions and resultative constructions pattern with

particles and should be assigned to the rechte Satzklammer too (Müller 2002). In senten-
ces like (3) the rechte Satzklammer then consists of the adjective treu ‘faithful’ and the
copula and the resultative predicate (leer ‘empty’) and the matrix verb, respectively:

(3) a. dass er seiner Frau treu ist

that he his wife faithful is
‘that he is faithful to his wife’
b. dass er den Teich leer fischt
that he the pond empty fishes
‘that he fishes the pond empty’

Additional fields can be identified to the left of the linke Satzklammer and to the right
of the rechte Satzklammer. In (4a) Max is placed in the so-called Vorfeld ‘pre field’ and
in (4b) the relative clause that modifies Eis ‘ice cream’ is extraposed. It is located in the
Nachfeld ‘post field’.

(4) a. Max hat gestern das Eis gegessen.

Max has yesterday the ice.cream eaten
‘Max ate the ice cream yesterday.’
b. Max hat gestern das Eis gegessen, das Barbara gekauft hat.
Max has yesterday the ice.cream eaten that Barbara bought has
‘Max ate the ice cream yesterday that Barbara bought.’

In addition to the fields already discussed, Höhle suggested a clause-initial field for
conjunctions like (und ‘and’, oder ‘or’, aber ‘but’) and a field between this initial field
and the Vorfeld for left dislocated elements as for instance der Montag ‘the monday’ in
(5). See Altmann (1981) on left dislocation.
41. German: A Grammatical Sketch 1449

(5) Aber der Montag, der passt mir gut.

but the monday it suits me well
‘But Monday suits me well.’

Höhle calls the latter field KL. It is sometimes also called the Vorvorfeld ‘pre pre field’.
The examples above show that not all fields have to be filled in a German clause.
For instance, in (5) the rechte Satzklammer and the Nachfeld are empty. The most ex-
treme case is shown in (6a).

(6) a. Schlaf!
sleep
b. (Jetzt) lies das Buch!
now read the book
‘Read the book now!’

In imperatives the finite verb is serialized in the linke Satzklammer and the Vorfeld may
remain empty. In (6a), there is only a finite verb, that is, only the linke Satzklammer is
filled. All other fields are empty.
Sometimes the fact that fields may be unfilled leads to situations in which the assign-
ment to topological fields is not obvious. For instance the rechte Satzklammer is not
filled by a verb or verb particle in (7). So in principle it could be to the left or to the
rechte Satzklammer. The relative clause could be considered as part of the Nachfeld or
part of the Mittelfeld, depending on the decision made with respect to the location of
the bracket.

(7) Er gibt der Frau das Buch, die er kennt.

he.M gives the woman.F.SG the book.N.SG who.F.SG he knows
‘He gives the book to the woman he knows.’

Fortunately, there is a test that helps to determine the position of the rechte Satzklammer.
The test is called Rangprobe ‘embedding test’ and was developed by Bech (1955: 72):
One can fill the rechte Satzklammer by using a complex tense like the perfect or the
future. The tense auxiliary takes the position in the linke Satzklammer and the non-finite
verb is placed in the rechte Satzklammer. Applying this test to (7) shows that the non-
finite verb has to be placed before the relative clause. Placing it after the relative clause
results in ungrammaticality:

(8) a. Er hat der Frau das Buch gegeben, die er kennt.

he has the woman the book given who he knows
‘He gave the book to the woman he knows.’
b. *Er hat der Frau das Buch, die er kennt, gegeben.
he has the woman the book who he knows given

As was pointed out by Reis (1980: 82), topological fields can contain material that is
internally structured. For instance the Vorfeld in (9b) contains the non-finite verb gewusst
in the rechte Satzklammer and the clause dass du kommst in the Nachfeld.
1450 VII. Syntactic Sketches

(9) a. Wir haben schon seit langem gewusst, dass du kommst.

we have already since long known that you come
‘We have known for a long time that you are coming.’
b. [Gewusst, dass du kommst,] haben wir schon seit langem.
known that you come have we already since long

There is no obvious way to relate the clause type (declarative, imperative, interrogative)
to the topological fields model. The reason for this is that irrespective of the clause type,
all fields can remain empty (Müller 20014a). The Vorfeld is usually filled in declarative
main clauses, but it may be empty as in instances of Vorfeldellipse ‘topic drop’, see Fries
(1988), Huang (1984) and Hoffmann (1997):

(10) a. Das hab ich auch gegessen.

that have I also eaten
‘I ate that too.’
b. Hab’ ich auch gegessen./?
have I also eaten
‘I also ate him/her/it.’ or (with different intonation) ‘Did I also eat?’

On the other hand there are examples in which more than one constituent seems to be
located in the Vorfeld. These will be discussed in section 3.
Similarly, yes/no questions are usually verb-first utterances, as in the second reading
of (10b). But with a question intonation V2 is possible as well:

(11) Das hab’ ich auch gegessen?

that have I also eaten
‘Did I eat that too?’

Conversely, V1 sentences are not necessarily questions:

(12) a. Kommt ein Mann zum Arzt.

comes a man to.the doctor
‘A man comes to the doctor.’
b. Gib mir das Buch!
give me the book
‘Give me the book!’

(12a) is a special form of declarative clause that is used at the beginning of jokes or
stories (Önnerfors 1997: Chapter 6.1). (12b) is an imperative.
Imperatives are not necessarily V1, as (13) shows (see also Altmann, 1993: 1023):

(13) Jetzt gib mir schon das Buch!

now give me already the book
‘Give me the book now!’
41. German: A Grammatical Sketch 1451

To make matters worse, there are even verbless sentences in German. As Paul (1919: 13,
41) noted, there is a variant of the copula that is semantically empty and hence it may
be omitted if information about tense corresponds to the default value present.

(14) a. Doch egal, was noch passiert, der Norddeutsche

but never.mind what still happens the North.German
Rundfunk steht schon jetzt als Gewinner fest.
broadcasting.company stands already now as winner PART
‘But never mind what happens, it is already certain that the Norddeutscher
Rundfunk (North German broadcasting company) will be the winner.’
(Spiegel, 12/1999: 258)
b. Interessant, zu erwähnen, daß ihre Seele völlig in Ordnung war.
interesting to mention that her soul completely in order was
‘It is interesting to point out that she was completely sane.’
c. Ein Treppenwitz der Musikgeschichte, daß die Kollegen von Rammstein
a stair.joke of.the music.history that the colleagues of Rammstein
vor fünf Jahren noch im Vorprogramm von Sandow spielten.
before five years still in.the before.program of Sandow played
‘It is an irony of musical history that the colleagues from (the band) Ramm-
stein were still playing as the support group of Sandow a few years ago.’
(taz, 12. 07. 1999: 14)

(14b) is taken from Michail Bulgakow, Der Meister und Margarita. München: Deutscher
Taschenbuch Verlag. 1997: 422. In the sentences in (14) the copula sein ‘be’ has been
omitted. The sentences in (14) correspond to the sentences in (15).

(15) a. Doch was noch passiert, ist egal, …

but what still happens is never.mind
‘But never mind what happens …’
b. Zu erwähnen, daß ihre Seele völlig in Ordnung war, ist interessant.
to mention that her soul completely in order was is interesting
‘It is interesting to point out that she was completely sane.’
c. Dass die Kollegen von Rammstein vor fünf Jahren noch im
that the colleagues of Rammstein before five years still in.the
Vorprogramm von Sandow spielten ist ein Treppenwitz der
before.program of Sandow played is a stair.joke of.the
Musikgeschichte.
music.history
‘It is an irony of musical history that the colleagues from (the band) Ramm-
stein were still playing as the support group of Sandow a few years ago.’

So, the sentences in (14) are declarative clauses, but as Paul (1919: 13) noted, questions
without a verb are possible as well:
1452 VII. Syntactic Sketches

(16) Niemand da?

nobody there
‘Is anybody there?’
(Paul 1919: 13)

This situation leaves us in a state where it is very difficult to get a clear picture of the
connection between order and clause type. The situation can be improved by stipulating
empty elements, for instance, for empty pronouns in topic drop constructions and empty
copulas for the constructions in (14) and (16). The empty copula would be placed after
Treppenwitz in (14c) and before niemand in (16) and hence the sentences would have a
verb in first or second position, respectively. However, see Finkbeiner and Meibauer
(2014) and Müller (2014) for arguments for a constructional treatment of such structures.
Similarly, the Vorfeld in (10b) would be filled by an empty element and hence the clause
would be a verb second clause. With such fillings of the respective fields it is reasonable
to state that prototypical declarative clauses are V2 clauses in German and yes/no ques-
tions prototypically are V1.

2. German as an SOV language

Starting with Fourquet (1957, 1970: 117−135), Bierwisch (1963: 34), and Bach (1962),
German was analyzed as an SOV language, that is, the SOV order is considered the
basic order and other orders like the V1 order in (17b) and the V2 order in (17c) are
related to the SOV order in (17a).

(17) a. dass Max das Eis aufisst

that Max the ice.cream up.eats
‘that Max eats up the ice cream.’
b. Isst Max das Eis auf?
eats Max the ice.cream up
‘Does Max eat up the ice cream?’
c. Das Eis isst Max auf.
the ice.cream eats Max up
‘Max eats up the ice cream.’

The initial proposals by Forquet, Bierwisch, and Bach were adapted and further moti-
vated by Reis (1974), Thiersch (1978: Chapter 1), and den Besten (1983). (See also
Koster 1975 on Dutch.) The analysis of German as an SOV language is nowadays
standard in GB/Minimalism and also adopted in various competing frameworks (GPSG:
Jacobs 1986: 110, LFG: Berman 2003a: 41, HPSG: Kiss and Wesche 1991; Meurers
2000: 206−208; Müller 2005a, b).
The following observations motivate the assumption that SOV is the basic order: verb
particles and idioms, the order in subordinated and non-finite clauses (Bierwisch
1963: 34−36) and the scope of adverbials (Netter 1992: section 2.3). The relevant data
will be addressed in the following subsections.
41. German: A Grammatical Sketch 1453

2.1. Non-finite forms, verb particles, and idioms

In contrast to SVO languages like English, non-finite verbs cluster at the end of the
clause in German:

(18) a. [weil] er nach hause kommt

because he to home comes
‘because he comes home’
b. [weil] er nach hause gekommen ist
because he to home come has
‘because he has come home’
c. [weil] er nach hause gekommen sein soll
because he to home come be should
‘because he should have come home’

In main clauses only the finite verb is placed in initial or second position, but non-finite
verbs stay in the position they take in embedded clauses:

(19) Er soll nach hause gekommen sein

he should to home come be
‘He should have come home.’

Verb particles form a close unit with the verb. The unit is observable in verb final
sentences only, which supports an SOV analysis (Bierwisch 1963: 35).

(20) a. weil er morgen anfängt

because he tomorrow at.catches
‘because he starts tomorrow’
b. Er fängt morgen an.
he catches tomorrow at
‘He starts tomorrow.’

The particle verb in (20) is non-transparent. Such particle verbs are sometimes called
mini idioms. In fact the argument above can also be made with real idioms: Many idioms
do not allow rearrangement of the idiom parts. This is an instance of Behaghel’s law
(1932) that things that belong together semantically tend to be realized together. The
exception is the finite verb. The finite verb can be realized in initial or final position
despite the fact that this interrupts the continuity of the idiomatic material. Since the
continuity can be observed in SOV order only, this order is considered basic.
Verbs that are derived from nouns by back-formation often cannot be separated and
verb second sentences therefore are excluded (see Haider 1993: 62, who refers to unpub-
lished work by Höhle 1991):

(21) a. weil sie das Stück heute uraufführen

because they the play today play.for.the.first.time
‘because they premiered the play today’
1454 VII. Syntactic Sketches

b. *Sie uraufführen heute das Stück.

they play.for.the.first.time today the play
c. *Sie führen heute das Stück urauf.
they guide today the play PREFIX.PART

Hence these verbs can only be used in the order that is assumed to be the base order.
Similarly, it is sometimes impossible to realize the verb in initial position when el-
ements like mehr als ‘more than’ are present in the clause (Haider 1997; Meinunger
2001):

(22) a. dass Hans seinen Profit letztes Jahr mehr als verdreifachte
that Hans his profit last year more than tripled
‘that Hans increased his profit last year by a factor greater than three’
b. Hans hat seinen Profit letztes Jahr mehr als verdreifacht.
Hans has his profit last year more than tripled
‘Hans increased his profit last year by a factor greater than three.’
c. *Hans verdreifachte seinen Profit letztes Jahr mehr als.
Hans tripled his profit last year more than

So, it is possible to realize the adjunct together with the verb in final position, but there
are constraints regarding the placement of the finite verb in initial position.

2.2. Order in subordinate and non-finite clauses

Verbs in non-finite clauses and in subordinate finite clauses starting with a conjunction
always appear finally, that is, in the rechte Satzklammer. For example, zu geben ‘to give’
and gibt ‘gives’ appear in the rechte Satzklammer in (23a) and (23b):

(23) a. Der Clown versucht, Kurt-Martin die Ware zu geben.

the clown tries Kurt-Martin the goods to give
‘The clown tries to give Kurt-Martin the goods.’
b. dass der Clown Kurt-Martin die Ware gibt
that the clown Kurt-Martin the goods gives
‘that the clown gives Kurt-Martin the goods’

2.3. Scope of adverbials

The scope of adverbials in sentences like (24) depends on their order: the left-most
adverb scopes over the following adverb and over the verb in final position. This was
explained by assuming the following structure:
41. German: A Grammatical Sketch 1455

(24) a. weil er [absichtlich [nicht lacht]]

because he deliberately not laughs
‘because he deliberately does not laugh’
b. weil er [nicht [absichtlich lacht]]
because he not deliberately laughs
‘because he does not laugh deliberately’

An interesting fact is that the scope relations do not change when the verb position is
changed. If one assumes that the sentences have an underlying structure like in (24), this
fact is explained automatically:

(25) a. Lachti er [absichtlich [nicht _i]]?

laughs he deliberately not
‘Does he deliberately not laugh?’
b. Lachti er [nicht [absichtlich _i]]?
laughs he not deliberately
‘Doesn’t he laugh deliberately?’

It has to be mentioned here, that there seem to be exceptions to the claim that modifiers
scope from left to right. Kasper (1994: 47) discusses the examples in (26), which go
back to Bartsch and Vennemann (1972: 137).

(26) a. Peter liest wegen der Nachhilfestunden gut.

Peter reads because.of the tutoring well
‘Peter reads well because of the tutoring.’
b. Peter liest gut wegen der Nachhilfestunden.
Peter reads well because.of the tutoring

(26a) corresponds to the expected order in which the adverbial PP wegen der Nachilfe-
stunden outscopes the adverb gut, but the alternative order in (26b) is possible as well
and the sentence has the same reading as the one in (26a).
However, Koster (1975: section 6) and Reis (1980: 67) showed that these examples
are not convincing evidence since the rechte Satzklammer is not filled and therefore the
orders in (26) are not necessarily variants of Mittelfeld orders but may be due to extrapos-
ition of one constituent. As Koster and Reis showed, the examples become ungrammati-
cal when the rechte Satzklammer is filled:

(27) a. *Hans hat gut wegen der Nachhilfestunden gelesen.

Hans has well because.of the tutoring read
b. Hans hat gut gelesen wegen der Nachhilfestunden.
Hans has well read because.of the tutoring
‘Peter read well because of the tutoring.’

The conclusion is that (26b) is best treated as a variant of (26a) in which the PP is extra-
posed.
1456 VII. Syntactic Sketches

While examples like (26) show that the matter is not trivial, the following example
from Crysmann (2004: 383) shows that there are examples with a filled rechte Satzklam-
mer that allow for scopings in which an adjunct scopes over another adjunct that pre-
cedes it. For instance, in (28) niemals ‘never’ scopes over wegen schlechten Wetters
‘because of the bad weather’:

(28) Da muß es schon erhebliche Probleme mit der Ausrüstung gegeben haben,
there must it PART severe problems with the equipment given have
da [wegen schlechten Wetters] ein Reinhold Messner [niemals]
since because.of bad weather a Reinhold Messner never
aufgäbe.
give.up.would
‘There must have been severe problems with the equipment, since someone like
Reinhold Messner would never give up just because of the bad weather.’

However, this does not change the fact that the sentences in (24) and (25) have the same
meaning independent of the position of the verb. The general meaning composition may
be done in the way that Crysmann suggested.
Another word of caution is in order here: There are SVO languages like French that
also have a left to right scoping of adjuncts (Bonami et al. 2004: 156−161). So, the
argumentation above should not be seen as the only fact supporting the SOV status of
German. In any case the analyses of German that were worked out in various frameworks
can explain the facts nicely.

3. German as a verb second language

The Vorfeld can be filled by arguments or adjuncts of the verb:

(29) a. Der Mann hat dem Jungen gestern den Ball gegeben. (subject)
the man.NOM has the boy.DAT yesterday the ball.ACC given
‘The man gave the boy the ball yesterday.’
b. Den Ball hat der Mann dem Jungen gestern (accusative object)
the ball.ACC has the man.NOM the boy.DAT yesterday
gegeben.
given
c. Dem Jungen hat der Mann gestern den Ball (dative object)
the boy.DAT has the man.NOM yesterday the ball.ACC
gegeben.
given
d. Gestern hat der Mann dem Jungen den Ball gegeben. (adjunct)
yesterday has the man.NOM the boy.DAT the ball.ACC given
41. German: A Grammatical Sketch 1457

In addition arguments and adjuncts of other heads can appear in the Vorfeld:

(30) a. [Um zwei Millionen Mark]i soll er versucht haben, [eine

around two Million Mark should he tried have an
Versicherung _i zu betrügen ].
insurance to cheat
‘He is said to have cheated an insurance of two Million Marks.’
(taz, 04. 05. 2001: 20)
b. „Weri, glaubt er, daß er _i ist?“ erregte sich ein Politiker
who.NOM believes he.NOM that he is excited REFL a politician
vom Nil.
from.the Nile
‘“Who does he think he is”, a politician from the Nile asked excitedly.’
(Spiegel, 8/1999: 18)
c. Weni glaubst du, daß ich _i gesehen habe.
who.ACC believe you that I seen have
‘Who do you believe that I saw?’
(Scherpenisse 1986: 84)
d. [Gegen ihn]i falle es den Republikanern hingegen schwerer,
against him fall it the Republicans but more.difficult
[[Angriffe _i] zu lancieren].
attacks to launch
‘It is more difficult for the Republicans to start attacks against him.’
(taz, 08. 02. 2008: 9)

The generalization is that a single constituent can be put in front of the finite verb
(Erdmann 1886: Chapter 2.4; Paul 1919: 69, 77). Hence, German is called a verb second
language. Crosslinguistically verb second languages are rare. While almost all Germanic
languages are verb second languages, V2 in general is not very common among the
languages of the world.
Sentences like the ones in (29) and (30) are usually analyzed as combination of a
constituent and a verb first clause from which this constituent is missing (Thiersch 1978;
den Besten 1983; Uszkoreit 1987). The examples in (30b, c) show that the element in
the Vorfeld can originate from an embedded clause. Since the dependency can cross
clause-boundaries it is called an unbounded dependency. In any case it is a non-local
dependency as all examples in (30) show.
The vast majority of declarative main clauses in German is V2. However, it did not
go unnoticed that there appear to be exceptions to the V2 rule in German (Engel
1970: 81; Beneš 1971: 162; van de Velde 1978; Dürscheid 1989: 87; Fanselow 1993: 67;
Hoberg 1997: 1634; G. Müller 1998: Chapter 5.3). Some examples are given in (31):

(31) a. [Zum zweiten Mal] [die Weltmeisterschaft] errang Clark 1965 …

for.the second time the world.championships won Clark 1965
‘Clark won the world championships for the second time in 1965.’
(Beneš 1971: 162)
1458 VII. Syntactic Sketches

b. [Besonders schnell] [in die Zahlungsunfähigkeit] rutschen demnach

especially fast in the insolvency slip according.to.this
junge Unternehmen und Betriebe mit Umsätzen unter 100.000 B.
young companies and firms with turnovers below 100.000 A
‘According to this young companies with a turnover below 100.000 A slip into
insolvency especially fast.’
c. „Wir erarbeiten derzeit Grundsätze für den Einsatz von Videoüberwachung“,
sagte Jacob der taz. […]
[Völlig] [auf die Überwachung] könne aber nicht verzichtet werden,
absolutely on the surveillance can but not go.without be
um „Inventurverluste“ zu vermeiden.
to stocktaking.losses to avoid
‘But the surveillance cannot be completely stopped, since this is the only way
to avoid stocktaking losses.’
(taz, 17./18. 05. 2008: 6)

Example (31b) is from tagesschau, 03. 12. 2008, 20:00, http://www.tagesschau.de/multi-

media/sendung/ts8914.html.
A documentation and discussion of various combinations of constituents can be found
in Müller (2003). My web page provides an updated list of examples. While the accepta-
bility of examples like (31) is surprising, it is not the case that anything goes. As Fanse-
low (1993: 67) pointed out the fronted constituents have to be parts of the same clause:

(32) a. Ich glaube dem Linguisten nicht, einen Nobelpreis gewonnen zu haben.
I believe the linguist not a Nobel.price won to have
‘I do not believe the linguist’s claim to have won a Nobel price.’
b. *Dem Linguisten einen Nobelpreis glaube ich nicht gewonnen zu haben.
the linguist a Nobel.price believe I not won to have

This can be captured by an analysis that assumes an empty verbal head in the Vorfeld
that corresponds to a verb in the rest of the sentence. The fronted constituents are com-
bined with this empty verbal head. The analysis of (31a) is thus similar to the one of (33):

(33) [[Zum zweiten Mal] [die Weltmeisterschaft] errungen] hat Clark 1965.
for.the second time the world.championships won has Clark 1965
‘Clark won the world championships for the second time in 1965.’

See G. Müller (1998: Chapter 5.3) and S. Müller (2005b) for analyses of this type with
different underlying assumptions. The analyses share the assumption that apparently
multiple frontings of the type discussed here are instances of partial fronting (see Müller
1998; Meurers 1999a; Müller 1999: Chapter 18) and that the V2 property of German
can be upheld despite the apparent counter evidence.
This is the place for a final remark on SOV as the basic order: all facts that have
been mentioned as evidence for SOV as the basic order can be and have been accounted
for in approaches that do not assume an empty verbal head (Uszkoreit 1987; Pollard
1996; Reape 1994; Kathol 2001; Müller 1999, 2002, 2004b). However, such approaches
41. German: A Grammatical Sketch 1459

do not extend to examples like (31) easily: Since no overt verbal element is present in
the Vorfeld, the only way to account for the data seems to be the stipulation of an empty
verbal head or an equivalent grammar rule (Müller 2005a). Head movement approaches
assume this element anyway and hence do not require extra stipulations for examples of
apparent multiple frontings.

4. The order of elements in the Mittelfeld

German is a language with relatively free constituent order: the arguments of a verb can
be ordered freely provided certain constraints are not violated. A lot of factors play a
role: animate NPs tend to be ordered before inanimate ones, short constituents before
long ones (Behaghel 1909: 139; Behaghel 1930: 86), pronouns tend to appear before
non-pronouns in a Mittelfeld initial position which is called Wackernagelposition, and
definite NPs before indefinite ones. See Lenerz (1977) and Hoberg (1981) for discussion.
Another important constraint is that given information precedes new information (Be-
haghel 1930: 84). Höhle (1982) looked at German constituent order in information struc-
tural terms and developed criteria for determining the unmarked constituent order. Ac-
cording to him the unmarked order is the one that can be used in most contexts.
Applying Höhle’s tests one can determine that the order in (34a) is the unmarked one:

(34) a. dass der Mann dem Jungen den Ball gibt (nom, dat, acc)
that the man.NOM the boy.DAT the ball.ACC gives
‘that the man gives the boy the ball’
b. dass der Mann den Ball dem Jungen gibt (nom, acc, dat)
that the man.NOM the ball.ACC the boy.DAT gives
c. dass den Ball der Mann dem Jungen gibt (acc, nom, dat)
that the ball.ACC the man.NOM the boy.DAT gives
d. dass den Ball dem Jungen der Mann gibt (acc, dat, nom)
that the ball.ACC the boy.DAT the man.NOM gives
e. dass dem Jungen der Mann den Ball gibt (dat, nom, acc)
that the boy.DAT the man.NOM the ball.ACC gives
f. dass dem Jungen den Ball der Mann gibt (dat, acc, nom)
that the boy.DAT the ball.ACC the man.NOM gives

While the reference to utterance contexts makes it possible to determine the unmarked
order, this does not tell us how the marked orders should be analyzed. One option is to
derive the marked orders from the unmarked one by transformations or something
equivalent (Ross 1967). In a transformational approach, (34b) is derived from (34a) by
movement of den Ball ‘the ball’:

(35) dass der Mann [den Ball]i dem Jungen _i gibt

that the man the ball the boy gives
1460 VII. Syntactic Sketches

Another option is to allow all possible orders and constrain them by linearization rules.
This option is called base-generation in Transformational Grammar since the various
constituent orders are generated by phrase structure rules before transformations apply,
that is, they are part of the transformational base (Fanselow 1993).
Non-transformational theories like LFG, HPSG, and CxG can implement analyses
that are equivalent to movement transformations, but this is rarely done (see Choi 1999
for an example). Instead the analyses are surface-oriented, that is, one does not assume
an underlying order from which other orders are derived. The surface-oriented ap-
proaches come in two varieties: those that assume flat structures or flat linearization
domains (Uszkoreit 1987; Reape 1994; Bouma and van Noord 1998; Kathol 2001) and
those that assume binary branching structures (Berman 2003a: 37 building on work by
Haider 1991; Kiss 1995; Müller 2005a). One way to analyze (34b) with binary branching
structures is to allow a head to combine with its arguments in any order. This was
suggested by Gunji (1986) for Japanese in the framework of HPSG and is also assumed
in many HPSG grammars of German. Fanselow (2001) makes a similar proposal for
German in the Minimalist Program.
The fact that adverbs can appear anywhere in the Mittelfeld is straightforwardly ac-
counted for in analyses that assume binary branching structures:

(36) a. dass [der Mann [dem Jungen [den Ball [gestern gab]]]]
that the man.DAT the boy.DAT the ball.ACC yesterday gave
‘that the man gave the boy the ball yesterday’
b. dass [der Mann [dem Jungen [gestern [den Ball gab]]]]
that the man.NOM the boy.DAT yesterday the ball.ACC gave
c. dass [der Mann [gestern [dem Jungen [den Ball gab]]]]
that the man.NOM yesterday the boy.DAT the ball.ACC gave
d. dass [gestern [der Mann [dem Jungen [den Ball gab]]]]
that yesterday the man.NOM the boy.DAT the ball.ACC gave

The verb is combined with one of its arguments at a time and the results of the combina-
tion are available for modification by adverbial elements. This also accounts for the
iteratability of adjuncts. In flat structures one would have to admit any number of ad-
juncts between the arguments. While this is not impossible (Weisweber and Preuss 1992;
Kasper 1994), the binary branching analysis is conceptually simpler.
Proponents of movement-based analyses argued that scope ambiguities are evidence
for movement. While a sentence in the unmarked order is not ambiguous as far as
quantifier scope is concerned, sentences with scrambled NPs are. This was explained by
the possibility to interpret the quantifiers at the base-position and at the surface position
(Frey 1993). So for (37b) one gets jedes > einem (surface position) and einem > jedes
(reconstructed position).

(37) a. Es ist nicht der Fall, dass er mindestens einem Verleger fast jedes
it is not the case that he at.least one publisher almost every
Gedicht anbot.
poem offered
‘It is not the case that he offered at least one publisher almost every poem.’
41. German: A Grammatical Sketch 1461

b. Es ist nicht der Fall, dass er fast jedes Gedichti mindestens einem
it is not the case that he almost every poem at.least one
Verleger _i anbot.
publisher offered
‘It is not the case that he offered almost every poem to at least one publisher.’

As it turned out this account overgenerates and hence, the scope data can be used as an
argument against movement-based analyses. Both Kiss (2001: 146) and Fanselow (2001:
section 2.6) point out that the reconstruction analysis fails for examples with ditransitive
verbs in which two arguments are in a marked position but keep their relative order. For
example mindestens einem Verleger ‘at least one publisher’ in (38) is predicted to be
interpretable at the position _i . This would result in a reading in which fast jedes Gedicht
‘almost every poem’ outscopes mindestens einem Verleger.

(38) Ich glaube daß mindestens einem Verlegeri fast jedes Gedichtj nur dieser
I believe that at.least one publisher almost every poem only this
Dichter _i _ j angeboten hat.
poet offered has
‘I believe that only this poet offered at least one publisher almost every poem.’

Such a reading does not exist.

In recent analyses in the Minimalist Program (Chomsky 1995) it is assumed that
movement of phrases is feature driven, that is, an element moves to a specifier position
in a syntactic tree if it can check a feature at this position. Frey (2004a) assumes a
KontrP (contrast phrase) and Frey (2004b) a TopP (topic phrase) in order to provide for
targets for movement (see also Rizzi 1997 for TopP and FocP ‘focus phrase’ in Italian
and Haftka 1995; Grewendorf 2002: section 2.6, 2009; Abraham 2003: 19; Laenzlinger
2004: 224; Hinterhölzel 2004: 18 for analyses of German using TopP and/or FocP).
Constituents have to move into the specifier position of one of these functional heads
depending on their information structural status. Fanselow (2003) showed that such
movement-based approaches fail, since there are cases of so-called altruistic movement
(see Rosengren 1993: 290−291 and Krifka 1998: 90). That is, elements do not move
because of their properties, but rather in order to free positions for other elements. For
instance, assuming the main accent at the default position immedeately before the verb,
the object will not be part of the focus in (39b).

(39) a. dass die Polizei gestern Linguisten verhaftete

that the police yesterday linguists arrested
‘that the police arrested linguists yesterday’
b. dass die Polizei Linguisten gestern verhaftete
that the police linguists yesterday arrested

If the object stays in the position next to the verb as in (39a), it gets the structural accent
(focus accent) and has to be interpreted as part of the focus.
Fanselow gives the following generalization with respect to reorderings: a direct ob-
ject can be placed at a marked position if the information structure of the sentence
requires that another constituent is in focus or that the object is not part of the focus. In
1462 VII. Syntactic Sketches

languages like German partial focussing can also be established by intonation, but choos-
ing a marked constituent order helps in marking the information structure unambigu-
ously, especially in written language. German differs from languages like Spanish (Zub-
izarreta 1998) in that the (altruistic) movement is optional in the former language but
obligatory in the latter one.
It follows that it is not reasonable to assume that constituents move to certain tree
positions to check features. However, this is the basic explanation for movement in
current Minimalist theorizing.
Fanselow (2003: Abschnitt 4, 2006: 8) also showed that order restrictions that hold
for topic and focus with respect to sentence adverbials can be explained in an analysis
such as the one that was laid out above. The positioning of sentence adverbs directly
before the focused part of the sentence is explained semantically: since sentence adverbi-
als behave like focus sensitive operators, they have to be placed directly before the
element they take scope over. It follows that elements that are not part of the focus
(topics) have to be placed to the left of sentence adverbs. No special topic position for
the description of local reorderings is necessary.

