![]() ![]() Verbs like correct and file subcategorize their com plements. Yet, there is an important difference between the two constructions. In this aspect, the sentence much resembles the English parasitic gap construction above: in the former case too, the comple ments of correct and file must corefer with the noun phrase heading the relative (the reports). As the indices indicate, the interpretation of the French sentence is un ambiguous: both the prestige and the wealth necessarily pertain to the same individual. ![]() My own interest in the phenomenon was sparked a few years ago, when, in a novel, I came across a sentence like the following: Chait un armateur dont Ie prestige _ reposait largement sur la fortune _, 'he was a shipbuilder of whom the prestige was largely based on the wealth'. ![]() Je relance le jeu, et la, mes saves ont disparues rien du tout Je me dit je vais créer un profil, je recomence le niveau avec mon new profile, et au bout dun moment je quitte le jeu et je le relance pour verifier. Furthermore, it is unlikely that any principle of Universal Grammar refers specifically to parasitic gap constructions their syntactic and interpretive properties must instead follow entirely from independent principles. voila, jai un gros probleme, je viens dinstaller Far cry, je me suis taper le premier niveau, jusqua avoir le buggy, et hop jai quitté le jeu pensant 5 minutes. Clearly, the intuitions that native speakers have about parasitic gaps do not stem from direct instruction hence, it is reasoned, such knowledge follows from the restrictions imposed by Universal Grammar. The impetus behind this lies mostly in the margi nality of the construction. these are the reports which you corrected _ before filing _i) has been a very lively area of research over the last decade. The study of parasitic gap constructions (e. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |