Organizing Grammar: Linguistic Studies in Honor of Henk van Riemsdijk

Studies in Generative Grammar 86

Editors Jan Koster Harry van der Hulst Henk van Riemsdijk

Mouton de Gruyter Berlin

New York

Organizing Grammar Studies in Honor of Henk van Riemsdij k

Edited by Hans Broekhuis Norbert Corver Riny Huybregts Ursula Kleinhenz Jan Koster

Mouton de Gruyter Berlin

New York

&

Mouton de Gruyter (formerly Mouton, The Hague) is a Division of Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Co. KG, Berlin.

The series Studies in Generative Grammar was formerly published by Foris Publications Holland.

@ Printed

on acid-free paper which

falls

within the guidelines

of the ANSI to ensure pennanence and durability.

, rJC'f 2Q:.,l..�1

cI

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Organizing grammar: linguistic studies in honor of Henk Van Riems­ dijk I edited by Hans Broekhuis ... let a1.].

p. cm. - (Studies in generative grammar ; 86) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN-13: 978-3-1 1-018850-9 (cloth: alk. paper) ISBN- lO: 3-11-018850-3 (cloth: alk. paper) 1. Grammar, Comparative and general. I. Riemsdijk, Henk C. van. II. Broekhuis, Hans, 1959III. Series. P201.068 2005 415-dc22 2005031175

ISBN-13: 978-3-11-018850-9 ISBN-lO: 3-11-018850-3 Bibliographic illformation published by Die Deutsche Bibliothek Die Deutsche Bibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data is available in the Internet at .

©

Copyright 2005 by Walter de Gruyter

and by the contributors.

GmbH

& Co.

KG,

10785 Berlin

All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. No part of this

book may be reproduced in any fonn or by any means, electronic or mechanical. including photocopy. recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Cover design: Christopher Schneider, Berlin. Printing and binding: Hubert & Co. GmbH & Co. KG, Gottingen Printed in Germany.

Henk van Riemsdijk (Picture courtesy Ben Bergmans)

Table of Contents XIII

List of contributors

XVII

Hi Morris, this is Henk! An intersubjective note on the notion of 'subjectification'

VVerneri\braharn A note on n on can onical passives: the case of the get-passive -

Artemis i\lexiadou

1

13 22

Dis placed and misplaced genitives Josef Bayer

Preposition stranding and locative adverbs in German

31

Dorothee Beennann and Lars Hellan Moving verbal complexes in Spanish

43

Reineke Bok-Bennema Unbearably light verbs versus finite auxiliary drop

Anne Breitbarth

Extraction from subjects: some remarks on Chomsky's

��

53 On

Hans Broekhuis

A Chinese relative Lisa Lai-Shen Cheng and Rint Sybesma

� 69

Approximative ofZO as a diagnostic tool

77

selection

87

Norbert Corver

A note on in te rpretable features and idiosyncratic categorial

Denis Delfitto

VIII

Contents

Transparent, free... and polarised: the (poli}tics of polarity in transparent free relatives Marcel den Dikken

97

The inverse agreement constraint in Hungarian: a relic of a Uralic-Siberian Sprachbund? Katal in E. Kiss

108

Syntactic conditions on phonetically empty morphemes Joseph Emonds Long-distance reciprocals Martin Everaert The notion of topic and the problem of quantification in Hungarian Zsuzsanna Gecseg and Ferenc Kiefer Questions of complexity C asper de Groot Functional heads, lexical heads and hybrid categories Liliane Haegeman Concatenation and interpretation Martin Haiden As time goes by: a digressive discourse Hubert Haider, Masyuki Oishi and Shigeo Tonoike There's that: unifying existential and list readings Jutta M. Hartmann Extended projections - extended analogues: a note on Hungarian PPs Veronika Hegedus Against the sonority scale: evidence from Frankish tones Ben Hermans and Marc van Oostendorp

1 16 127

137 146 152 162 171 186

197 206

Contents

Classifiers, agreement and honorifics in Japanese Masaru Honda

What stranded adjectives reveal about Split-NP Topicalization 'Hanneke van Hoof

Past tense interpretations in Dutch AngeJiek van Hont

Why phonology is the same Harry van der Hulst

Recursively linked Case-Agreement: from accidents to principles and beyond Riny Huybregts

Enfoldment as Economy Takashi Imai

"GP, I'll have to put your flat feet on the ground" Jonathan Kaye

On parameters and on principles of pronunciation Richard S. Kayne

What to do with those fools of a crew? Evelien Keizer

Why indefinite pronouns are different Istvan Kenesei

Seeing the forest despite the tree Hans-Peter Kolb

When to pied-pipe and when to strand in San Dionicio Octo tepee Zapotec Hilda Koopman

Free relatives as light-headed relatives in Turkish Jaklin Komfilt

IX 222 230 241 252

263 275 283 289 300 310 319

331 340

X

Contents

Is linguistics a natural science? Jan Koster Two asymmetries between Clitic Left and Clitic Right Dislocation in Bulgarian Iliyana Krapova and Guglielmo Cinque On dative subjects in Russian s.-y. Kuroda On the nature of case in Basque: structural or inherent? Itziar Laka3 74 Examining the scope of Principles-and-Paramelers Theory David LeBlanc Clitics and adjacency in Greek PPs Winfried Lechner and Elena Anagnostopoulou A minimalist program for parametric linguistics? Giuseppe Longobardi A syntactic approach to negated focus questions in Bulgarian Krzysztof Migdalski The case of midpositions N atasa Milicev iC Quechua P-soup Pieter Muysken Semantic compositionality of the way-construction Heizo Nakajima Soft mutation at the interface Ad Neeleman Abracadabra, the relation between stress and rhythm Anneke Neijt

350

359 365 374 383 390 407 415 424 434 439 447 458

;;What do we learn when we acquire a language? Marina Nespor, Judit Gervain and Jacques Mehler

�;A 'pr:o�odic contrast between Northern and a result of a Flemish -French sprachbund

Contents

Southern Dutch:

Rbland:NoSke

The object of verbs like help and an apparent violation of UTAH Christer Platzack

A note on relative pronouns in Standard German Martin Prinzhom and Viola Schmitt Agreeing to bind Eric Reuland Positive polarity and evaluation Hendrik C. van Riemsdijk Phase theory

Luigi Rizzi

and the privilege of the root

On the role of parameters in Universal Grammar: a reply to Newmeyer Ian Roberts and Anders Holmberg Welsh VP-ellipsis and the representation of aspect Alain Rouveret A new perspective on event participants in psychological states and events Bozena Rozwadowska A glimpse of doubly-filled COMPs in Swiss German Manuela Schonenberger Missing prepositions in Dutch free relatives Chris Sijtsma Final sonorant devoicing in early Yokuts field-records Norval Smith

XI

466 474 483 495 505 5 14 529

538 554

563 572 582 592

XII

Contents

Cyclic NP structure and trace interpretation Dominique Sportiche Appositive and parenthetical relative clauses Tim Stowell Overt infinitival subjects (if that's what they are) Anna Szabo lcsi Wanna and the prepositional complementizers of English Tarald Taraldsen

A note on asymmetric coordination and subject gaps Craig Thiersch The representation of focus and its implications: towards an alternative account of some 'intervention effects' Jean-Roger Vergnaud and Maria-Luisa Zubizarreta Circumstantial evidence for Dative Shift Edwin Williams Why should diminutives count? Martina Wiltschko Adjacency, PF, and extraposition Susi Wurmbrand and Jonathan David Bobaljik A note on functional ad positions lan-Wouter Zwart Bibliography of Henk C. van Riemsdijk Index

599 608 618 625 633

641 661 669 679 "689 696

707

List of contributors

W�irierb\bralfkln

UiiiV�f§itat Wten [email protected]

Guglielmo Cinque U niversitit di Venezia [email protected]

Artemis Alexiadou University of Stuttgart [email protected]

Norbert Corver University of Utrecht [email protected]

Eena Anagnostopoulou University of Crete [email protected]

Denis Delfitto University of Verona denis.delfitto@ univr.it

Josef Bayer University of Konstanz josef. [email protected]

�arcel den Dikken CUNY Graduate Center [email protected]

Dorothee Beermann NTNU, Trondheim dorothee. [email protected]

Katalin t. Kiss Hungarian Academy of Sciences [email protected]

Jonathan David Bobaljik University ofConnecticut, Storrs jonathan.bobalj [email protected]

Joseph Emonds Kobe-Shoin Women' s University [email protected]

Reineke Bok-Bennema University ofGroningen [email protected]

Martin Everaert Utrecht University [email protected]

Anne Breitbarth University ofTilburg [email protected]

Zsuzsanna Gecseg Szeged University [email protected] .lm

Hans Broekhuis University ofTilburg [email protected]

Judit Gervain SISSA gervain@sissa:it

Lisa Lai-Shen Cheng Leiden U niversity [email protected] .nl

Casper de Groot University of Amsterdam [email protected]

XIV

Contributors

Liliane Haegeman UMR 8258 Silex du CNRS Li lle III liliane.haegeman@univ-lille3 .fr

Harry van der Hulst University of Connecticut harry. [email protected]

Martin Haiden CNRS, Univ. Lille 3 [email protected]

Riny Huybregts University of Utrecht! University of Leiden [email protected]

Hubert Haider U niversitat Salzburg [email protected]

Takashi Imai Tsuru University timaiOO [email protected]

Jutta M. Hartmann Tilburg University j [email protected]

Jonathan Kaye Girona, Catalunya jdkaye 1 [email protected]

Veronika Hegedus University of Tilburg [email protected]

Richard S. Kayne New York University [email protected]

Lars Hellan N 1NU, Trondhelffi [email protected]

Evelien Keizer University of Amsterdam [email protected]

Ben Hermans Meertens Institute, Amsterdam [email protected]

Istvan Kenesei Research Institute for Linguistics, Budapest/University of Szeged ik �[email protected]

Anders Holmberg University of Newcastle upon Tyne [email protected] Masaru Honda Kwansei Gakuin University [email protected] Hanneke van Hoof University of Tilburg [email protected] Angeliek van Hout University of Groningen angeliek. [email protected]

Ferenc Ki�fer . Hungarian Academy of Sciences [email protected] Hans-Peter Kolb TNO, Delft, The Netherlands [email protected] Hilda Koopman UCLA [email protected] Jaklin Kornfilt Syracuse University [email protected]

Contributors XV

Jan Koster University of Groningen j [email protected]

Pieter Muysken Radboud University [email protected]

I1iyana Krapova Universitil di Venezia [email protected]

Heizo Nakajima Gakushuin University [email protected]

S.-Y. Kuroda University of California, San Diego/International Institute for Advanced Studies� Kyoto. [email protected]

Ad Neeleman UCL [email protected]

Itziar Laka University of the Basque Country EHUIUPV iziar [email protected] David LeBlanc University of Prince Edward Island [email protected] Winfried Lechner University of Stuttgart [email protected] Giuseppe Longobardi U niversitit di Trieste [email protected] Jacques Mehler SISSA [email protected] Krzysztof Migdalski University of Tilburg [email protected] N atasa Milicevic University of Tilburg n.m. [email protected]

Anneke Neijt Radboud University, Nijrnegen [email protected] Marina Nespor University of Ferrara [email protected] Roland Noske Universite Lille 3/CNRS 8528 Silex [email protected]

UMR

Masyuki Oishi Tohoku Gakuin University [email protected] p Marc van Oostendorp Meertens Institute� Amsterdam [email protected] aw.nl Cbrister Platzack Lund University [email protected] Martin Prinzhorn University of Vienna [email protected] Eric Reuland University of Utrecht [email protected]

