Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-trf7k Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-17T23:28:04.105Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Movement to C in German

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2008

Robert G. Hoeing
Robert G. Hoeing
Affiliation:
State University of New York at BuffaloBuffalo, New York 14260
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Standard movement theory stipulates that any X"-phrase that is moved must move to the specifier position (SPEC) of C". In this paper, however, it is argued on the basis of coordination phenomena, verb-final structure, and diachronic evidence that, in relative clauses and indirect questions, the moved pronoun or w-element functions more as a true complementizer than as a fronted X"-phrase and thus should move to the head position C. Movement to C is thus determined not by the phrase-structure level of the moved category, but by feature compatibility.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Germanic Linguistics , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , January 1993 , pp. 29 - 46
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Germanic Linguistics 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

WORKS CITED

Braune, Wilhelm. 1979. Althochdeutsches Lesebuch. 16. Aufl., bearb. Ebbinghaus, von Ernst A.. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Braune, Wilhelm. 1981. Gotische Grammatik. 19. Aufl., bearb. Ebbinghaus, von Ernst A.. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Barriers. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dal, Ingerid. 1966. Kurze deutsche Syntax auf historischer Grundlage. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Emonds, Joseph. 1976. A transformational approach to English syntax. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Grewendorf, Günther. 1988. Aspekte der deutschen Syntax. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Hock, Hans Heinrich. 1988. “Relative clauses and rebracketing in Old English.” Germanic linguistics II. Eds. Antonsen, E. H. and Hock, Hans Heinrich. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Linguistics Club. Pp. 35–54.Google Scholar
Klaeber, F., ed. 1950. Beowulf. 3rd ed.Lexington MA: D.C. Heath.Google Scholar
Lenerz, Jürgen. 1981. “Zur Generierung der satzeinleitenden Positionen im Deutschen.” Sprache: Formen und Strukturen. Ed. Kohrt, Manfred und Lenerz, Jürgen. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 171–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olsen, Susan. 1985. “On deriving V-l and V-2 structures in German.” Studies in German grammar. Ed. Toman, Jindrich. Dordrecht: Foris. Pp. 133–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pesetsky, David. 1982. “Complementizer-Trace phenomena and the Nominative Island condition.” The linguistic review 1: 297–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reis, Marga. 1985. “Satzeinleitende Strukturen im Deutschen. Über COMP, Haupt- und Nebensätze, w−Bewegung und die Doppelkopfanalyse.” Erklärende Syntax des Deutschen. Ed. Abraham, Werner. Tübingen: Narr. Pp. 271–311.Google Scholar
Schirmunski, V.M. 1962. Deutsche Mundartkunde. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar