Augustin Speyer

Inhalt: – Vorwort – Arnulf Deppermann: Lean syntax: how argument structure is adapted to its interactive, material, and temporal ecology – Helmut Weiß & Thomas Strobel: Neuere Entwicklungen in der Dialektsyntax – Augustin Speyer: N [...]

Fragen der Koordination und der Subordination stehen seit langer Zeit im Fokus sprachwissenschaftlicher Forschung. Während in den 70er und auch noch in den 80er Jahren die Analyse der als kanonis [...]

There are three kinds of non-phoric es: the topologically motivated prefield-es, the formal subject-es and the correlate es which is coindexed with a subject or object subordinate clause. All of them can stand in the ,prefield' of German declarative clauses. The theory of the prefield ranking should disallow the positioning of such elements in the prefield. A closer look at corpus data reveals that sentences with non-phoric es in the prefield do not contain any of the more favoured prefield-fillers. The only way to fill the prefield in such cases is by Formal Movement of the subject (es) into the prefield position, or, if even that fails, by base-generation of an expletive in the prefield, namely the prefield-es.

In Modern German (MG), only one phrase can stand in the prefield. There are very few exceptions to that rule. In Early New High German (ENHG), clauses with two phrases in the prefield are more common. The ENHG data is partly in discord with Müller's (2005) hypothesis that double prefield-filling is due to movement of a partly emptied VP. In this paper I propose a new analysis in the framework of Optimality Theory that can apply both to MG and ENHG. Constraints are assigned to several information structural properties of phrases capable of vorfeld-movement. The interaction of constraints determines what is moving to the prefield in the end. The effect that in ENHG double vorfeld-filling was more common than in MG is explained by an increase in the value of the constraint that selects the candidate with only one phrase in the prefield.

In this paper a new analysis of German correlative clauses such as Je weniger Gepäck wir haben, umso leichter werden wir wandern (the less luggage we have, the easier we will be able to hike) is put forward, based on work by den Dikken. Correlative clauses are seen as base generated as part of their correlate phrase in the matrix clause. The above example is thus base generated as ...wir [umso leichter,[je weniger Gepäck wir haben]], wandern werden (which is a licit constituent order in German). This status as a partial constituent explains certain similarities with relative clauses (being partial constituents as well) such as the impossibility of movement to a position such as the prefield or the middle field. Correlative clauses are often leftward dislocated, the area left of the clause proper being virtually the only place they can be moved to. The reason why left dislocation of correlative clauses is so frequent is that this is the only possibility to avoid a stress clash which is inevitable in the base position of correlative clauses because both, the introductory element of the correlative clause (je weniger Gepäck) and the matrix correlate (umso leichter) bear focus. This explains also, why both clauses, matrix and correlative clause, have independent focus-background-structures; as this fact is conditioned by the shape of the sentences themselves it cannot serve as argument against embeddedness of correlative clauses.