XVI

Contributors

Hendrik C. van Riemsdijk

Anna Szabolcsi

Freelance Linguist [email protected]

New York University [email protected]

Luigi Rizzi

Tarald Taraldsen

University of Siena [email protected]

CASTL Troms0 [email protected]

Ian Roberts

Craig Thiersch

University of Cambridge [email protected]

University of TiIburg/U niversity of Potsdam [email protected]

Alain Rouveret Universite Paris-7 [email protected]

Bozena Rozwadowska University ofWroclaw [email protected]

Manuela Schonenberger University of Stuttgart [email protected]

Chris Sijtsma

Shigeo Tonoike Aoyama Gakuin University [email protected]

Jean-Roger Vergnaud U.S.C [email protected]

Edwin Williams Princeton University [email protected]

C.S [email protected]

Martina WiItschko

Viola Schmitt

UBC [email protected]

University of Vienna [email protected]

Norval Smith University of Amsterdam [email protected]

Dominiq ue Sportiche UCLA/ENS Paris [email protected]

Tim Stowell UCLA [email protected]

Rint Sybesma Leiden University r. [email protected]

Susi Wurmbrand University of Connecticut, Storrs [email protected]

Maria-Luisa Zubizarreta U.S.C [email protected] .

Jan-Wouter Zwart University of Groningen c.j . w [email protected]

689

Hi Morris, this is Henk!

According to an apocryphal story, in 1970, a group of stud ents at the University of Amsterdam was discussing a problem related to phonology. They could not solve the problem, so, one of the students, Henk van Riemsdijk, said: "OK, let me call Morris Halle at MIT". So, Henk grabbed the nearest telephone, dialed a number, followed by a conversation th at started as follows: "Hi Morris, this is Henk! We've got a problem here and we thought you might know the answer, etc., etc." We have not been able to ascertain the authenticity of the story, but we all agree that it could have be en true and that it is typical of a kind of flair that did not exist in Dutch lingUistics before Henk's arrival in 1970. Just imagine, Morris and MIT were :\.vorld-famous institutions and quite intimidating to a group o f rel�dve ly provincial and diffident students. Henk was only 22, already a complete linguist and talking to the big shots in the field as i f he were their equal and daily pal. It is this exceptional flair and initiative that wou ld become the basis of Henk's decisive role in organizing the field of generative linguistics in Europe. Born in 1948 in The Hague, The Netherlands, Henk's Dutch family soon moved to Zurich, Switzerland, where he grew up. That was a lucky acci dent because it would make Henk the internationally-mi nded polyglot that helped him so much to play a European role in his later life. In Zurich, he spoke Dutch within the family, Swis� German in the streets and High German in school. Moreover, since not only German but also French and Italian are official languages of Switzerl an d, he learned these lang uages better than most of us. In fact, he became absolutely fluent in French when he became a student of linguistics in the revolutionary Paris of the late 1960s. Going to Paris at that time was another stroke of good luck, because said revolutionary climate had created the experimental curriculum in Vincennes, which included much interest in generative grammar. This attracted various MIT linguists, next to local pioneers of the field, like Nicola s Ruwet and the psycholinguist Jacques Mehler. The MIT linguists in Pari s included Richard Kayne, Yuki Kuroda an d Joseph Emonds.

XVIII

Preface

Especially Joe Emonds would become a lifelong friend of Henk's and a maj or influence on early Dutch generative syntax. When Henk arrived at the University of Amsterdam in 1 970, not on ly was he a mature linguist but he also brought along the international network he had built up in his Paris years. With his social and intellectual talents, his initiative and, above all, with his international background, Henk turned the aforementioned somewhat diffident and provincial group of Amsterdam students into a force that would make Amsterdam the leading European center of generative linguistics for many years to come. Luckily, the older generation in Holland, with figures like Frits Staal, Albert Kraak, Pieter Seuren, Wim Klooster and Henk Verkuyl, had already created a favorable climate for generative linguistics, with various connections to MIT and other international centers. The typical orientation of generative linguistics in Amsterdam in those years was generative seman tics and that created a short-l ived consensus for a while across generations. It even included the head of the Amsterdam linguistics department, the late Simon Dik, who had serious misgivings about MIT linguistics but who -it must be said to his credit- was always supportive of the initiatives of Henk and his fellow students, especially in the early years. After a while, the consensus about generative semantics broke down because the students of Henk's generation became more and more skeptical about the ever wilder extensions of grammar, especially in the hands of George Lakoff. They started looking for something new and, 10 and behold, in flew Joe Emonds in 1 972, on Henk's invitation and precisely at the right time. Curiously, thanks to a lecture given ,by Joe in U trecht, the Amsterdam students had their first real contacts with the like-minded Utrecht linguists Arnold Evers and Riny Huijbregts. Joe was a representative of the then new EST model, with a much more down- to-earth, surface-oriented kind of syntax, with an emphasis on solid argumentation. The minor paradigm shift was already initiated by Chomsky'S visit to Amsterdam the year before, when he presented a version of his article Conditions on Transformations. The new orientation of Henk and his fellow students created some minor tensions with the older generation, who stuck to the generative semantics framework� but on the whole things remained friend1y and there never was anything like 'the linguistic wars' that allegedly were waged in the United States. Occasionally, the breaking down of the consensus was blamed on Henk' s pernicious influence, but it really was a collective process and Henk was not even the first to make the transition to the EST model. Apart from

Preface

XIX

considerations of substan ce , this transition also was a dev elopment defining ident ity of a new generation, for which Chom sky ' s Conditions of Transformations would become the leading program. This development was consol idated by Henk's sabbatical at MIT in 1974 (together with Frans Zwarts), which was preceded by an influential anti-generative semantics seminar given by Mike Brame in Utrecht. The MIT visit also led to a considerable expansion of Henk's already impressive: network� with new friends, like Mary-Louise Kean, Edwin Williams and.,many others. The cooperation with Edwin would lead to a popular'textbook that was translated into several languages. The association with MIT became rather close at the time, especially when Henk' s friends and fellow students Hans den Besten and Jan Koster also visited MIT in 1976. By that time, we had already seen the hirth of what would become GLOW. In the spring of 1976, there was a student reading and discussion club led by Henk under the name Green Ideas. Henk took the initiative for a concluding conference in Amsterdam called Green Ideas Blown Up, wh ich was an unforgettable experience. The Amsterdam linguists discovered that they were not alone in their enthusiasm for Conditions on Transformations and were delighted to share ideas and impressions with Jacqueline Gueron, Jean-Yves Pollock, Luigi Rizzi, Alain Rouveret, and several others. GLOW, in other words, really goes back to this Amsterdam­ Paris association, all of it started by Henk, who had had the good fortune to have lived in both citi es . Henk's friend Jean-Roger Vergnaud could not come in 1 976, but the next year he was one of the three founders of GLOW, together with Henk and Jan Koster, but clearly, as always, on Henk's initiative. The GLOW manifesto -in retrospect a document of touching orthodoxy- was written by Jan Koster and corrected and expanded by Henk and Jean-Roger. The rest is h i story . Henk chaired GLOW for many years and made it the leading platfonn of European generative linguistics, which it has remained until the present day. Last but not least, Henk has been co-editor of the renowned book series Studies in Generative Grammar since its inception ( 1 978) and also was co-founder of The Linguistic Review in 198 1 . Apart from his leading role in org�izing our field, Henk also played a major role in buildi ng the quality of Dutch linguistics. His dissertation of 1 978 about PPs is a classical text on the topic. Henk made major contributions to X-bar theory, theories of sentence Pied Piping, and particularly to non-tree-representable structures, as, according to Henk, found in coordination, parasitic gaps, parentheticals, and many other the