5. Extraposition
In section 3 we discussed fronting data. In this section I discuss dislocations of elements
to the right. Extraposition can be used to postpone heavy elements. This is useful since
otherwise the sentence brackets may be too far away from each other to be processed
successfully. (40) is an example of a train announcement:

(40) Auf Gleis drei fährt ein der ICE aus Hamburg zur
on platform three drives PART the ICE from Hamburg to.the
Weiterfahrt nach München über …
continuation.of.the.journey to Munic via
‘The ICE train from Hamburg to Munic via … is arriving at platform three.’

The syntactic category of the extraposed element is not restricted. PPs, VPs, clauses
and − as evidenced by (40) − even NPs can be extraposed. See Müller (1999: Chapter
13.1) and Müller (2002: ix−xi) for further naturally occuring examples of NP extraposi-
tion of different types.
Despite the tendency to extrapose heavy constituents, extraposition is not restricted
to heavy phrases:

(41) a. [[_i Bekannt] dazui ] hatte sich die „Kämpfende Kommunistische

confessed there.to had REFL the fighting communist
Partei“, eine Neugruppierung aus den Resten der altterroristischen
party, a reformation from the remainders of.the old.terrorist
Roten Brigaden.
Red Brigades
‘The Fighting Communist Party, a reformation of remainders of the old terror-
ist group Red Brigades, confessed this.’
(Spiegel, 44/1999: 111)
41. German: A Grammatical Sketch 1463

b. „Würde der sich doch aufhängen, jetzt, dann wäre Ruhe.“

would he REFL only hang now then would.be silence
‘If he would hang himself now, peace would be restored.’
(taz, 18. 11. 1998: 13)

In (41a) the pronominal adverb dazu is placed to the right of the non-finite verb, that is,
it is in the Nachfeld in a complex Vorfeld. In (41b) the adverb jetzt is extraposed.
The following example by Olsen (1981: 147) shows that sentential arguments may
be realized in the Mittelfeld.

(42) Ist, dass Köln am Rhein liegt, auch in Amerika bekannt?

is that Cologne at.the Rhine lies also in America known
‘Is it known in America as well that Cologne is located at the Rhine?’

Hence, it is plausible to assume that verbs take their arguments and adjuncts to the left
but, due to extraposition, the arguments and adjuncts may appear in the Nachfeld to the
right of the verb.
In connection with the Subjacency Principle (Chomsky 1973: 271, 1986: 40; Baltin
1981, 2006) it was claimed for German that extraposition is a restricted process in which
only two maximal projections may be crossed (Grewendorf 1988: 281; Rohrer
1996: 103). Which projections may be crossed is said to be due to language-specific
parameterization (Baltin 1981: 262, 2006; Rizzi 1982; Chomsky 1986: 40). According
to Grewendorf (1988: 81, 2002: 17−18) and Haider (2001: 285), NP is such a bounding
node in German. As the data in (43) show, extraposition in German is clearly a non-
local phenomenon that can cross as many NP nodes as we can come up with:

(43) a. Karl hat mir [eine Kopie [einer Fälschung [des Bildes [einer
Karl has me a copy of.a forgery of.the picture of.a
Frau _i]]]] gegeben, [die schon lange tot ist]i .
woman given who already long dead ist
‘Karl gave me a copy of a forgery of the picture of a woman who has been
dead for a long time.’
b. Ich habe [von [dem Versuch [eines Beweises [der Vermutung _i]]]]
I have of the attempt of.a proof of.the assumption
gehört, [dass es Zahlen gibt, die die folgenden Bedingungen erfüllen]i .
heard that it numbers gives that the following conditions satisfy
‘I have heard of the attempt to prove the assumption that there are numbers
for which the following conditions hold.’

(43a) shows an example of adjunct extraposition and (43b) shows that complement extra-
position is possible as well. For discussion and corpus data see Müller (1999: 211, 2004a,
2007). Koster (1978: 52) provides Dutch examples parallel to (43a). See also Strunk and
Snider (2013) for German and English data. A discussion of the differences between
examples like (43) and the ungrammatical examples that have previously been discussed
in the literature as evidence for subjacency constraints can be found in Crysmann (2013).
The data from section 3 show that fronting to the left can cross clause boundaries. In
contrast, extraposition seems to be clause bounded. The clause-boundedness constraint
1464 VII. Syntactic Sketches

was first discussed by Ross (1967) and later termed the Right Roof Constraint (RRC).
However, the Right Roof Constraint was called into question by Kohrt (1975) and Mei-
nunger (2000). Kohrt’s examples and most of Meinunger’s examples can be explained
as mono-clausal structures involving several verbs that form a verbal complex and,
hence, do not constitute evidence against the RRC. But Meinunger (2000: 201) pointed
out that sentences like (44) pose a challenge for the RRC:

(44) Peter hat, [dass er uns denjenigen Computer _i schenkt] fest versprochen,
Peter has that he us the.one computer gives firmly promised
[den er nicht mehr braucht]i .
that he not anymore needs
‘Peter can’t go back on his promise that he will give us the computer he no longer
needs as a present.’

(45) shows a naturally occurring example:

(45) [„Es gibt viele wechselseitige Verletzungen _i“], befindet er, [in die sich
it gives many reciprocal injuries finds he in which REFL
einzumischen er nicht die geringste Neigung zeigt]i.
to.involve he not the slightest inclination shows
‘He finds that there are many reciprocal injuries and he does not show the slightest
inclination to get involved in these injuries.’
(taz, 01. 04. 2009: 16)

However, (45) differs from (44) in that it could be explained as a parenthetical insertion
of befindet er ‘finds he’ into a normal sentence (see Reis 1995 on parenthesis in Ger-
man). According to the parenthetical analysis, (45) would not involve extraposition at all.
While the above examples are marked − (44) is more marked than (45) −, it is an
open question how these cases should be handled. For the corresponding restrictions on
left-ward movement it has been pointed out that both information structure (Goldberg
2006: Chapter 7.2; Ambridge and Goldberg 2008) and processing constraints (Grosu
1973; Ellefson and Christiansen 2000; Gibson 1998; Kluender 1992; Kluender and Kutas
1993) influence extractability. So, a combination of similar factors may play a role for
movement to the right as well and hence, the Right Roof Constraint would not be a
syntactic constraint but the result of other restrictions.

6. Subjects, passive, case, and agreement

German is a language that allows for subjectless constructions. There are a few verbs
like grauen ‘to dread’, schwindeln + dative/accusative ‘to feel dizzy’, and frieren +
accusative ‘to be cold’ that can be used without a subject. (46) shows an example:

(46) Den Studenten graut vor der Prüfung.

the student.DAT .PL dreads.3 SG before the exam
‘The students dread the exam.’
41. German: A Grammatical Sketch 1465

The dative and accusative arguments of the verbs mentioned above are not subjects since
they do not agree with the verb (46), they are not omitted in controlled infinitives, in
fact control constructions are not possible at all (47a), and the verbs do not allow impera-
tives to be formed (47b) (Reis 1982).

(47) a. *Der Student versuchte, (dem Student) nicht vor dem Examen
the student.NOM tried the student.DAT not before the exam
zu grauen.
to dread
‘The student tried not to dread the exam.’
b. *Graue nicht vor der Prüfung!
dread not before the exam
‘Do not dread the exam!’

As Reis (1982) argued, German subjects are always NPs in the nominative. The view
that clauses are never subjects is not shared by everybody (see for instance Eisenberg
1994: 285). In particular in theories like LFG, in which grammatical functions are primi-
tives of the theory, there is an ongoing debate concerning the status of sentential argu-
ments: Dalrymple and Lødrup (2000); Berman (2003b, 2007); Alsina, Mohanan, and
Mohanan (2005); Forst (2006). In any case, the status of sentential arguments does not
affect the fact that subjectless constructions exist in German.
German also allows for passivization of intransitive verbs resulting in subjectless sen-
tences:

(48) a. Hier tanzen alle.

here dance all.NOM
‘Everybody dances here.’
b. Hier wird getanzt.
here is danced
‘Dancing is done here.’
c. Die Frau hilft dem Mann.
the woman.NOM helps the man.DAT

d. Dem Mann wird geholfen.

the man.DAT is helped
‘The man is being helped.’

tanzen is an intransitive verb. In the passive sentence (48b), no NP is realized. helfen is

a verb that governs the nominative and the dative (48c). In passive sentences the subject
is suppressed and the dative object is realized without any change (48d). The sentences
in (48b) and (48d) are subjectless constructions. German differs from languages like
Icelandic in not having dative subjects (Zaenen, Maling, and Thráinsson 1985). One test
for subjecthood that Zaenen, Maling, and Thráinsson (1985: 477) apply is the test for
controllability of an element.
1466 VII. Syntactic Sketches

(49) *Der Student versucht, getanzt zu werden.

the student tries danced to get
Intended: ‘The student tries to dance.’ or ‘The student tries to make somebody
dance.’

Like (49), infinitives with passivized verbs that govern only a dative cannot be embedded
under control verbs, as (50) shows.

(50) *Der Student versucht, geholfen zu werden.

the student tries helped to get
Intended: ‘The student tries to get helped.’

This shows that the dative in (48d) is a complement and not a subject.
There is a very direct way to analyze the passive in German (and other languages)
that goes back to Haider (1984, 1986). Haider suggests to designate the argument of the
verb that has subject properties. This argument is the subject of unergative and transitive
verbs. Unaccusative verbs do not have a designated argument, since it is assumed that
their nominative argument has object properties (see Grewendorf 1989 for an extensive
discussion of unaccusativity in German, see Kaufmann 1995 for a discussion of semantic
factors, and Müller 2002: Chapter 3.1.1 for problems with some of the unaccusativity
tests). (51) shows some prototypical argument frames with the designated argument un-
derlined: ankommen ‘to arrive’, tanzen ‘to dance’, auffallen ‘to notice’, lieben ‘to love’,
schenken ‘to give as a present’, and helfen ‘to help’.

(51) arguments
a. ankommen (unaccusative): )NP[str]*
b. tanzen (unergative): )NP[str]*
c. auffallen (unaccusative): )NP[str], NP[ldat]*
d. lieben (transitive): )NP[str], NP[str]*
e. schenken (transitive): )NP[str], NP[str], NP[ldat]*
f. helfen (unergative): )NP[str], NP[ldat]*

In the valence frames in (51) str stands for structural case and ldat for lexical dative.
Structural case is case that changes depending on the syntactic environment. For instance
the second argument of schenken can be realized as accusative in the active and as
nominative in passive sentences:

(52) a. dass sie dem Jungen den Ball geschenkt hat

that she.NOM the boy.DAT the ball.ACC given has
‘that she gave the boy the ball’
b. dass dem Jungen der Ball geschenkt wurde
that the boy.DAT the ball.NOM given was
‘that the ball was given to the boy’
41. German: A Grammatical Sketch 1467

I follow Haider (1986: 20) in assuming that the dative is a lexical case. As shown in
(48d) the dative does not change in the werden passive. (Since arguments that are dative
in the active can be realized as nominative in the bekommen ‘become’ passive, the status
of the dative as structural or lexical case is controversial. See Müller 2002: Chapter 3
for a treatment of the bekommen passive and further references.) The arguments are
ordered with respect to obliqueness (Keenan and Comrie 1977), which is relevant for
many phenomena, for instance, topic drop as in example (10b), case assignment, and
pronoun binding (Grewendorf 1985; Pollard and Sag 1992).
The morphological rule that licenses the participle blocks the designated argument.
(53) shows the participles and their blocked arguments.

(53) DA SUBCAT

a. angekommen (unaccusative): )* )NP[str]*

b. getanzt (unergative): )NP[str]* )*
c. aufgefallen (unaccusative): )* )NP[str], NP[ldat]*
d. geliebt (transitive): )NP[str]* )NP[str]*
e. geschenkt (transitive): )NP[str]* )NP[str], NP[ldat]*
f. geholfen (unergative): )NP[str]* )NP[ldat]*

The passive auxiliary combines with the participle and realizes all unblocked arguments
(52b), while the perfect auxiliary deblocks the designated argument and realizes it in
addition to all other arguments of the participle (52a).
Having explained which arguments are realized in active and passive, I now turn to
case assignment and agreement: In verbal domains, nominative is assigned to the least
oblique argument with structural case. All other arguments with structural case are as-
signed accusative in verbal domains. See Yip, Maling, and Jackendoff (1987) and Meu-
rers (1999b); Przepiórkowski (1999); Müller (2008) for further details on case assign-
ment along this line.
In the analysis developed here, the verb agrees with the least oblique argument that
has structural case. If there is no such argument, the verb is 3rd person singular.
Such an analysis of passive, as opposed to a GB analysis à la Grewendorf (1989) can
explain the German data without the stipulation of empty expletive elements. The prob-
lem for movement based analyses of the German passive in the spirit of Chomsky (1981)
is that there is no movement. To take an example, consider the passive of (54a). The
unmarked serialization of the arguments in the passivized clause is (54b) not the seriali-
zation in (54c), which could be argued to involve movement of the underlying accusative
object (Lenerz 1977: section 4.4.3).

(54) a. dass das Mädchen dem Jungen den Ball schenkt

that the girl.NOM the boy.DAT the ball.ACC gives.as. a.present
‘that the girl gives the boy the ball as a present’
b. dass dem Jungen der Ball geschenkt wurde
that the boy.DAT the ball.NOM given was
‘that the ball was given to the boy’
1468 VII. Syntactic Sketches

c. dass der Ball dem Jungen geschenkt wurde

that the ball.NOM the boy.DAT given was

The object in the active sentence is serialized in the same position as the subject of the
passive sentence. Grewendorf captured this by assuming that there is an empty expletive
element in the position where nominative is assigned and this empty element is con-
nected to the subject which remains in the VP and gets case by transfer from the subject
position. The same would apply to agreement information.
Given recent assumptions about the nature of linguistic knowledge (Hauser, Chomsky,
and Fitch 2002; Goldberg 2006; Tomasello 2003), analyses that assume empty expletive
elements are not adequate since they cannot account for language acquisition. In order
for the respective grammars to be learnable there has to be innate language specific
knowledge that includes knowledge about subject positions and knowledge about the
obligatoriness of subjects. In the analysis suggested here, no such knowledge is neces-
sary.

7. Summary
In this article I sketched the main building blocks of German clausal syntax. I assume a
binary branching verb final structure. This structure is assumed for verb initial and for
verb final clauses. In verb initial clauses the verb is related to a trace in the rechte
Satzklammer. The arguments of the verb can be discharged in any order and adverbs can
appear between the arguments at any place in the Mittelfeld. The subject is selected by
the verb like any other argument. This gives a straightforward account of subjectless sen-
tences.
While I hope to have been able to sufficiently motivate such an analysis throughout
the individual sections, the analysis remains sketchy. Due to space limitations I could
not go into the details, but the pointers to the relevant publications will enable the
interested reader to get more information. Of course pointers to publications of authors
working in different frameworks do not guarantee that a sketch can be turned into a
consistent grammar fragment, but the reader may rest assured that the things that I
represented here are consistent: They have been implemented in a downloadable, compu-
ter processable grammar fragment that is described in detail in Müller (2013).

