Unit 6: Subject-Verb Inversion PDF

UNIT 6: SUBJECT-VERB INVERSION In Spanish, verb-subject order is possible for all sentences even if some orders ar better than others for understanding the message. 6.1. SV INVERSION IN… NATIVE SPANISH NATIVE ENGLISH 6.1.1. Theoretical departure point: Interfaces We need 4 basic ingredients in Lang...

UNIT 6: SUBJECT-VERB INVERSION In Spanish, verb-subject order is possible for all sentences even if some orders ar better than others for understanding the message. 6.1. SV INVERSION IN… NATIVE SPANISH NATIVE ENGLISH 6.1.1. Theoretical departure point: Interfaces We need 4 basic ingredients in Language (and 3 interfaces): -​ Words (lexicon) -​ How to combine words (syntax/computational system) -​ How to pronounce those words (phonetics, phonology) -​ What those word and the combinations of those words mean (semantics, pragmatics) Lexicon feeds the computational system and syntax through the syntax lexicon interface. Syntax, through the syntax-phonology interface, creates the sensory-motor systems (because we hear it and motor because we articulate to produce: phonetics and phonology). Syntax also creates the conceptual-intentional systems (conceptual is related to ideas and intentional to pragmatics: semantics, pragmatics) through the syntax-discourse interface. and it feeds the other two interfaces. ​ An interface is the connection point between two linguistic modules 6.2. WORD ORDER IN NATIVE SPANISH: APPARENTLY “FREE”? Postverbal subjects can (apparently) alternate ‘freely’ with all verb classes – BUT THERE ARE CONSTRAINTS (it depends on whether the speaker knows some information about the context or not). 6.3. WORD ORDER IN NATIVE ENGLISH VS ORDER: RULES There are 3 principles operating at 3 interfaces: Subjects which are focus and heavy tend to occur post verbally in those structures with unaccusative verbs. 1.​ Lexicon-syntax interface: Only unaccusative verbs [existence, appearance, change of location] allow postverbal subjects in native English. a.​ Existential constructions with “there”: THERE + VUNACCUSATIVE + S: There exist three main types of social problems (unaccusative verb)  b.​ Locative inversion: Locative + VUNACCUSATIVE + S: The storm arrived from the west 2.​ Syntax-discourse interface: Postverbal material tends to be focus (new information), while preverbal material links to previous discourse (topic): Principle of End-Focus: I was walking down the park. Suddenly, there appeared a dog [Focus subject with unaccusative verb]. Syntax related to syntax. 3.​ Syntax-Phonological Form: Heavy material is sentence-final (Principle of End-Weight). Syntax communicated with phonology: A big black panting dog appeared there vs There appeared a big black panting dog. 6.4.: STUDY 1: INTERFACE CONDITIONS ON POSTVERBAL SUBJECTS: A CORPUS STUDY OF L2 ENGLISH 6.4.1. Previous L2 findings XP-V-S only with unaccusative verbs (a type of intransitive verb), never with unergatives → Reason → Unaccusative Hypothesis. -​ Unaccusatives (verbs of change of location, existence, appearance): arrive, happen, exist, come, appear, live (there lives an old woman)… -​ Unergatives: cry, speak, sing, walk... 6.4.2. Hypotheses (=predictions) 3 interface conditions constrain the appearance of subjects in postverbal position in native English and in L2 English: 1.​ Hypothesis 1 [UNACCUSATIVITY]: Lexicon-syntax interface (learners know the rules of the interface): Postverbal subjects appear with unaccusatives only (never with unergatives) 2.​ Hypothesis 2 [END WEIGHT]: Syntax-Phonology interface (learners know the rules of the interface): Postverbal subjects are phonologically heavy (but preverbal subjects are light) 3.​ Hypothesis 3 [END FOCUS]: Syntax-Discourse interface (learners know the rules of the interface): Postverbal subjects are focus/new information (but preverbal subjects are topic) 6.4.3. Learner corpora Corpora used to compare learners with native speakers. There was a total of 1905 concordances, with there being more concordances on the learner’s unaccusative use of verbs. The English natives’ corpus has less words for control corpus. Results: -​ Learners and natives produce all unergative verbs (100%) in SV formations. -​ Natives produce more unaccusative SV formation (97.8%) in SV formations in comparison to learners (92.9%). Which means that learners produce more unaccusative verbs (7.1%) in VS formations than natives (2.3%). 6.4.4. Syntactic encoding of XP - V (unac) - S Natives only produce grammatical unaccusative sentences but learners produce both grammatical and ungrammatical unaccusative structures. These are produced by: -​ Using “it” (most frequent) -​ Using PPloc -​ There -​ Zero insertion (less frequent) We cannot say that these learners are constantly being influenced from their mother tongue 6.4.5. H2 SYNTAX-PHONOLOGY: RESULTS The tendency is: heavy subject post-verb and light subjects pre-verb -​ S-V sentences: Natives and learners produce more or less the same length for pre-subject sentences (4.5) → but they may… (L) vs These debates began… (N) -​ V-S sentences: Natives produce longer post-subject sentences (7-16 words) in relation to learners (4-9 words) → Against this society drama emerged an opposition headed by O.W and B.S (L) vs With this theory also came the campaign on how to educate the public on how one contracts aids. 6.4.6. H3: SYNTAX-DISCOURSE: RESULTS Both in learners and natives, the post-verbal subject is the focus or new information whilst pre-verbal subjects q43 considered topics or known information. 100% = New information 90% and 84% → Preverbal is topic