xx

Preface

constructions. He also has been influential as a teacher and thesis supervisor, first in Amsterdam and since 1 981 in Tilburg. He supervised many dissertations, including those of Hilda Koopman, Reineke Bok­ Bennema, Hans den Besten, Hans Bennis, Norbert Corver, Marco Haverkort, Angeliek van Hout, Paola Monachesi, Elena Anagnostopoulou and Marc van Oostendorp. Next to his major achievement of founding GLOW, Henk made several other important contributions to the infra-structure of our field in Europe. The major European summer schools, like the ones in Salzburg (Austria) in the I 980s, and in Girona (Spain) and other places later on, were inconceivable without Henk' s contributions and recommendations . Also in his Tilburg years, Henk, as a true social animal, organized numerous conferences, which often led to published volumes with major contributions to the field. During the last ten years, when Henk became more and more skeptical about certain developments in the field and their lack of solid empirical foundation, he doubled his consolidating efforts, which produced, among other things, the monumental and truly encyclopedic SynCom project (The Syntax Companion), which promises to become the best resource for information on what our field has achieved during its first 50 years. As everyone knows, there are many other aspects of Henk' s personality that we have hardly touched upon. He is, for instance, a connoisseur of opera and an impressive singer himself, with a beautiful, deep bass voice. Henk could not have succeeded as the arch itect of the European infrastructure of our field if he had not been a wann and loyal friend to many, always organizing w�ll-catered social events, always sharing his enthusiasm about good food and wine. Many of us will never forget Henk's descents into his well-supplied wine cellar, returning after a while with some superb grand cru and a happy· smile of anticipatory satisfaction on his face. With Henk, it's not just a matter of initiative and organizational talents, but also the right kind of personality ..and the right kind of charisma that have given' glow' and cohesion to the social structure of our field. It is hard to believe that Henk will leave The Netherlands after 35 most successful years as a friend, inspiring colleague, as educator and as the founder of GLOW and of so many other institutionalized activities that give our field social cohesion and a sense of common enterprise. Since Henk is moving to Tuscany, he will once more have the advantage of a Swiss education and its attention for things Italian. He does not plan to go into full retirement, but still has many plans to organize linguistic activities in

Preface

XXI

his new environment. Needless to say, we are all very much looking forward to that and wish him and Elisabeth many happy years under the Tuscan sun! Most important of all, we would like to express our gratitude to Henk, not only on behalf of ourselves but on behalf of the entire generative communi ty, for more than 35 years of inspiration and initiative. It is in frien,c:ls hip �d great appreciation of what he achieved that we offer this collection of articles to him. Without Henk's unforgettable contributions, E:\ltPPean ·. generative linguistics would most certainly not be where it is today. Molle grazie, Henk! October, 2005 Hans Broekhuis Norbert Corver Riny Huij bregts Ursula Kleinhenz Jan Koster

An intersubjective note on the notion of 'subjectifi cation' Werner Abraham 1.

The problem

On exp laining the apparent gap of epistemic readings of modal verbs in Old English and early M iddle English as well as a number of other, independent d iachronic phenomena and their historical emergence, Traugott (1989, 1995, 1997) speculated that the notion of rising Subjectification and, more recently (2003), also Intersubjectification has played a determining role. ' Many others have adopted this notion as a driving and controlling force behind a host of grammaticalizing developments (Krug 2000, Verhagen 2005). The present paper presents arguments to the effect that such a notion may methodologically unhelpful or even undesirable and empirically unsatisfactory in explaining diachronic facts in general.. In particular, it will demonstrate how a different line of explanation can be pursued 2 making use of a purely linguistic reasoning in terms of marking (redundancy as well as underspecification) and optimizing the relation between form and function. This is how the discussion will be organized. First, the term of Subjectification will be highlighted in all due brevity quoting Traugott herself and other authors who have followed her in employing the notion of (Inter) Subjectification to explain diachronic phenomena. Second, it will be argued for Old and Middle High German that modal verbs show evidence of the polyfunctional uses of modal verbs in diachronic texts and that an account of such historical material in terms of Subjectification, though not impossible, can be replaced by two scenarios in terms of concrete semantic and syntactic accounts: the Modal Aspect Hypothesis and the Marking and Optimizing Hypothesis. A simple I