41. Acknowledgements

I thank Felix Bildhauer, Philippa Cook, Jakob Maché, Bjarne 0̸rsnes, and an anonymous
reviewer for comments on an earlier version of this paper.
41. German: A Grammatical Sketch 1469

8. Abbreviations
The following is a list of abbreviations that are not definied by the Leipzig Glossing
Rules, which are used throughout the paper.

PART particle
PREFIX prefix

9. References (selected)
Abraham, Werner
2003 The syntactic link between thema and rhema: the syntax-discourse interface. Folia Lin-
guistica 37 1−2: 13−34.
Alsina, Alex, KP Mohanan, and Tara Mohanan
2005 How to get rid of the COMP. In: Miriam Butt and Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceed-
ings of the LFG 2005 Conference Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Altmann, Hans
1981 Formen der „Herausstellung“ im Deutschen: Rechtsversetzung, Linksversetzung, freies
Thema und verwandte Konstruktionen. (Linguistische Arbeiten 106.) Tübingen: Max
Niemeyer Verlag.
Altmann, Hans
1993 Satzmodus. In: Jacobs, Joachim, Arnim von Stechow, Wolfgang Sternefeld and Theo
Vennemann (eds.), Syntax − Ein Internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung
9.2, 1006−1029. (Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft.) Berlin,
New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Ambridge, Ben, and Adele E. Goldberg
2008 The island status of clausal complements: Evidence in favor of an information structure
explanation. Cognitive Linguistics 19: 349−381.
Bach, Emmon
1962 The order of elements in a Transformational Grammar of German. Language 8 3:
263−269.
Baltin, Mark
1981 Strict bounding. In: Carl Lee Baker and John J. McCarthy (eds.), The Logical Problem
of Language Acquisition. Cambridge, MA/London, England: MIT Press.
Baltin, Mark
2006 Extraposition. In: Martin Everaert, Henk van Riemsdijk, Rob Goedemans and Bart Hol-
lebrandse (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, 237−271. (Blackwell Handbooks
in Linguistics.) Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Bartsch, Renate, and Theo Vennemann
1972 Semantic Structures. A Study in the Relation between Semantics and Syntax. (Athenäum-
Skripten Linguistik 9.) Frankfurt/Main: Athenäum.
Bech, Gunnar
1955 Studien über das deutsche Verbum infinitum. (Linguistische Arbeiten 139.) Tübingen:
Max Niemeyer Verlag. 2nd unchanged edition 1983.
Behaghel, Otto
1909 Beziehung zwischen Umfang und Reihenfolge von Satzgliedern. Indogermanische For-
schungen 25: 110−142.
Behaghel, Otto
1930 Von deutscher Wortstellung. Zeitschrift für Deutschkunde 44: 81−89.
1470 VII. Syntactic Sketches

Behaghel, Otto
1932 Die deutsche Syntax. Eine geschichtliche Darstellung. Band IV: Wortstellung. Perioden-
bau. (Germanische Bibliothek) Heidelberg: Carl Winters Universitätsbuchhandlung.
Beneš, Eduard
1971 Die Besetzung der ersten Position im deutschen Aussagesatz. In: Hugo Moser (ed.),
Fragen der Strukturellen Syntax und der Kontrastiven Grammatik, 160−182. (Sprache
der Gegenwart − Schriften des IdS Mannheim 17.) Düsseldorf: Pädagogischer Verlag
Schwann.
Berman, Judith
2003a Clausal Syntax of German. (Studies in Constraint-Based Lexicalism.) Stanford, CA:
CSLI Publications.
Berman, Judith
2003b Zum Einfluss der strukturellen Position auf die syntaktische Funktion der Komplement-
sätze. Deutsche Sprache 3: 263−286.
Berman, Judith
2007 Functional identification of complement clauses in German and the specification of
COMP. In: Annie Zaenen, Jane Simpson, Tracy Holloway King, Jane Grimshaw, Joan
Maling and Chris Manning (eds.), Architectures, Rules, and Preferences. Variations on
Themes by Joan W. Bresnan. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Bierwisch, Manfred
1963 Grammatik des deutschen Verbs. (studia grammatica 2.) Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Bonami, Olivier, Danièle Godard, and B. Kampers-Manhe
2004 Adverb classification. In: Francis Corblin and Henriëtte de Swart (eds.), Handbook of
French Semantics, 143−184. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Bouma, Gosse, and Gertjan van Noord
1998 Word order constraints on verb clusters in German and Dutch. In: Erhard W. Hinrichs,
Andreas Kathol and Tsuneko Nakazawa (eds.), Complex Predicates in Nonderivational
Syntax, 43−72. (Syntax and Semantics 30.) San Diego: Academic Press.
Choi, Hye-Won
1999 Optimizing Structure in Scrambling. Scrambling and Information Structure. (Disserta-
tions in Linguistics.) Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Chomsky, Noam
1973 Conditions on transformations. In: Stephen R. Anderson and Paul Kiparski (eds.), A
Festschrift for Morris Halle, 232−286. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Chomsky, Noam
1981 Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.
Chomsky, Noam
1986 Barriers. (Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 13.) Cambridge, MA/London, England: MIT
Press.
Chomsky, Noam
1995 The Minimalist Program. (Current Studies in Linguistics 28.) Cambridge, MA/ London,
England: MIT Press.
Crysmann, Berthold
2004 Underspecification of intersective modifier attachment: Some arguments from German.
In: Stefan Müller (ed.), Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Head-
Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Crysmann, Berthold
2013 On the locality of complement clause and relative clause extraposition. In: Gert Webel-
huth, Manfred Sailer and Heike Walker (eds.), Rightward Movement in a Comparative
Perspective, 369−396. (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 200.) Amsterdam/Philadel-
phia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
41. German: A Grammatical Sketch 1471

Dalrymple, Mary, and Helge Lødrup

2000 The grammatical functions of complement clauses. In: Miriam Butt and Tracy Holloway
King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG 2000 Conference. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
den Besten, Hans
1983 On the interaction of root transformations and lexical deletive rules. In: Werner Abraham
(ed.), On the Formal Syntax of the Westgermania: Papers from the 3rd Groningen Gram-
mar Talks, Groningen, January 1981, 47−131. (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 3.)
Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Drach, Erich
1937 Grundgedanken der deutschen Satzlehre. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesell-
schaft. 4., unveränderte Auflage 1963.
Dürscheid, Christa
1989 Zur Vorfeldbesetzung in deutschen Verbzweit-Strukturen. (FOKUS 1.) Trier: Wissen-
schaftlicher Verlag.
Eisenberg, Peter
1994 Grundriß der deutschen Grammatik. Stuttgart, Weimar: Verlag J. B. Metzler, 3. edition.
Ellefson, Michelle R., and Morten Christiansen
2000 Subjacency constraints without universal grammar: Evidence from artificial language
learning and connectionist modeling. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of
the Cognitive Science Society, 645−650. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Engel, Ulrich
1970 Regeln zur Wortstellung. Forschungsberichte des Instituts für deutsche Sprache 5, Insti-
tut für deutsche Sprache, Mannheim.
Erdmann, Oskar
1886 Grundzüge der deutschen Syntax nach ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung, Vol. 1. Stutt-
gart: Verlag der J. G. Cotta’schen Buchhandlung. Reprint: Hildesheim: Georg Olms
Verlag, 1985.
Fanselow, Gisbert
1993 Die Rückkehr der Basisgenerierer. Groninger Arbeiten zur Germanistischen Linguistik
36: 1−74.
Fanselow, Gisbert
2001 Features, θ-roles, and free constituent order. Linguistic Inquiry 32 3: 405−437.
Fanselow, Gisbert
2003 Free constituent order: A Minimalist interface account. Folia Linguistica 37 1−2: 191−
231.
Fanselow, Gisbert
2006 On pure syntax (uncontaminated by information structure). In: Patrick Brandt and Eric
Fuss (eds.), Form, Structure and Grammar: a Festschrift Presented to Günther Grewen-
dorf on Occasion of His 60 th Birthday, 137−157. (Studia grammatica 63.) Berlin: Akade-
mie Verlag.
Finkbeiner, Rita and Jörg Meibauer
2014 Richtig gut, das Paper! Satz, non-sententiale/unartikulierte Konstituente, Konstruktion?
In: Finkbeiner, Rita and Jörg Meibauer (eds.), Satztypen und Konstruktionen im Deut-
schen. (Linguistik − Impulse und Tendenzen.) Berlin, Boston: de Gruyter.
Forst, Martin
2006 COMP in (parallel) grammar writing. In: Miriam Butt and Tracy Holloway King (eds.),
The Proceedings of the LFG ’06 Conference. Stanford, CA, CSLI Publications.
Fourquet, Jean
1957 Review of: Heinz Anstock: Deutsche Syntax − Lehr- und Übungsbuch. Wirkendes Wort
8: 120−122.
1472 VII. Syntactic Sketches

Fourquet, Jean
1970 Prolegomena zu einer deutschen Grammatik. (Sprache der Gegenwart − Schriften des
Instituts für deutsche Sprache in Mannheim 7.) Düsseldorf: Pädagogischer Verlag
Schwann.
Frey, Werner
1993 Syntaktische Bedingungen für die semantische Interpretation. Über Bindung, implizite
Argumente und Skopus. (studia grammatica 35.) Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Frey, Werner
2004a The Grammar-Pragmatics Interface and the German Prefield. Forschungsprogramm
Sprache und Pragmatik 52, Germanistisches Institut der Universität Lund.
Frey, Werner
2004b A medial topic position for German. Linguistische Berichte 198: 153−190.
Fries, Norbert
1988 Über das Null-Topik im Deutschen. Forschungsprogramm Sprache und Pragmatik 3,
Germanistisches Institut der Universität Lund, Lund.
Gibson, Edward
1998 Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition 68 1: 1−76.
Goldberg, Adele E.
2006 Constructions at Work. The Nature of Generalization in Language. (Oxford Linguistics.)
Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Grewendorf, Günther
1985 Anaphern bei Objekt-Koreferenz im Deutschen. Ein Problem für die Rektions-Bin-
dungs-Theorie. In: Werner Abraham (ed.), Erklärende Syntax des Deutschen, 137−171.
(Studien zur deutschen Grammatik 25.) Tübingen: originally Gunter Narr Verlag now
Stauffenburg Verlag.
Grewendorf, Günther
1988 Aspekte der deutschen Syntax. Eine Rektions-Bindungs-Analyse. (Studien zur deutschen
Grammatik 33.) Tübingen: originally Gunter Narr Verlag now Stauffenburg Verlag.
Grewendorf, Günther
1989 Ergativity in German. (Studies in Generative Grammar 35.) Dordrecht: Holland, Provi-
dence: U. S.A.: Foris Publications.
Grewendorf, Günther
2002 Minimalistische Syntax. (UTB für Wissenschaft: Uni-Taschenbücher 2313.) Tübingen,
Basel: A. Francke Verlag GmbH.
Grewendorf, Günther
2009 The left clausal periphery. Clitic left dislocation in Italian and left dislocation in German.
In: Benjamin Shear, Philippa Cook, Werner Frey and Claudia Maienborn (eds.), Dislo-
cated Elements in Discourse. Syntactic, Semantic, and Pragmatic Perspectives, 49−94.
(Routledge Studies in Germanic Linguistics.) New York: Routledge.
Grosu, Alexander
1973 On the status of the so-called right roof constraint. Language 49 2: 294−311.
Gunji, Takao
1986 Subcategorization and word order. In: William J. Poser (ed.), Papers from the Second
International Workshop on Japanese Syntax, 1−21. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Haftka, Brigitta
1995 Syntactic positions for topic and contrastive focus in the German middlefield. In: Inga
Kohlhof, Susanne Winkler and Hans-Bernhard Drubig (eds.), Proceedings of the Göttin-
gen Focus Workshop, 17 DGFS, March 1−3, 137−157. (Arbeitspapiere des SFB 340
No. 69.) Eberhard-Karls Universität Tübingen.
Haider, Hubert
1984 Was zu haben ist und was zu sein hat − Bemerkungen zum Infinitiv. Papiere zur Linguis-
tik 30 1: 23−36.
41. German: A Grammatical Sketch 1473

Haider, Hubert
1986 Fehlende Argumente: vom Passiv zu kohärenten Infinitiven. Linguistische Berichte 101:
3−33.
Haider, Hubert
1991 Fakultativ kohärente Infinitivkonstruktionen im Deutschen. Arbeitspapiere des SFB 340
No. 17, IBM Deutschland GmbH, Heidelberg.
Haider, Hubert
1993 Deutsche Syntax − generativ. Vorstudien zur Theorie einer projektiven Grammatik.
(Tübinger Beiträge zur Linguistik 325.) Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
Haider, Hubert
1997 Typological implications of a directionality constraint on projections. In: Artemis Alexi-
adou and T. Alan Hall (eds.), Studies on Universal Grammar and Typological Variation,
17−33. (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 13.) Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benja-
mins Publishing Co.
Haider, Hubert
2001 Parametrisierung in der Generativen Grammatik. In: Martin Haspelmath, Eckehard
König, Wulf Oesterreicher and Wolfgang Raible (eds.), Sprachtypologie und sprachliche
Universalien − Language Typology and Language Universals. Ein internationales
Handbuch − An International Handbook, 283−294. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Hauser, Marc D., Noam Chomsky, and W. Tecumseh Fitch
2002 The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science 298:
1569−1579.
Hinterhölzel, Roland
2004 Language change versus grammar change: What diachronic data reveal about the inter-
action between core grammar and periphery. In: Carola Trips and Eric Fuß (eds.), Dia-
chronic Clues to Synchronic Grammar, 131−160. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benja-
mins Publishing Co.
Hoberg, Ursula
1981 Die Wortstellung in der geschriebenen deutschen Gegenwartssprache. (Heutiges
Deutsch. Linguistische Grundlagen. Forschungen des Instituts für deutsche Sprache 10.)
München: Max Hueber Verlag.
Hoberg, Ursula
1997 Die Linearstruktur des Satzes. In: Hans-Werner Eroms, Gerhard Stickel and Gisela Zi-
fonun (eds.), Grammatik der deutschen Sprache, Vol. 7.2 of Schriften des Instituts für
deutsche Sprache, 1495−1680. Berlin/New York, NY: Walter de Gruyter.
Hoffmann, Ludger
1997 Zur Grammatik von Text und Diskurs. In: Hans-Werner Eroms, Gerhard Stickel and
Gisela Zifonun (eds.), Grammatik der deutschen Sprache, Vol. 7.1 of Schriften des
Instituts für deutsche Sprache, 98−591. Berlin/New York, NY: Walter de Gruyter.
Höhle, Tilman N.
1982 Explikation für „normale Betonung“ und „normale Wortstellung“. In: Werner Abraham
(ed.), Satzglieder im Deutschen − Vorschläge zur syntaktischen, semantischen und prag-
matischen Fundierung, 75−153. (Studien zur deutschen Grammatik 15.) Tübingen: orig-
inally Gunter Narr Verlag now Stauffenburg Verlag.
Höhle, Tilman N.
1986 Der Begriff „Mittelfeld“, Anmerkungen über die Theorie der topologischen Felder. In:
Walter Weiss, Herbert Ernst Wiegand and Marga Reis (eds.), Akten des VII. Kongresses
der Internationalen Vereinigung für germanische Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft.
Göttingen 1985. Band 3. Textlinguistik contra Stilistik? − Wortschatz und Wörterbuch −
Grammatische oder pragmatische Organisation von Rede?, 329−340. (Kontroversen,
alte und neue 4.) Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
1474 VII. Syntactic Sketches

Höhle, Tilman N.
1988 Verum-Fokus. Netzwerk Sprache und Pragmatik 5, Universität Lund-German. Inst.,
Lund.
Höhle, Tilman N.
1991 Projektionsstufen bei V-Projektionen. Tübingen, ms.
Höhle, Tilman N.
1997 Vorangestellte Verben und Komplementierer sind eine natürliche Klasse. In: Christa
Dürscheid, Karl Heinz Ramers and Monika Schwarz (eds.), Sprache im Fokus. Festschrift
für Heinz Vater zum 65. Geburtstag, 107−120. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Huang, C.-T. James
1984 On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 15 4: 531−574.
Jacobs, Joachim
1986 The syntax of focus and adverbials in German. In: Werner Abraham and S. de Meij (eds.),
Topic, Focus, and Configurationality. Papers from the 6th Groningen Grammar Talks,
Groningen, 1984, 103−127. (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 4.) Amsterdam/Phila-
delphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Kasper, Robert T.
1994 Adjuncts in the Mittelfeld. In: John Nerbonne, Klaus Netter and Carl J. Pollard (eds.),
German in Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, 39−70. (CSLI Lecture Notes 46.)
Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Kathol, Andreas
2001 Positional effects in a monostratal grammar of German. Journal of Linguistics 37 1:
35−66.
Kaufmann, Ingrid
1995 Konzeptuelle Grundlagen semantischer Dekompositionsstrukturen. Die Kombinatorik lo-
kaler Verben und prädikativer Elemente. (Linguistische Arbeiten 335.) Tübingen: Max
Niemeyer Verlag.
Keenan, Edward L., and Bernard Comrie
1977 Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 8 1: 63−99.
Kiss, Tibor
1995 Infinite Komplementation. Neue Studien zum deutschen Verbum infinitum. (Linguistische
Arbeiten 333.) Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Kiss, Tibor
2001 Configurational and relational scope determination in German. In: Walt Detmar Meurers
and Tibor Kiss (eds.), Constraint-Based Approaches to Germanic Syntax, 141−175. (Stud-
ies in Constraint-Based Lexicalism 7.) Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Kiss, Tibor, and Birgit Wesche
1991 Verb order and head movement. In: Otthein Herzog and ClausRainer Rollinger (eds.), Text
Understanding in LILOG, 216−242. (Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 546.) Berlin/
Heidelberg/New York, NY: Springer Verlag.
Kluender, Robert
1992 Deriving island constraints from principles of predication. In: Helen Goodluck and Mi-
chael Rochemont (eds.), Island Constraints: Theory, Acquisition, and Processing, 223−
258. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Kluender, Robert, and Marta Kutas
1993 Subjacency as a processing phenomenon. Language and Cognitive Processes 8 4: 573−
633.
Kohrt, Manfred
1975 A note on bounding. Linguistic Inquiry 6: 167−171.
Koster, Jan
1975 Dutch as an SOV language. Linguistic Analysis 1 2: 111−136.
41. German: A Grammatical Sketch 1475

Koster, Jan
1978 Locality Principles in Syntax. Dordrecht: Holland, Cinnaminson: U. S.A.: Foris Publica-
tions.
Krifka, Manfred
1998 Scope inversion under the rise-fall contour in German. Linguistic Inquiry 29 1: 75−112.
Laenzlinger, Christoph
2004 A feature-based theory of adverb syntax. In: Jennifer R. Austin, Stefan Engelberg and
Gisa Rauh (eds.), Adverbials: The Interplay Between Meaning, Context, and Syntactic
Structure, 205−252. (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 70.) Amsterdam/Philadelphia:
John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Lenerz, Jürgen
1977 Zur Abfolge nominaler Satzglieder im Deutschen. (Studien zur deutschen Grammatik 5.)
Tübingen: originally Gunter Narr Verlag now Stauffenburg Verlag.
Meinunger, André
2000 Syntactic Aspects of Topic and Comment. (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 38.) Am-
sterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Meinunger, André
2001 Restrictions on verb raising. Linguistic Inquiry 32 4: 732−740.
Meurers, Walt Detmar
1999a German partial-VP fronting revisited. In: Gert Webelhuth, Jean-Pierre Koenig and Andreas
Kathol (eds.), Lexical and Constructional Aspects of Linguistic Explanation, 129−144.
(Studies in Constraint-Based Lexicalism 1.) Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Meurers, Walt Detmar
1999b Raising spirits (and assigning them case). Groninger Arbeiten zur Germanistischen Lin-
guistik (GAGL) 43: 173−226.
Meurers, Walt Detmar
2000 Lexical Generalizations in the Syntax of German Non-Finite Constructions. Arbeitspapiere
des SFB 340 No. 145, Eberhard-Karls-Universität, Tübingen.
Müller, Gereon
1998 Incomplete Category Fronting. A Derivational Approach to Remnant Movement in Ger-
man. (Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 42.) Dordrecht/Boston/London:
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Müller, Stefan
1999 Deutsche Syntax deklarativ. Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar für das Deutsche.
(Linguistische Arbeiten 394.) Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Müller, Stefan
2002 Complex Predicates: Verbal Complexes, Resultative Constructions, and Particle Verbs in
German. (Studies in Constraint-Based Lexicalism 13.) Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Müller, Stefan
2003 Mehrfache Vorfeldbesetzung. Deutsche Sprache 31 1: 29−62.
Müller, Stefan
2004a Complex NPs, subjacency, and extraposition. Snippets 8: 10−11.
Müller, Stefan
2004b Continuous or discontinuous constituents? a comparison between syntactic analyses for
constituent order and their processing systems. Research on Language and Computation,
Special Issue on Linguistic Theory and Grammar Implementation 2 2: 209−257.
Müller, Stefan
2005a Zur Analyse der deutschen Satzstruktur. Linguistische Berichte 201: 3−39.
Müller, Stefan
2005b Zur Analyse der scheinbar mehrfachen Vorfeldbesetzung. Linguistische Berichte 203:
297−330.
1476 VII. Syntactic Sketches

Müller, Stefan
2007 Qualitative Korpusanalyse für die Grammatiktheorie: Introspektion vs. Korpus. In: Gisela
Zifonun and Werner Kallmeyer (eds.), Sprachkorpora − Datenmengen und Erkenntnis-
fortschritt, 70−90. (Institut für Deutsche Sprache Jahrbuch 2006) Berlin: Walter de
Gruyter.
Müller, Stefan
2008 Depictive secondary predicates in German and English. In: Christoph Schroeder, Gerd
Hentschel and Winfried Boeder (eds.), Secondary Predicates in Eastern European Lan-
guages and Beyond, 255−273. (Studia Slavica Oldenburgensia 16.) Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag.
Müller, Stefan
2013 Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar: Eine Einführung. (Stauffenburg Einführungen
17.) Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag, 3. edition.
Müller, Stefan
2014a Elliptical constructions, multiple frontings, and surface-based syntax. In: Paola Monach-
esi, Gerhard Jäger, Gerald Penn and Shuly Wintner (eds.), Proceedings of Formal Gram-
mar 2004, Nancy, 91−109. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Müller, Stefan
2014b Satztypen: Lexikalisch oder/und phrasal? In: Rita Finkbeiner und Jörg Meibauer (eds.),
Satztypen und Konstruktionen im Deutschen. (Linguistik − Impulse und Tendenzen.)
Berlin, New York, Heidelberg: de Gruyter.
Netter, Klaus
1992 On non-head non-movement. An HPSG treatment of finite verb position in German.
In: Günther Görz (ed.), Konvens 92. 1. Konferenz „Verarbeitung natürlicher Sprache“.
Nürnberg 7.−9. Oktober 1992, 218−227. (Informatik aktuell.) Berlin/Heidelberg/New
York, NY: Springer Verlag.
Olsen, Susan
1981 Problems of seem / scheinen Constructions and their Implications for the Theory of
Predicate Sentential Complementation. (Linguistische Arbeiten 96.) Tübingen: Max
Niemeyer Verlag.
Önnerfors, Olaf
1997 Verb-erst-Deklarativsätze. Grammatik und Pragmatik. (Lunder Germanistische For-
schungen 60.) Stockholm: Almquist and Wiksell International.
Paul, Hermann
1919 Deutsche Grammatik. Teil IV: Syntax, Vol. 3. Halle an der Saale: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
2nd unchanged edition 1968, Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Pollard, Carl J.
1996 On head non-movement. In: Harry Bunt and Arthur van Horck (eds.), Discontinuous
Constituency, 279−305. (Natural Language Processing 6.) Berlin/New York, NY: Mou-
ton de Gruyter. Veröffentlichte Version eines Ms. von 1990.
Pollard, Carl J., and Ivan A. Sag
1992 Anaphors in English and the scope of binding theory. Linguistic Inquiry 23 2: 261−303.
Przepiórkowski, Adam
1999 On case assignment and “adjuncts as complements”. In: Gert Webelhuth, Jean-Pierre
Koenig and Andreas Kathol (eds.), Lexical and Constructional Aspects of Linguistic
Explanation, 231−245. (Studies in Constraint-Based Lexicalism 1.) Stanford, CA:
CSLI Publications.
Reape, Mike
1994 Domain union and word order variation in German. In: John Nerbonne, Klaus Netter
and Carl J. Pollard (eds.), German in Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, 151−
198. (CSLI Lecture Notes 46.) Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Reis, Marga
1974 Syntaktische Hauptsatzprivilegien und das Problem der deutschen Wortstellung. Zeit-
schrift für Germanistische Linguistik 2 3: 299−327.
41. German: A Grammatical Sketch 1477

Reis, Marga
1980 On justifying topological frames: ‘positional field’ and the order of nonverbal constitu-
ents in German. Documentation et Recherche en Linguistique Allemande Contemporaine
22/23: 59−85.
Reis, Marga
1982 Zum Subjektbegriff im Deutschen. In: Werner Abraham (ed.), Satzglieder im Deut-
schen − Vorschläge zur syntaktischen, semantischen und pragmatischen Fundierung,
171−211. (Studien zur deutschen Grammatik 15.) Tübingen: originally Gunter Narr Ver-
lag now Stauffenburg Verlag.
Reis, Marga
1995 Wer glaubst Du hat recht? on the so-called extractions from verb-second clauses and
verb-first parenthetical constructions in German. Sprache und Pragmatik 36: 27−83.
Rizzi, Luigi
1982 Violations of the wh island constraint and the Subjacency Condition. In: Luigi Rizzi
(ed.), Issues in Italian Syntax, 49−76. (Studies in Generative Grammar.) Dordrecht:
Holland, Cinnaminson: U. S.A.: Foris Publications.
Rizzi, Luigi
1997 The fine structure of the left periphery. In: Liliane Haegeman (ed.), Elements of Gram-
mar, 281−337. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Rohrer, Christian
1996 Fakultativ kohärente Infinitkonstruktionen im Deutschen und deren Behandlung in der
Lexikalisch Funktionalen Grammatik. In: Gisela Harras and Manfred Bierwisch (eds.),
Wenn die Semantik arbeitet. Klaus Baumgärtner zum 65. Geburtstag, 89−108. Tübingen:
Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Rosengren, Inger
1993 Wahlfreiheit und Konsequenzen: Scrambling, Topikalisierung und FHG im Dienste der
Informationsstrukturierung. In: Marga Reis (ed.), Wortstellung und Informationsstruktur,
251−312. (Linguistische Arbeiten 306.) Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Ross, John Robert
1967 Constraints on variables in syntax. Ph.D. thesis, MIT. Reproduced by the Indiana Uni-
versity Linguistics Club.
Scherpenisse, Wim
1986 The Connection Between Base Structure and Linearization Restrictions in German and
Dutch. (Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe XXI, Linguistik 47.) Frankfurt/M.: Pe-
ter Lang.
Strunk, Jan, and Neal Snider
2013 Extraposition without subjacency. In: Gert Webelhuth, Manfred Sailer and Heike Walker
(eds.), Rightward Movement in a Comparative Perspective. (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguis-
tics Today 200.) Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Thiersch, Craig L.
1978 Topics in German syntax. Dissertation, M.I.T.
Tomasello, Michael
2003 Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Uszkoreit, Hans
1987 Word Order and Constituent Structure in German. (CSLI Lecture Notes 8.) Stanford,
CA: CSLI Publications.
van de Velde, Marc
1978 Zur mehrfachen Vorfeldbesetzung im Deutschen. In: Maria-Elisabeth Conte, Anna
Giacalone Ramat and Paolo Ramat (eds.), Wortstellung und Bedeutung: Akten des 12.
Linguistischen Kolloquiums, Pavia 1977, 131−141. (Linguistische Arbeiten 61.) Tü-
bingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
1478 VII. Syntactic Sketches

Weisweber, Wilhelm, and Susanne Preuss

1992 Direct parsing with metarules. In: Antonio Zampoili (ed.), 14th International Conference
on Computational Linguistics (COLING ’92), August 23−28, 1111−1115. Nantes,
France, Association for Computational Linguistics.
Yip, Moira, Joan Maling, and Ray S. Jackendoff
1987 Case in tiers. Language 63 2: 217−250.
Zaenen, Annie, Joan Maling, and Höskuldur Thráinsson
1985 Case and grammatical functions: The Icelandic passive. Natural Language and Linguis-
tic Theory 3 4: 441−483.
Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa
1998 Prosody, Focus and Word Order. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Stefan Müller, Berlin (Germany)

42. Hindi-Urdu: Central Issues in Syntax

1. Urdu and Hindi, Hindi and Urdu
2. Sentence constituents and basic order
3. Alternations in clause structure
4. Basic clause structure
5. Finite and non-finite clauses
6. Finite subordinate clauses
7. Summary
8. Abbreviations
9. References (selected)

Abstract
Hindi-Urdu is an Indo-European language which preserves many syntactic and morpho-
logical traits of the older Indic language; it shows the influence of Persian and Arabic
in vocabulary, as well as Sanskrit. It is primarily a head-final language, with inflections
for case, tense, aspect and agreement. Complex predicates are productive source of new
vocabulary, along with verb-verb compounds. Subject properties are associated with
dative noun phrases, reflexive pronouns and auxiliary verbs, in addition to nominative
and ergative case, which marks transitive subjects. There is also differential object mark-
ing of direct objects. Finite clauses differ significantly from non-finite clauses, both in
position and head direction. Agreement, reflexive binding and operator wh-scope are
possible across non-finite clause boundaries, but are restricted within finite clauses.

1. Urdu and Hindi, Hindi and Urdu

Urdu and Hindi are two terms for essentially one language which originated out of the
Indic dialect spoken in Delhi, in approximately the 16th and 17th centuries; see Masica
42. Hindi-Urdu: Central Issues in Syntax 1479

(1991: 27−30) for a fuller account. Common to colloquial Hindi and Urdu is a large
vocabulary which was mostly derived from Indic roots, but also borrowed from Persian
and Arabic. English borrowings are increasingly common. The syntax and morphology
of Hindi and Urdu are virtually identical, except for a small number of constructions
influenced by Persian, or directly borrowed.
Urdu is distinct from Hindi in its writing system, which is a modified Perso-Arabic
script, and in Persian and Arabic vocabulary used in formal vocabulary. Hindi is now
written in the Devanagari syllabic script also used for Sanskrit, and borrows much techni-
cal and formal vocabulary from Sanskrit.
This sketch of Hindi-Urdu morphology and syntax can be supplemented in more depth
by various useful reference grammars and pedagogical grammars which have insightful
descriptions. Masica (1991) is a particularly clear and detailed survey of the Indic lan-
guages, of which Hindi-Urdu is one, allowing for comparison with more or less closely
related languages. Subbarao (2012) is a linguistically based comparison of languages of
South Asia, showing typological similarities and differences among languages of differ-
ent families; there is much discussion of Hindi-Urdu.
Platts (1990), Bailey (1963) and Schmidt (1999) focus on Urdu, though they contain
much information which applies to Hindi as well. Descriptive and pedagogical grammars
of Hindi with descriptive uses include Porizka (1963); McGregor (1995); Montaut (2006)
and Kachru (1980, 2006). Linguistic analyses of various features of Hindi-Urdu are
included as references in the text and bibliography.

1.1. Basic features of the clause

Hindi-Urdu is a mostly head-final language with case clitics, agreement morphology on
the verbal complex. It distinguishes finite from non-finite clauses in ways which very
generally affect coindexing and scope relations.
Hindi-Urdu has verb final structure shown in (1), and in most other respects the basic
clause is consistently head-final (see section 4.4 below). Some important features of the
basic clause are illustrated in (1) and (2), showing the same sentence in the future tense,
and the present perfect. Note that all the examples in this paper are from Hindi-Urdu.

(1) vee laRkee aap=koo eek ciTThii. [Hindi-Urdu]

those.NOM boy.M.PL.NOM you=DAT one letter.F.SG.NOM
likh-eeNgee
write-FUT.3.M.PL
‘Those boys will write you a letter.’
(2) un laRkooN=nee aap=koo eek ciTThii likh dii
those.OBL boy.M.PL.OBL=ERG you=DAT one letter.F.SG.NOM write give.PFV.F.
hai.
be.PRS.3SG
‘Those boys have written a letter to you.’

The unmarked order of constituents is subject, indirect object, direct object and verb;
variations are nevertheless possible for discourse effect (see for example Kidwai 2000).
1480 VII. Syntactic Sketches

The case of the transitive subject varies; in present and future sentences such as (1), the
subject is nominative, which is the direct, unmarked case. In past or perfect sentences,
the subject has the ergative postposition =nee (see section 2.2 for information on case
marking). Agreement morphology is expressed on the verbal complex. It reflects the
properties of the nominative subject in (1), but if the subject is marked by a postposition
case marker, agreement reflects the properties of the nominative direct object (see section
2.3 for information on agreement). Postpositional marking also requires a morphological
change in some nouns and pronouns, to the oblique inflectional form, as shown in the
subject of (2). Finally, the verbal complex in (2) combines the main verb likh ‘write’
with another verb ‘give’, which adds the idea of completion of the event and benefit to
the indirect object (see section 4.2.1 for more information about complex predicates).
I have used this pair of examples to point out briefly some of the important features
of this language. These features will be described in greater depth in sections to follow.
Here are some highlights of the topics to be included. In this language, there is extensive
agreement for person, number and gender in both nominal and verbal categories. Case
distinctions are expressed with postpositional clitics, except for nominative “direct” case
which is null. Transitive subjects have ergative case in perfective finite sentences, an
instance of split ergativity. Verbs are inflected for tense and aspect, in many possible
combinations. Verb compounding expresses several relations, including aspectual dis-
tinctions. Subordinate clauses differ in syntactic status as adjuncts or argument, depend-
ing whether their inflection is finite or non-finite. Non-finite clauses may be sentence
internal, in argument or modifier positions. Finite clauses are prohibited from argument
positions. Instead they must be adjoined, either to the matrix clause or to a sentence-
internal nominal. Finite clauses are autonomous domains for agreement, reflexive bind-
ing and relative/question scope, while non-finite clauses are transparent to long-distance
coindexing relations.
In this chapter, I focus on the syntax and related of Hindi-Urdu as seen through the
perspective of a (Chomskyan) generative theory of grammar, such as Chomsky (2004)
and earlier work. I use this kind of syntactic theory because it is a useful way for
organizing and labeling the linguistic data from a specific language, while providing a
general definition of crucial categories and relationships shared by human languages. I
refer to work done in different linguistic theories, as well as work which is basically
descriptive. The references in each section give a much fuller account of the data and
the problems at issue.
Hindi-Urdu, like many languages, presents problems for generalizing from the most
descriptive level of analysis. Both Hindi-Urdu and other Indic languages have properties
which follow neither from their Indo-European roots nor from typological similarities to
non-Indo-European languages of South and East Asia. Hindi-Urdu is an Indo-European
language with ergative subject case, like Basque and Georgian. It is head-final, has non-
nominative subjects like Japanese and Korean, but its verbal inflection and agreement
patterns are unlike what is found in these languages. Unlike English, it has both locally
and long-distance bound anaphors, which have only a subject antecedent. Like its Indo-
European ancestors, Hindi-Urdu retains the correlative type of sentence-adjoined relative
clause. Because of its origin as a lingua franca, it shows certain influences from Persian.
So the analysis of Hindi-Urdu cannot follow easily from the results achieved over the
last thirty years in generative grammars for the analysis of other languages, like English,
Spanish, Chinese and Japanese, for example, whatever the specific theory used. The
organizing plan of this chapter is to start with basic clause structure, to note case and
42. Hindi-Urdu: Central Issues in Syntax 1481

coindexing relations within the clause, then to categorize non-finite clauses, and finally
to contrast complex sentences with non-finite and finite clauses. The references give
further data, as well as different positions on how to analyze these constructions. The
goal is to point out aspects of the language which present interesting problems for fur-
ther research.

2. Sentence constituents and basic order

In this section, I give a brief overview of the lexical and functional categories in clause
structure, pointing out important features of case and agreement, tense and aspect.

2.1. Sentence arguments and transitivity

In unmarked sentence orders, the verb is final; the following sentences have an intransi-
tive verb in (3), a transitive verb in (4) and a ditransitive verb in example (5). Each verb
has the appropriate number of arguments which it selects, plus an optional adverb modi-
fier, such as jaldii ‘soon, quickly’ in (5).

(3) baccee saarii raat soo-tee haiN.

child.M.PL.NOM whole.F night.F sleep-IPFV be.PRS.3PL
‘(The) children sleep through the whole night.’
(4) tum yah film kal deekh-oogee.
you.FAM this film.F.SG.NOM tomorrow see-FUT.2PL
‘You will see this film tomorrow.’
(5) woo aadmii aap=koo ciTThii jaldii bheej-ee-gaa.
that man.M.SG.NOM you.FORM=DAT letter.F.SG.NOM quickly send-FUT.PL-M.SG
‘That man will soon send you a letter.’

2.2. Case

Each of the arguments of the verb is case-marked. The indirect object aap=koo ‘you=
DAT’ is marked by the clitic postposition =koo, which is obligatory (see Butt and King
2004 for discussion of the clitic status of postpositions in Hindi-Urdu). The subjects in
(3)−(5) have the unmarked or direct case, which involves the absence of a postposition.
I have glossed the case as nominative, the default case. This case is found also on direct
objects, for instance in the examples (4) and (5). It is possible to mark the direct object
with =koo if it is specific or animate, as in (6):

(6) tum is film=koo/ hamaaree doost=koo deekh-oogee.

you. FAM this.OBL film.F. SG .OBL =ACC our. OBL friend=ACC see-FUT.2PL
‘You will see this film/our friend.’
1482 VII. Syntactic Sketches

The case situation in Hindi-Urdu is somewhat contradictory: subjects and direct objects
may have nominative case, and direct objects may have either nominative case or the
postposition =koo, which I have glossed as accusative. The dative use of =koo is obliga-
tory and invariant, but =koo as a direct object marker depends on the specificity and
animate reference of the object. See Legate (2004) for discussion of unmarked or zero
default case, Butt (1993) for the referential properties of =koo and Aissen (2003) for a
comprehensive account of the reference conditions for direct object marking; in Hindi-
Urdu compared with other languages.
Transitive subjects also have ergative case in the perfective finite sentences (7)−(9).
The subject is marked by the ergative postposition =nee.

(7) *baccooN=nee saarii raat soo-yaa hai.

child.M.PL=ERG whole.F night.F sleep-PFV.M.SG be.PRS.3SG
‘(The) children sleep through the whole night.’
(8) tum=nee yah film kal deekh-ii hai.
you.FAM=ERG this film.F.SG.NOM yesterday see-PFV.F.SG be.PRS.3SG
‘You have seen this film yesterday.’
(9) us aadmii=nee aap=koo ciTThii jaldii bheej-ii.
that.OBL man.M.SG=ERG you.FORM=DAT letter.F.SG.NOM quickly send-PVF.F.SG
‘That man quickly sent you a letter.’

The main use of the postposition =nee is to mark a transitive/ditransitive subject in finite
sentences with perfective aspect. Agency is not the main factor, as experiencers such the
subject of (8) have ergative case (Davison 2004; see Butt and King 2004 and Woolford
2006 for a contrary view). Nevertheless, the majority of ergative marked subjects refer
to volitional, causative agents. There are some options for ergative case on intransitive
verbs, with varying degrees of grammaticality for different speakers or varieties of the
language.

(10) kal raat kuttooN=nee bhauN-kaa.

yesterday night dog.M.PL.OBL=ERG bark-PFV.M.SG
‘Yesterday night (the) dogs barked.’
(11) raam/ raam=nee zoor=see cillaa-yaa.
Ram.NOM Ram=ERG force=with shout-PFV.M.SG
‘Ram shouted loudly.’
(Mohanan 1994: 71)
(12) (*)baccee=nee roo-yaa.
child.MSG.OBL=ERG cry-PFV.M.SG
‘The child cried (on purpose).’

The verb bhauNk-naa ‘bark’ may have an ergative-marked subject without the assump-
tion that the dogs barked on purpose as in (10). Other verbs with subjects referring to
human beings may convey that the act was done on purpose as in (11)−(12), but speakers
I have consulted reject sentences like (12). See discussion of the semantic quality of the
ergative in Mohanan (1994: 71−72), Butt (1995: 15) and Butt and King (2004).
42. Hindi-Urdu: Central Issues in Syntax 1483

The case uses in (1)−(9) reflect grammatical functions as structural cases in Chom-
sky’s terminology, with the exception of the dative =koo, which is a lexical case linked
to the thematic role of goal. Other postpositions related to specific thematic roles are
found in Hindi-Urdu; they will be discussed in sections below.

2.3. Agreement

The verbal complex is marked for agreement in person, number and gender. Person and
number are required in finite clauses, while number and gender are characteristic of non-
finite inflection. Agreement is obligatory in sentences which have a nominative argu-
ment. Note that in (3), there is a feminine adverbial saarii raat ‘all night’, which has no
postposition, but as a non-argument, it does not trigger agreement. Instead, the masculine
plural subject baccee ‘children’ determines agreement. If there are two nominative argu-
ments, as in (4), the subject takes precedence. If the subject has a postpositional case,
as it does in (8)−(9), then the object triggers agreement. The agreement is the default
third person masculine singular if both the subject and direct object have postpositions,
as occurs when the subject is ergative and the direct object has the accusative postposi-
tion =koo, as in (13).

(13) tum=nee is film=koo kal deekh-aa hai.

you.FAM=ERG this.OBL film.F.SG=ACC yesterday see-PFV.M.SG be.PRS.3SG
‘You have seen this film yesterday.’

The verbal complex may consist of the verb alone, as in (6), where the tense is future,
and has features for person, number, and somewhat anomalously, also for gender. Or
there may be combination of a non-finite participle, imperfective or perfective, and a
finite copula, as in (3) and (8). Both components of the verbal complex have the same
agreement features. In the terminology of Bhatt (2005), the participle and copula are
covalued and therefore show the same agreement features, number and gender on the
participles, and number and person on the copula.

2.4. Tense and aspect

In this section I survey briefly the tense and aspectual morphology of Hindi-Urdu. For
a more detailed account, including the nuances of meaning, and the possibilities of com-
bination in Hindi-Urdu, see Schmidt (1999), Montaut (2006), McGregor (1995), and
Butt and Rivzi (2010).
The finite tenses are the present, represented by the copula hai ‘be.PRS’ and past thaa
‘be.PST’. These are indicative, contrasting with the subjunctive hoo. The future indicative
is formed from the subjunctive, with the addition of a suffix -gaa, as in hoo-gaa, e.g.
jaa-oo-gaa ‘go-FUT.3SG.M’; sentences (5) and (6) have future verb forms showing the
complex pattern of agreement. These are all more or less suppletive forms of the verb
hoo-naa ‘be-INF’. The infinitive suffix itself -naa could be regarded as non-finite tense,
1484 VII. Syntactic Sketches

dependent for its tense reference on the tense of the matrix clause; infinitive clauses are
discussed below with other embedded non-finite clauses.
Aspect is expressed by the imperfective suffix -taa (3), the perfective suffix -(y)aa
in (8) and (9), and by a progressive auxiliary rahaa (14). Complex aspectual combina-
tions can be formed from the participle affixes in combination with main verbs (15).
See Butt and Rivzi (2010) for more examples of composed aspectual combinations and
their meanings.

(14) kuttee bhauNk rahee haiN.

dog.M.PL bark PROG.M.PL be.PRS.3PL
‘(The) dogs are barking.’
(15) kuttee bhauNk-tee rah-tee haiN.
dog.M.PL bark-IPFV.M.PL stay-IPVF.M.PL be.PRS.3PL
‘(The) dogs are continually barking, keep on barking.’

The perfective participle is used in combination with the copula to express the present,
past or future perfect (8). Used alone in a non-embedded sentence, the perfective expresses
a kind of neutral past or aorist, as in (9)−(10), discussed in Montaut (2006: 103−106).
Perfective and imperfective participles are used as subordinate clauses, often as modi-
fiers, but also as complements; these will be discussed further below. There is another
aspectual form which is used only as a modifier. This is the conjunctive participle, a
bare verb stem with the invariant suffix -kar, as in (16). It normally means that the
embedded clause event is completed in relation to the matrix tensed verb, but it also
may be used adverbially, with a perfective meaning which includes the resulting state
overlapping with the matrix verb in (17).

(16) [PRO(i) yah khabar sun-kar] woo(i) xush hoo ga-ii.

this news.NOM hear-CP 3SG.NOM happy be go-PFV.F.SG
‘[PRO(i) having heard this news] she(i) became happy.’
(17) woo(i) [PRO(i) sooc samajh-kar] ciTThii likh rahaa thaa.
3SG.NOM think understand-CP letter.F.SG.NOM write PROG be.PST.3.M.SG
‘He was carefully writing a letter.’
(Literally, ‘having thought and understood.’)

For additional properties of the conjunctive participle -kar, see section 2.5.3 below.
In many languages with tense inflection, person and number are represented in finite
clauses, while number and gender are typical of non-finite inflection. This generalization
applies to a limited degree to Hindi-Urdu, but as Butt and Rivzi (2010) point out, person
and number are expressed only on the copula, the imperative and subjunctive/future.
Past tense is expressed by the perfect participle without person features. See Davison
(2002) for an explanation of how the perfect participle can have aorist, neutral past
meaning, contrasting with an overt past marker in an eastern Hindi language, Kurmali.
So is there a real difference between finite and non-finite clauses in Hindi-Urdu? I
believe there is, and it is revealed in complex sentences. Coindexing, agreement and
wh-scope relation may cross non-finite clause boundaries (5.3), but not finite clause
boundaries (6.2).
42. Hindi-Urdu: Central Issues in Syntax 1485

2.5. Subject properties

As in many languages, the subject is hard to define by absolute criteria in Hindi-Urdu.
The subject is not always in first position, in a language with some freedom of phrase
order. It does not uniquely have nominative case, or uniquely determine agreement (8)−
(9). But there are other clause relationships which (nearly) always define a subject. One
of them is anteceding a reflexive pronoun, regardless of case.
Subjects have other case choices, determined by specific semantic classes of predi-
cates or constructions. These classes will be discussed below in the section on diatheses
and verb classes.
Subjects may be required to have dative case (18)−(19), genitive (30) or locative
cases (21). This is true of biclausal sentences such as (19); see Davison (2008) for
discussion of this analysis.

(18) baccooN(i)=koo apnii(i/*j) billii dikhaaii dii.

child.M.PL=DAT self.GEN.F cat.F.SG.NOM sight give-PFV.F
‘The children saw, caught sight of their cat.’
(19) raam=koo [PRO(i) apnee(i/*j) bhaaii=koo khijaa-naa] nahiiN caahiyee.
Ram=DAT self.GEN brother=DAT tease-INF not ought
‘Ram(i) ought not [PRO(i) to tease his(i/*j) brother].’
(20) raam=kee caar baccee thee.
Ram=GEN.M.PL four child.M.PL.NOM be.PST.M.PL
‘Ram had four children.’
(Mohanan 1994: 139)
(21) raam=meeN bilkul dayaa nahiiN thii.
Ram=in completely mercy.F.SG.NOM not be.PST.F.SG
‘Ram had no mercy at all.’
(Mohanan 1994: 139)

Dative subjects are required for psychological predicates such as (18), and constructions
of obligation like (19), but see Bashir (1999) for some variation in meaning between
uses of =koo and =nee in obligation sentences. Genitive case is used for inalienable
possession in (20), while locative case is used for inherent qualities in (21). Other kinds
of subject marking will be shown in section 3 on diatheses.

2.5.1. Binding of reflexive pronouns

The reflexive pronoun is invariant for person, number and gender, and the reference of
the antecedent must be to an animate entity (See discussion in Davison 2001). The
possessive apnaa ‘self’s’ is bound by a subject, regardless of case, shown in (22)−(23),
and never bound by a non-subject, as in (24).

(22) baccii(i) apnee(i/*j) bhaaii=koo tang kar rahii hai.

child.F.SG self.GEN.OBL.M brother=DAT vexed do PROG.F.SG be.PRS.3SG
‘The little girl is teasing/tormenting her brother.’
1486 VII. Syntactic Sketches

(23) baccii(i)=nee apnee bhaaii=koo tang ki-yaa (hai).

child.F.SG=ERG self.GEN.OBL.M brother=ACC vexed do-PFV.M.SG be.PRS.3SG
‘The little girl (has) teased/tormented her brother.’
(24) eek baccee(i)=nee duusree baccee(j)=see apnaa(i/*j) khilaunaa chiin
one child.OBL=ERG second child.OBL=from self’s.M.SG toy.M.SG.NOM snatch
li-yaa.
take-PFV.M.SG
‘One child snatched his own toy from another child.’

The full reflexive, apnee (aap) ‘self’s (self)’ also requires a subject antecedent, as in
(25):

(25) maaN (i) baccee(j)=koo apnee aap(i/*j)-see kaisee alag kar sak-tii
mother child=ACC self’s self-from how separate do can-IPFV
hai?
be.PRS
‘How can the mother(i) separate the child(j) from herself/*himself?’

Only subjects can control the null subject of the conjunctive participle, as in (26):

(26) [PRO(i/*j) yah baat sun-kar] pitaa(i)=koo beeTee(j)=par taras

this matter hear-CP father=DAT son=on pity
aa-yaa.
come-PFV.M.SG
‘[PRO(i/*j) having heard this], the father(i) felt pity for (his) son(j).’

2.5.2. Auxiliary verb orientation

Non-nominative subjects, like nominative subjects, are in the semantic scope of subject
oriented auxiliaries, such as baiTh-naa ‘to do something inadvertently’ (27) and paa-
naa ‘manage’ (28):

(27) maiN /*=nee aap=kii Daak paRh baiTh-aa.

I.NOM =ERG you=GEN.F mail.F.SG read sit-PFV.M.SG
‘I inadvertently read your mail (by mistake).’
(28) koosT gaarD=koo yah naaNw dikh nahiiN paa-ii.
Coast Guard=DAT this ship.F.SG be.seen not manage-PFV.F.SG
‘The Coast Guard did not manage to spot this ship.’
(Also: ‘This ship did not manage to be visible to the Coast Guard.’)

The auxiliary ascribes properties to the subject, such as ability in (25), inadvertence in
(27), or success in (28). The ambiguity of which argument is the subject will be discussed
below in the section on diatheses, or conditioned variation in what the subject and object
may be. The VV combination in (27) is discussed in 4.3.1; note that the intransitive
baiTh ‘sit’ blocks the ergative =nee on the subject of the transitive verb paRh ‘read’.
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
 XV
GUSTAVE A SIGISMOND.
A Pinsk.

Tu as pris plaisir sans doute à alarmer mon amour, et à me tenir

sur les épines. Si ta lettre fût venue plutôt, elle m'eût fait une
terrible peur: mais tu ne jouiras pas de ta méchanceté.
Comme je m'abusai sur le compte de Lucile!
Ce que je prenais pour intrigue n'était que ressentiment, que
dépit simulé. Humiliée de mes attentions pour cette coquette, son
âme sensible s'est trouvée exposée aux premières atteintes de la
jalousie et sa délicatesse blessée ne lui a pas permis de chercher
aucune explication, ni même de me laisser entrevoir son chagrin.
Après ce qui s'était passé, je brûlais d'envie de voir Lucile; et
cependant j'avais peine à m'y rendre. J'aurais fort souhaité que
quelqu'un m'eût épargné l'embarras d'une explication avec elle.
Tandis que j'étais ainsi en suspens, la raison prit enfin le dessus.

—Quoi donc, me suis-je dit, la mauvaise honte m'arrête? Je

n'ai pas craint d'affliger Lucile si mal à propos, craindrai-je
d'adoucir le coup cruel que je lui ai porté? Ah! quand l'amour
n'attendrait pas de moi cette démarche, je la dois à la justice.»

Honteux de ma faute, et pénétré de regret, je me rends chez le

comte Sobieski. Ils avaient déjà eu vent de mon affaire.
Je me fais annoncer.
A peine étais-je au haut de l'escalier, que la porte s'ouvre, mon
cœur palpite: Lucile paraît.
 Je n'osai lever ni les yeux ni la voix. Cependant elle s'avance et
se jette à mon cou. Je reçois ses embrassements d'un air confus.
Étonnée que je répondisse si mal à sa tendresse, elle recule
quelques pas, son cœur est prêt à éclater, ses yeux se remplissent
de larmes, elles roulent comme des perles sur ses belles joues
qu'elles embellissent encore.

—D'où vient cet air sombre, Potowski, me dit-elle en

sanglottant. Après une si longue absence es-tu fâché de me
revoir? Que t'ai-je fait? Tu détournes les yeux…»

Tout ce que les grâces éplorées ont d'attendrissant était peint sur
son visage.
Comme je continuai à garder le silence, elle se laissa aller sur un
sopha, et se mit à pleurer amèrement. Mon cœur ne put soutenir
cette dernière atteinte. Je courus à elle.

—Viens, chère âme de ma vie, lui dis-je, en la pressant

contre mon sein, laisse-moi essuyer tes larmes.»

Lorsque mon cœur fut soulagé par les pleurs.

«C'est moi, chère Lucile, repris-je, qui suis indigne de ta

tendresse; et c'est le sentiment de ma faute qui a si longtemps
retenu les démonstrations de ma joie. Pourras-tu me
pardonner?»

Elle leva sur moi ses beaux yeux mouillés de larmes, et me tendit
sa main que je pressais longtemps contre mes lèvres.
Comme je poussais un profond soupir.

«Ah, Gustave! pourquoi avoir ainsi exposé votre vie pour des
riens?»
—Des riens, Lucile, quoi! appelles-tu des riens de me voir
enlever ton cœur?
—Quelle illusion!
 —Du moins m'as-tu donné sujet de le croire par tes
procédés repoussants. J'avais beau te demander grâce, soupirer,
gémir, toujours je te trouvais inexorable. Voulais-je m'aboucher?
cette faible consolation même m'était refusée. Tu as été piquée
de quelques attentions que j'ai eues pour une évaporée; mais
puisqu'elles te déplaisaient pourquoi ne me l'avoir pas donné à
connaître? au moindre signe tu aurais vu combien peu j'en étais
coiffé.
—Était-ce à moi à vous prescrire ce sacrifice? Amants ou
époux, l'infidélité est un privilége que votre sexe s'est réservé;
que ne savais-je, si vous ne vouliez pas vous en prévaloir?
Pourquoi m'être plainte? Il me paraissait inutile de courir après
un volage qui me laissait pour la première venue, et je
dédaignais de devoir à la pitié son retour. Ainsi forcée de
supporter patiemment votre inconstance, je renfermai ma
douleur dans mon sein, et gémissais au fond de mon cœur.
—Ah! Lucile! peux-tu faire cet outrage à mon amour?

Elle parut fâchée de m'avoir fait sentir aussi vivement ma faute.

Cependant je me la reprochais plus vivement encore.

«Hélas! disais-je tout bas, pouvais-je sous ses yeux

m'occuper d'une coquette! Elle qui au milieu des assemblées les
plus brillantes, et environnée de jeunes gens aimables, ne
s'occupa jamais que de moi!»

Quand je fus un peu revenu de ma consternation:

—Tu m'affliges, Lucile, repris-je, avec tes soupçons injurieux.

Ah! de grâce, épargne ces regrets à ton amant, qui est au
désespoir de se les être attirés.»

A ces mots, elle me sourit avec douceur, ses yeux s'attachèrent

sur les miens avec l'expression la plus naïve de la tendresse; je
signai mon pardon sur sa bouche, et mon cœur satisfait se livra de
nouveau tout entier au plaisir d'aimer.
 A présent que l'orage est passé, je te permets, cher ami, de rire
de moi tout à ton aise.
De Varsovie, le 5 juillet 1769.
 XVI
SOPHIE A SA COUSINE.
A Biella.

Je me sais retirée de la capitale où j'ai dessein de séjourner

jusqu'à ce que la Pologne soit pacifiée.
Mon château est trop près du théâtre de la guerre pour continuer
à en faire le lieu de ma résidence: peut-être, chère cousine, qu'une
passion bien différente de la crainte contribue encore à me
déterminer de fixer ici mon séjour.
Je ne connaissais pas l'amour, et déjà je croyais en avoir épuisé
les douceurs; je n'avais pas encore senti ces vifs élans, ces désirs
empressés, ce feu victorieux, cette invincible flamme qui porte le
trouble à nos cœurs et l'ivresse à nos sens.
Engagée contre ma volonté sous les lois de l'hymen, je haïssais
sans l'aimer le malheureux qui m'aimait. Je lui prodiguais mes
froides caresses comme je l'eusse fait au premier venu. Semblable à
ces femmes mercenaires qui font de l'amour un trafic honteux,
mettent leurs faveurs à prix et se vendent aux plaisirs d'un maître.
Bientôt j'éprouvai entre ses bras les horreurs du dégoût.
Longtemps j'eus à endurer ce martyre; enfin la mort eut pitié de
mon triste destin et rompit mes chaînes.
Une fois maîtresse de moi-même, je me vis de nouveau
environnée d'adorateurs et fis quelques conquêtes: mais j'avais le
goût des plaisirs sans l'embarras du choix: j'ignorais ce que c'est
qu'être amoureuse: Gustave seul me l'a appris.
Je croyais ne pas l'aimer; hélas! je sens que je l'adore. Que ne
sait-il l'état de mon cœur! Que ne puis-je le voir à mes genoux, plein
de la même ardeur m'exprimer sa tendresse! que ne puis-je dans
mes bras lui faire oublier l'univers!
Je le désire, mais que je suis loin de l'espérer.
Longtemps j'ai renfermé dans mon sein ce fatal secret; mais ma
constance est épuisée: il faut lui en faire l'aveu.
Je n'ose m'abandonner sans précaution au plaisir que j'ai de le
voir et de l'entendre. Plus ce plaisir est grand, plus j'ai soin de
dissimuler. En présence de sa belle, je ne me permets jamais le plus
petit mot de douceur; je commande à mes yeux mêmes de retenir
leur langage: ma main seule, en pressant furtivement la sienne, lui
exprime quelquefois en tremblant ma tendresse.
Ce n'est que dans le particulier que je cherche à lui faire démêler
par mes regards ce qui se passe dans mon cœur: mais il fait comme
s'il ne m'entendait pas; il n'est point touché de mes attentions; et
quelque agacerie que je lui fasse, il garde toujours auprès de moi un
maintien réservé. Non que la crainte de déplaire balance en lui le
désir d'être heureux; mais il n'est réellement point entreprenant: je
ne crois pas même qu'il y ait au monde de jeune fille plus novice.
Le croiras-tu? Au lieu de me rebuter, sa froideur ne sert
malheureusement qu'à approfondir l'impression qu'il a faite sur mon
cœur.
Deux mois s'étaient passés en légères tentatives sans succès, et
je vis bien qu'il fallait lui ménager de plus fortes épreuves.
Je ne te dirai pas tout le manége que j'ai employé depuis
quelques jours, pour allumer ses désirs et me faire attaquer.
Je veux seulement t'en rapporter un trait.
Jeudi dernier je me trouvai seule avec lui, et comme je le vis de
fort belle humeur, j'engageai la conversation sur les tours galants de
la palatine B…, qui font à Varsovie la nouvelle du jour, et je n'oubliai
pas d'appuyer sur la manière dont elle s'est arrangée avec son
époux.
 —Cela est comique, observa-t-il en riant, d'être la confidente
de son mari et le complaisant de sa femme.
—Vous m'avouerez que c'est ce qui s'appelle se consoler en
galant homme, lui dis-je en portant la main sur la sienne que je
pressai doucement et en lui jetant un regard tendre. Quoi, si
vous aviez une femme coquette, ne feriez-vous pas de même?
Dès qu'on ne trouve pas le plaisir chez soi, il faut bien l'aller
chercher ailleurs.
—Quand on est de cette humeur, on fait bien de s'arranger.
Que chacun vive à sa guise, j'y consens; mais je ne prendrai
jamais de femme coquette, et je n'aimerai point que Lucile et
moi en vinssions ainsi à nous passer nos torts.
—Pourquoi non? quand l'usage et le bon ton vous y
autoriseraient. Trouvez-vous donc que ce soit si mal fait que
d'aimer le plaisir, et ce qui l'inspire. Il est doux de vivre au gré
de ses désirs. Du moins conviendrez-vous qu'il est assez
agréable de changer d'objet. Rien n'est si incommode que la
fidélité. Avec elle l'amour n'est jamais sans alarmes. La jalousie,
les reproches, les éclats, les pleurs, voilà son triste cortége.
—Je ne sais, répliqua-t-il avec un ton de bonhomie qui me
pénétrait. Je n'ai jamais aimé que Lucile, et je ne crois pas qu'il
me fût possible de jamais en aimer d'autre.

Sa belle approchait, et elle m'eût surpris à lui dire des douceurs,

si je n'eusse bien vite changé de propos.
Je ne suis pas contente de ce début, comme tu le penses bien.
Cette première épreuve m'ayant si mal réussi, je veux lui en
ménager une seconde, plus propre à le mettre sur la voie. Peut-être
est-il craintif en public? Mais je verrai s'il a assez d'esprit pour se
prévaloir de l'occasion, et se dédommager dans le tête-à-tête. Les
procédés galants vont tout seul avec une jolie femme, quand on la
trouve sans défense.
Adieu, chère cousine. J'ai en vue certain stratagème peu
commun, et je ne doute pas qu'il n'ait un succès complet.
De Varsovie, le 30 juillet 1769.
 XVII
GUSTAVE A SIGISMOND.
A Pinsk.

Ce matin j'ai reçu la visite du nonce de Mazovie et jamais je ne

fus plus surpris.
Il avait l'air un peu défait. Je lui demandai des nouvelles de sa
santé.

—Je me porte aussi bien, répondit-il, qu'on peut l'espérer,

d'un homme dans mon état. Vous voyez qu'il ne me reste
qu'une légère roideur. (En même temps il remuait son bras). Il
faut en convenir, j'en ai été quitte à assez bon marché.
—J'en suis charmé; mais je l'aurais été bien davantage, que
vous ne vous fussiez point mis dans ce cas.
—Ma foi, c'est votre faute.
—Comment cela, je vous prie?
—Le voici. Ne vous rappelez-vous pas d'avoir passé la soirée,
il y a deux mois environ, chez le prince Toninski?
—Oui.
—Ne vous rappelez-vous pas d'y avoir fait à la princesse
l'éloge de la fille du comte Sobieski?
—Oui.
—Hé bien! dans la chambre voisine il y avait un jeune
homme un peu incommodé, et ce jeune homme c'était moi.
—Fort bien.
 —De mon lit j'écoutais votre conversation, et je n'en perdis
pas un mot. Tout ce que vous racontâtes des charmes et des
vertus de votre amante, alluma dans mon cœur un ardent désir
de la voir. J'en cherchai l'occasion, qui se présenta bientôt dans
la fête où nous fîmes connaissance. Au portrait que vous aviez
fait de Lucile, je la distinguai entre ses compagnes; et, à vous
dire vrai, je trouvai bien faible votre pinceau. Quelle figure
intéressante! disais-je en l'admirant. Quelle élégante taille! Quel
air noble! Quel teint de lis et de roses! Que de douceur dans les
traits! Que de tendresse dans le regard! Que de finesse dans le
sourire! Que de grâce dans les manières! Que de modestie dans
le maintien! Je la considérais avec volupté et cherchais à
démêler dans ses traits tout ce que je savais qu'elle devait avoir
dans l'âme. Tandis que vous étiez à vous amuser auprès d'une
coquette, Lucile alla se mettre dans un coin: je saisis ce
moment pour lier conversation avec elle. Je l'abordai. Durant
notre entretien, j'admirai la vivacité, la finesse, l'aménité de son
esprit; je crus voir dans sa personne tout ce qui peut rendre
heureux un homme délicat et sensible. A ses côtés, je sentis
mon cœur plus puissamment attiré vers elle. Mon amour se
développa même avec tant de rapidité et de violence, que
j'oubliai un instant qu'elle avait un amant, et ne songeai plus
qu'à me féliciter de cette inclination vertueuse. Mon illusion ne
fut pas de longue durée. Mais comme nous sommes tous portés
naturellement à nous flatter, soit folie, soit orgueil, je ne
désespérais pas de vous supplanter. Je sentais bien que la chose
n'était pas facile. Pour y réussir, il fallait faire ma cour, gagner la
confiance, et devenir ami avant de prétendre au titre d'amant.
C'eût été sans doute le parti le plus sage; mais ce n'était pas
celui dont s'accommodait le mieux mon cœur impatient: je
voulais aller vite en besogne. N'osant lui faire de bouche l'aveu
du choix de mon cœur, je remis ce soin à ma plume: je lui offris
ma main, et j'en reçus la réponse que je vous ai communiquée.
La lettre de Lucile m'alarma. Cependant, quoique je visse bien
que je ne devais pas compter sur un retour de tendresse, son
refus ne fit qu'irriter mon amour, et égarer ma raison; en proie à
ce délire, je ne songeai plus qu'aux moyens de la posséder à
quelque prix que ce fût. Néanmoins la réflexion me revint pour
un moment, et je raisonnais ainsi: Quoi, son cœur n'est plus
libre? Irai-je donc épouser une femme qui ne m'aime point?
Non, non, le souvenir de celui qu'elle aime la poursuivrait dans
mes bras et ses froides caresses feraient mon supplice. Mais
aussi renoncer à elle! mon cœur n'était pas capable de ce
douloureux sacrifice. Quel parti prendre? Tandis que j'étais en
suspens, un rayon d'espérance vint luire dans mon âme. Peut-
être, me disais-je, son penchant pour mon rival n'est-il pas bien
fort. Une fois à moi, son inclination changera. Les soins que je
prendrai de lui plaire la forceront de m'estimer; puis je gagnerai
sa confiance, son amitié; et quand on vit ensemble, de l'amitié à
l'amour il n'y a pas bien loin. Je formai donc le projet de
l'enlever, résolu d'y périr ou d'y parvenir. Vous savez le succès
de cette téméraire entreprise. Que tout soit oublié, ajouta-t-il en
me tendant la main; je ne veux plus troubler vos amours: j'étais
votre rival, je serai votre ami.
—J'accepte votre amitié pourvu qu'elle soit sincère, et que
l'offre que vous m'en faites ne soit pas un artifice pour vous
ménager la facilité d'en venir à vos fins. Et aussi y aurait-il peu à
gagner de troubler mon bonheur: souvenez-vous qu'on ne
m'enlèvera Lucile qu'avec la vie.
—Je m'offenserais de vos soupçons injurieux, si je ne vous
avais donné raison de vous plaindre de moi; mais souvenez-
vous, de votre côté, que jamais mon cœur ne connut la
dissimulation ni les vils détours. La faiblesse où me jette la perte
de mon sang avait presqu'éteint ma passion pour votre
maîtresse. Pendant ces moments de calme, j'ai fait des
réflexions bien propres à m'en guérir entièrement. A présent j'ai
l'âme tranquille: pour preuve de ma sincérité, je renonce
dorénavant à voir votre amante.
Puisque vous êtes si fort de bonne foi, je rougirais d'être
moins généreux que vous. Non-seulement je n'exige pas que
vous renonciez à voir Lucile, mais je vous demande le plaisir
 d'accepter ma soupe demain; vous dînerez avec elle. Lucile vous
pardonnera aisément d'avoir voulu me l'enlever, en
considération des motifs qui vous y ont porté, quoiqu'elle eût
été au désespoir si vous aviez réussi; et vous ne serez fâchés ni
l'un ni l'autre, je pense, de vous connaître un peu mieux.

Après quelques compliments de part et d'autre, il prit congé.

Que te dirai-je? Autant que j'en puis juger par cet échantillon, il
me paraît que ce jeune homme a reçu de la nature une âme
susceptible des plus vives passions, jointe à un caractère fort élevé.
Il s'abandonne à la fougue des désirs; mais il n'est pas toujours
sourd à la voix de la raison: il connaît le devoir et sait y sacrifier.
De Varsovie, le 11 août 1769.
 XVIII
SOPHIE A SA COUSINE.
A Biella.

Hier je fis partie avec Lucile et son amant d'aller de bon matin
voir la chasse aux filets dans les champs de Dasco. A dire le vrai, je
n'en avais nulle envie. Je voulais seulement que Gustave vînt
m'éveiller.
Quoique je n'aie pas à me plaindre de ma figure, et que je me
fusse contentée avec tout autre du simple attrait de mes charmes, il
fallait paraître jolie autant qu'il se pourrait. Je sautai donc en place
au lever de l'aurore, je fis ma toilette, et n'oubliai pas les doux
parfums; puis, j'allai me remettre au lit en attendant l'aimable
garçon après avoir eu soin toutefois d'écarter les rideaux afin de
laisser passage à la lumière.
Comme j'étais à rêver yeux ouverts, un domestique vint m'avertir
qu'il était temps de me lever. Peu après j'entends frapper à la porte
de la maison, c'est Gustave.
Déjà Lucile était à finir sa toilette; elle me croyait à la mienne; et
pour n'avoir pas à attendre, elle envoya Potowski me talonner. Je
l'entends monter. A l'instant je pousse la couverture au pied du lit, je
laisse sortir une jambe, et un de mes bras couronnait ma tête, ma
gorge était découverte; et un linceul négligemment jeté voilait le
reste.
C'est ainsi à peu près que les peintres représentent la belle
Ariadne lorsqu'elle fut trouvée par Bacchus.
La porte de ma chambre s'ouvre. Il approche doucement,
entr'ouvre les courtines.
 Je feignais de dormir, m'attendant de me sentir couverte de ses
baisers. Quel autre me trouvant dans cette attitude eût pu réprimer
ses transports amoureux? Mais ce froid mortel, le croiras-tu? ne me
toucha pas même du bout du doigt. A-t-on rien vu de si novice, de si
sot, de si impatientant?

—C'est donc ainsi, belle dormeuse, dit-il tout haut, que vous
prenez le frais?

Je fis semblant de m'éveiller en sursaut.

—Ciel, m'écriai-je en ouvrant les yeux, que faites-vous ici!

retirez-vous, Gustave!

Et comme si je fusse réellement honteuse d'avoir été surprise

dans cet équipage, je m'enveloppai de mes draps.

—Je m'étais bien douté, reprit-il en riant, que vous êtes fort
matinière.

Accablée de sa froideur:

—Retirez-vous! lui criai-je une seconde fois, d'un ton dont il

ne soupçonnait guères le motif.
—Ne craignez rien, je vous laisse, mais faites vite: savez-
vous qu'il y a une heure qu'on vous attend.

Il se retira et je me levai, piquée jusqu'au vif de sa froide

légèreté.
Quelle est donc sa fascination pour cette fille?
Je suis aussi grande, aussi bien prise qu'elle; je ne lui cède point
en attraits, et je suis plus enjouée. Il lui trouve tous les charmes, des
grâces: mais c'est une beauté molle et inanimée. J'ai du moins de la
vivacité, moi. Il est enchanté de son humeur caressante; mais ses
caresses n'ont rien de piquant, rien de flatteur. Avec son air ingénu
et languissant, à peine dirait-on qu'elle a une âme sensible. Elle est
si insipide que je m'étonne qu'il n'en soit pas déjà dégoûté.
A peine avais-je fait cette vive sortie, que je fus tout-à-coup
saisie d'une espèce de remords.
Quel rôle bas je viens de jouer! Pour le captiver je cherche à
corrompre son cœur. Ah! si j'ai le malheur de réussir, qu'il me fera
payer cher les soins que je prends à le séduire. Insensée que je suis!
Comment me sera-t-il fidèle, si je lui ai fait un jeu de la fidélité et un
épouvantail de la vertu? Et puis quel agrément alors de lui être unie.
C'est de sa candeur autant que de sa beauté dont je suis si éprise:
de quel prix serait à mes yeux un cœur avili par les vices que je lui
aurai prêchés? C'est sa belle âme qui m'enchante, et je travaille à le
rendre indigne de moi. Le dispenser à présent des devoirs que je lui
imposerai dans la suite, quelle extravagance! Changera-t-il de
mœurs en changeant d'état? Les goûts frivoles et vils que je lui aurai
inspirés pour le détacher de sa belle, disparaîtront-ils devant moi?
Non, pour gagner son cœur, il faut paraître à ses yeux un objet plus
digne que Lucile. Hélas! je sens le ridicule, la bassesse de mes
procédés; j'en suis humiliée, et pour comble de malheur, mon faible
cœur n'a pas la force d'y renoncer. Par quelle fatalité faut-il que je
suive encore un parti que je condamne?
Comme j'étais enfoncée dans ces sombres réflexions, Lucile vint
m'en tirer. J'étais attendue.
La comtesse et son époux furent de la partie. La prise de tant
d'oiselets fournit divers incidents agréables. La joie fut vive et
brillante; mais mon cœur n'osait s'y livrer.
Sans cesse l'image de Gustave venait s'offrir à mon esprit agité.
Cruel garçon! que t'ai-je fait, pour troubler ainsi mon repos? Que
suis-je venue faire ici? Avant de t'avoir vu j'étais si tranquille! Je
m'amusais si bien!
Ah, ma chère, que le monde est insipide. Que ses amusements
sont froids pour un cœur épris comme le mien! Répandue dans les
sociétés les plus brillantes: sollicitée par tous les plaisirs, pourrais-tu
le croire? Oui, je n'envie que le sort de Lucile. Je voudrais plaire à
son amant: l'entendre dire qu'il m'aime serait toute mon ambition, et
le soin de faire son bonheur mon unique étude.
De Varsovie, le 1er septembre 1769.
 XIX
GUSTAVE A SIGISMOND.
A Pinsk.

Tous mes vœux sont remplis, Lucile est à moi: nos parents, qui
ont vu naître notre inclination mutuelle, consentent à la voir
couronnée. Mon amour est à son comble. Je n'attends plus que
l'heureux moment de le consacrer au pied des autels.
Déjà tout se prépare pour la cérémonie, qui est fixée au 24 du
mois prochain.
Cher ami, renvoie ton voyage de quelques jours, et viens prendre
part à la fête.
De Varsovie, le 25 septembre 1769.
 XX
SOPHIE A SA COUSINE.
A Biella.

Qu'il est difficile de toujours lutter contre un penchant qui plaît!

Longtemps j'ai tâché de vaincre ma passion pour Gustave: mais
mon faible cœur ne peut plus s'en défendre. Je ne puis vivre sans
lui; à peine puis-je être un jour sans le voir, et son absence ne m'est
pas moins pénible qu'à Lucile. Hé bien, il faut que je la supplante.
Hélas où mon esprit s'égare! Dans quel nouvel abîme je vais me
plonger! Ah! ma chère, que ne peut point la beauté sur une âme,
puisqu'elle lui fait oublier son devoir et le soin de son repos?
Pour posséder Gustave, il faut gagner la confiance de Lucile, se
rendre maîtresse de ses secrets, faire naître adroitement entre eux
de la jalousie, et les brouiller l'un avec l'autre. Quoi, j'oublierai la
pitié? Je serai fausse par système? J'irai d'erreur en erreur, de crime
en crime? Je me rendrai méprisable à mes propres yeux?
Mais que m'importe de vivre sans remords, s'il faut vivre
infortunée! Les maximes de mon siècle seront mon excuse. Ne m'as-
tu pas dit toi-même cent fois que la vertu n'est uniquement faite que
pour les sots qui y croient; qu'il ne faut avoir d'autre règle de
conduite que son plaisir; que la sagesse consiste à savoir jouir du
présent, et que tout finit avec nous. Tu n'as fait de ces maximes
qu'une trop heureuse expérience: depuis longtemps tu ne vis que
pour toi. Que ne puis-je t'imiter, et être aussi fortunée!
 P. S. Il s'est élevé un différent entre les comtes Sobieski et
Potowski au sujet des confédérés. On craint une rupture. Lucile est
dans des transes continuelles dont je ne suis pas fâchée, et je ne
sais pourquoi.
De Varsovie, le 15 octobre 1769.
 XXI
GUSTAVE A LUCILE.
Depuis quelque temps je vois avec chagrin les débats de nos
parents au sujet des confédérés. Déjà ils ont fait naître du
refroidissement entre nos familles; le jour de notre union est
renvoyé, je ne puis plus te voir aussi souvent que je le souhaite, et
je tremble qu'à la fin cette mésintelligence n'ait des suites funestes
pour notre bonheur.
Hélas! nous touchons peut-être au moment d'être séparés pour
jamais.
Chère Lucile, prévenons par un nœud indissoluble le coup fatal
dont le destin nous menace. Viens, âme de ma vie, viens,
présentons-nous aux autels de l'hymen, et qu'un doux lien nous
unisse. Nous tenons encore dans nos mains l'arrêt de notre sort: le
laisserons-nous prononcer sans retour?
O ma Lucile, ne ferme pas ton oreille à la voix de ton amant.
Rends-toi à son ardente prière, ouvre ton âme aux plus doux
sentiments et garde-toi bien de résister au plus puissant des dieux
qui veut couronner notre bonheur.
De la rue Neuve, le 27 octobre 1769.
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookbell.com