1. List of contributors 2. Introduction: The role of semantic, pragmatic and discourse factors in the development of case (by Barddal, Johanna) 3. Part I. Semantically and aspectually motivated synchronic case variation 4. Case variation in Gothic absolute constructions (by Dewey, Tonya Kim) 5. Some semantic and pragmatic aspects of object alternation in Early Vedic (by Dahl, Eystein) 6. Part II. Discourse motivated subject marking 7. The case of the shifty ergative marker: A pragmatic shift in the ergative marker of one Australian mixed language (by Meakins, Felicity) 8. How useful is case morphology? The loss of the Old French two-case system within a theory of Preferred Argument structure (by Detges, Ulrich) 9. Part III. Reduction or expansion of case marker distribution 10. The development of case in Germanic (by Barddal, Johanna) 11. A usage-based approach to change: Old Russian possessive constructions (by Eckhoff, Hanne Martine) 12. Lacking in Latvian: Case variation from a cognitive and constructional perspective (by Berg-Olsen, Sturla) 13. Verb classes and dative objects in Insular Scandinavian (by Jonsson, Johannes Gisli) 14. Transitive adjectives in Japanese (by Caluianu, Daniela) 15. Part IV. Case syncretism motivated by syntax, semantics or language contact 16. Patterns of development, patterns of syncretism of relational morphology in the Bodic languages (by Noonan, Michael) 17. The evolution of local cases and their grammatical equivalent in Greek and Latin (by Luraghi, Silvia) 18. Argument structure and alignment variations and changes in Late Latin (by Cennamo, Michela) 19. Case loss in Texas German: The influence of semantic and pragmatic factors (by Boas, Hans C.) 20. Part V. Case splits motivated by pragmatics, metonymy and subjectification 21. Semantic role to new information in Meithei (by Chelliah, Shobhana L.) 22. From less personal to more personal: Subjectification of ni-marked NPs in Japanese discourse (by Sadler, Misumi) 23. Author index 24. Subject index

Introduction: The role of semantic, pragmatic and discourse factors in the development of case

https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/2696590.pdf

Historische Laut- und Formenlehre der lateinischen Sprache

I argue for a novel model of feature valuation in the CI interface and explore under what circumstances a syntactic feature is semantically interpretable As the groundwork for the investigation, I propose an explicit Distributed Morphology model of Italian nouns of profession The data provide evidence that the morphology accesses the narrow-syntax representation at two different temporal points within a phase: the earlier point (Spell-Out) returns a morphological realization faithful to feature values present in narrow syntax, while the later point (Transfer) allows for a narrow-syntax representation to be enriched by the CI component Thus, there is no syntactic distinction between interpretable and uninterpretable features: a syntactic feature appears to be interpretable only if it has been licensed by the CI interface

ɸ-Features at the Syntax-Semantics Interface: Evidence from Nominal Inflection

According to Word and Paradigm Morphology (Matthews, 1974; Blevins, 2016), the word is the basic cognitive unit over which paradigmatic analogy operates to predict form and meaning of novel forms. Baayen et al. (2019b, 2018) introduced a computational formalization of word and paradigm morphology which makes it possible to model the production and comprehension of complex words without requiring exponents, morphemes, inflectional classes, and separate treatment of regular and irregular morphology. This computational model, Linear Discriminative Learning (LDL), makes use of simple matrix algebra to move from words’ forms to meanings (comprehension) and from words’ meanings to their forms (production). In Baayen et al. (2018), we showed that LDL makes accurate predictions for Latin verb conjugations. The present study reports results for noun declension in Estonian. Consistent with previous findings, the model’s predictions for comprehension and production are highly accurate. Importantly, the model achieves this high accuracy without being informed about stems, exponents, and inflectional classes. The speech errors produced by the model look like errors that native speakers might make. When the model is trained on incomplete paradigms, comprehension accuracy for unseen forms is hardly affected, but production accuracy decreases, reflecting the well-known asymmetry between comprehension and production. Unseen principal parts (i.e., nominative, genitive, and partitive singulars) are particularly difficult to produce, possibly due to their more distinctive forms. Removing principal parts from training, however, does not affect accuracy for other case forms. Model performance does not degrade either when the training data includes the alternative forms that are ubiquitous in Estonian. These results are consistent with the claim of Blevins (2008) that Estonian number and case inflection is organized in a way that facilitates the deduction of full paradigms from only a small number of forms.

Estonian Case Inflection Made Simple

14. On the origin of non-nominative subjects

The meaning of a noun converted into a verb. A semantic exploration on denominal verbal lexemes

The paper explores the distribution of infinitives in subject function in Latin and Homeric Greek  As a matter of fact, in these languagues a nominal infinitive can appear in  in subject function if the finite verb of the clause belongs to a restricted set of intransitive predicates, all taking non-agentive subjects, thus pointing to an Aktionsart-based distribution  Some features of Latin and Homeric Greek infinitives are also discussed as further evidence for their status of non-canonical subjects Their distribution is compared with that of suffixed action nouns, which denote abstract notions but may play the role of agentive subjects The analysis allows to conclude that infinitives are non-agentive verbal nouns functioning as non-canonical subjects

/pdf/on-the-distribution-of-subject-infinitives-in-latin-and-3mmape4q6a.pdf

On the distribution of subject infinitives in Latin and Homeric Greek

The paper takes into account the syntax of infinitives in subject function in Latin, arguing that it represents a plausible instance of a semantically-oriented coding strategy. A great number of occurrences demonstrates that Latin infinitives can only appear in subject function if the finite verb of the clause belongs to a restricted set of intransitive predicates (namely stative predicates, achievements and activity predicates in the passive voice), all taking non-agentive subjects. Conversely, infinitives cannot appear as subjects of unergative predicates and accomplishments. Therefore, the Aktionsart of the finite predicate happens to play a relevant role in their distribution as subjects. Some features of Latin infinitives (lack of case marking, neuter gender, availability as direct objects) are also discussed as further evidence for their status of non-canonical subjects. The analysis allows to conclude that infinitives are non-agentive verbal nouns functioning as non-canonical subjects within some specific constructions, thus instantiating a semantically-oriented pattern of alignment.

Claudia Fabrizio

Papers

The meaning of a noun converted into a verb. A semantic exploration on denominal verbal lexemes

On the distribution of subject infinitives in Latin and Homeric Greek

Il caso curioso dell'infinito soggetto in latino

Valency Classes in Italian