I have profited greatly from discussions with Elisabeth Leiss, Munich and

exposition to audiences in Florianopolis/Brazii (Semana de Eventos 2005), Santiago de Compostela (NRG 3 2005), Paris (IVG 2005) and Lund, Sweden in Sept. 2005. 2 There is, at least indirectly so, MUller's (2001) account drawing a parallel

between deontic readings of modal verbs in the Middle High German prose Lancelot and the rise of coherently embedded infinitives, on the one hand, and epistemic readings and biclausality, on the other hand.

2

Werner Abraham

concrete discussion on the synchronic poiyfunctionality of the modal reading of aspectual werden 'becomelbe' will serve the purpose of showing that hard-core linguistic reasoning suffices to make the required predictions.

2.

The pragmatic notion of (Inter)Subjectification and its alleged force

Consider the following definition Traugott (1996:5): 'Subjectification is a phenomenon affecting large domains of the lexicon. If the meaning of a lexical item or construction is grounded in the world of reference, it is likely that over time speakers will develop polysemies grounded in their world, whether reasoning, belief, or metatextual attitude to the discourse. In other words, Subjectification is a semasiological development of meanings associated with a meaning-form pair such that the latter comes to mark subjectivity explicitly.' The general line of diachronic emergence (for epistemic='subjective' modals) is as in (I) below (Traugott 2003: 128; '>' standing for' grammaticalizes to'). ( 1)

non-subjective> subjective> intersubjective

Intersubjectification, 'in the sense of the development of meanings that encode speaker/writers' attention to the cognitive stances and social identities of addressees, arises out of and depends crucially on Subjectification.' (Traugott 2003: 124). (1) schematizes the complete grammaticalizing cycle (Traugott 2003: 1 34). Among the concepts the author discusses as instances of this diachronic control mechanism are Japanese politeness markers (emerging from spatial lexemes), modal particles in German, epistemic adverbs in English, promise and threaten in their heavily bleached epistemic raising meaning, epistemic well, the development of the perfect aspect (tendency toward analytics), the numeral one eventually yielding only, and others. Non-SUbjective lexemes such as the root modals in Old High German darf, seal, mag, lean, toug, muoz, Old English dear/. sceal, meeg, can, deaz, mot are thus thought to yield epistemic (= subjective) readings as their subjective tint emerges in due course. Rootldeontic readings of modal verbs (MV) are thus taken to be 'non-subjective'. Notice that this way of speaking about diachronic development is akin to Meillet's jargon about 'greater expressivity , - a notion which is also often appealed to as a driving force in diachrony.

SUbjectification 3

An attempt at bringing to a close the notion of Subjectivity and Subjectification with other notions in the literature does not appear to yield much. •

•

•

One can consider a version of Theory of Mind. 'Subjective' then could mean:§9methitlg Jike ,seeing things through a crucially different mind, like .f:lJchild's below the age of two, or a lion's. J�j�dn4�ed.(1) :with 'non-subjective > subjective> intersubjective' ·�oriJpJ¢tes and closes the full grammaticalizing cycle, it would appear thatthe two notions of Non-subjectivity and Intersubjectivity would be identical developmental states. Notice that, if the entire world of addressees is implied, the referential state of Non-subjectivity must be reached. This renders the state of Intersubjectivity as a separate developmental diachronic state superfluous, since non-distinct from the source state. Finally, if a purely linguistic line of argument leads to an identical result as under the controlling factor of (inter)subjectification, the vaguer notion not belonging to any calibrated linguistic layering should be given up to the benefit of the latter.

We will indeed claim that such a an explanation under calibrated linguistic layering is possible in accounting for what has been seen as the 'emergence of epistemic modal readings'. Two empirically plausible grammaticalizing paths will be sketched: first, the Aspect Hypothesis according to which aspectual sensitivities of DMV vs. EMV will be exploited for an explanation; and, second, the Marking and Optimality Hypothesis, which makes use of modal over- and under specification. Let us first look at some diachronic material. 3.

Tenninativity/root vs. interminativity/epistemics

It is held tha� root modals, but not epistemic modals have a event-semantic structure as perfective full predicates. See (2a) for the full perfective verbs and (2b) for DMV . The event-semantic structure of epistemic MY­ readings, on the other hand, is akin to that of imperfective verbs as in (3a,b).

4 Werner Abraham

(2) a. terminative (in)transitive verbs: sterben 'die' and toten 'kill', respectively: 1

ti

Sext' Elint » » » » > » »

EI

I

tm

Elint ----

b. DMV: cf. m6gen, miissen, sol/en corresponding etymologically to 'may, must, shall' : 1 -)- -)- -)- -)- -)- -)- 1 Sext' Elint

9 int

(3) a. non-terminative (in)transitive verbs: [eben 'live' and stoften 'push', respectively: 1------------1

E b. EMVIraising-V: gexl' Bint

1------------1

E The quasi-auxiliaries (raising verbs � according to their syntactic " derivational properties) scheinen 'seem' andpjZegen 'be used to' are mono­ phasic, as are EMV. They have no similarity to term inatives and their event structure, respectively. This is in line with the picture that we receive about EMVs as well as the epistemic readings of arohen 'threaten' and versprechen 'promise' in their use as semantically bleached raising verbs. On the other hand, their control readings are bi-phasic as shown in (2a,b). Notice that perfectives as bi-phasics as well as root MVs, DMV, project futural meaning (viz. The manager promises to help and its futural reading). This is in line with the empirical fact that MV s such as will and shall have substituted for the expression of future tense auxiliaries throughout the Germania. According to the linear distributions (Abraham 200 1 ), the fol lowing operator relations hold for DMV vs. EMV. See (4) and (5) .

Subjectification 5

(4) a. Mood scoping over the whole proposition is open for DMV and EMV: MODI {TEMP (p» b. Tense scoping over the whole proposition excludes EMV: TEMP(MOD2 (p» solI/muB[MOD] ... DMV, EMV that he in A. lived have shalVmust 'that he had to/was supposed to have lived in A.' b. daB es hat ein Fehler gewesen sein sollen/mussen ... DMV� *EMV shalUmust that it has a mistake been be 'that it must have been a mistake'

(5) a. daB er in A. gewohn!part habenTEMP

The underscored predicate components carry finiteness. The representations in (6a) and (6b) correspond to (Sa) and (Sb), respectively .

(6) a. SUPPOSE MODI 80/1-

shallb. ANTERIOR TEMP hab- (ge-t) have been shall

(ANTERIOR TEMP ge-t habbeen have (OBLIG MO D2

soli live

(V» P

... DMV, EMV

P

... DMV, *EMV

wohnlive (V» wohn-

The scope relations in (5) are in line with the syntactic relations as sketched in (6). Notice that XP* can merge only in English non-V2. The examples under {XP*} exemplify what can be inserted and what not. Modern English full verbs do not raise out of VP, while MVs occur only in their epistemic or tense readings (Abraham 2001) . Modem German DMVs merge in VP, while EMV merge late above VP, way-up beyond IP - a conclusion which is corroborated by the independent findings in (8) and (9).

6 Werner Abraham (7)

IP

�

NP

I

�

I� IEnglish

Subject

I

V (XP*} =Neg

=? =emph. do adverb Quant =

=

(9)

VP

�

I

MY/Aux VEnglish

(8)

XP *

VGerman

I

VIDMV/Aux

*He hopes not to go/*hopen't *Hope we to go? I do hope to come *We hope always to go *They hope all to come

EpistP> TP > (VP » DeontP > AspP > (Aktionsart)Yo

� Modepistemic

=

T(past)

EMV

M