Giuliana GIusti

106 Is there a FocusP anda TopicP in the Noun Phrase structure? both from the crosslinguistic and from the language internal points of view. In other words, not all languages have a fine DP-structure and, furthermore, each single position is not found in all languages. This is ...

GIULIANA GIUSTI A UNIFIED STRUCTURAL REPRESENTATION OF (ABSTRACT) CASE AND ARTICLE1 Evidence from Germanic ABSTRACT. In this paper, I will argue for the assumption of a nominal functional projec-tion FP that is the structural counterpart of (abstract) Case, ...

ABSTRACT In the generative tradition, the study of the noun phrase has received as much attention as the research on the structure of the sentence. The very concept of noun phrase has been expanded to contain an indefinite number of functional heads, with their specifiers and adjuncts. As a result, there is a vast structure, including ‘split projections’, that is parallel to clausal ones: an NP-shell (or nP) corresponding to a VP-shell (or vP)—an intermediate functional area formed with an indefinite number of projections related to adjectival modification, similar to adverbial modification in the clause—and a split DP representing different interpretive features parallel to a split CP. All this and much more is what Alexiadou, Haegeman, and Stavrou explore in Noun phrase in the generative perspective, which is dedicated to the memory of Tanya Reinhart. The book is indeed a challenging enterprise: the result is a fascinating voyage through one of the most intricate topics in the study of human language, manifested in an impressive number of languages representing various families, dialects, creoles, and historical stages. It is a comprehensive overview of the major achievements of generative grammar in the course of its fifty-year tradition, with particular focus on the last two decades. The structure of the book is a masterpiece of conceptual organization. Eight chapters are divided into four parts, each representing a major field of research. The authors are among the most influential European linguists in the study of nominal expressions. This is apparent from the fluent and easy-to-read style of the argumentation that is found in the book, despite the profoundly theoretical level of the discussion. The authors have done a remarkable job in approaching the subject through a wide historical picture. Nominal structure is as complex as clausal structure, and the labels NP, noun phrase, and DP are no longer suitable to refer to the whole nominal expression since they may also refer to portions of structure formed by split projections. A term parallel to ‘clause’ is necessary to formulate generalizations without taking a stand for a particular analysis. The fully spelled ‘noun phrase’ is too reminiscent of the most internal projection and so is not adequate to refer to the whole structure, while the label DP may refer to the highest constituent or to the highest layer, again leading to ambiguity. For these reasons, I follow Mila Dimitrova-Vulchanova’s (p.c.) suggestion and propose to use nominal expression (NE) to refer to the whole nominal constituent without touching on the very nature of the highest projection. Part 1, ‘Introduction’, presents the general framework, emphasizing the parallelisms between NEs and clauses. It shows that nominals have argument structure, that they are encapsulated into functional structure, and that A-, A-bar, and head-movements are present in NEs, mutatis mutandis, parallel to what is found in the clause. Competing hypotheses are introduced in an interlocutory fashion that prepare the discussions of the successive chapters. This part will be particularly useful to those linguists who are not completely familiar with the long-term tradition in the study of NEs or to those who are starting their research in generative grammar in general. Part 2, ‘The functional make up of the noun phrase’, deals with the upper area of the NE (usually called DP, but recently split into a number of projections), which is characterized as having two main, apparently unrelated properties: on the one hand, it makes the NE visible for thematic interpretation through the realization of (abstract) Case, and on the other hand, it hosts the interpretive features relevant to referential interpretation at LF. I particularly appreciate this dichotomic perspective because the studies on this part of the nominal structure usually focus on one of these two aspects and disregard the other. Ch. 1 of Part 2, ‘The emergence and the structure of DP: Articles and demonstratives’, discusses these two properties in turn. Articles are related to referential interpretation, but are also sensitive to the grammatical function of the NE and ultimately to the (abstract) Case assigned to it. Demonstratives have a different, much more complex syntax across languages. They can occupy more than one position in the NE and...

... E' attesa la rianalisi di un elemento da una delle tre categorie lessi-cali ad un'altra, con zone di indeterminatezza relativa, causata dalla attri-buzione di un dato elemento a più di ... Ad esempio, il caso partitivo realizzato marginalmente dalla preposizione di in italiano antico. ...

Sportiche (1988) proposes a theory of floating quantifiers for French that relies on two independently motivated assump-tions: (a) modifiers (including quantifiers) are generated adja-cent to the maximal projection they modify; and (b) the NP subject is generated adjoined to VP but ...

The examples in (1) show an apparently complete parallelism between the two languages. In fact, in both, the indefinite article precedes the noun while the definite article follows it in the form of a suffix. The examples in (2), however, already reveal a considerable difference ...

Agreement and concord in nominal expressions1 Giuliana Giusti Università Ca'Foscari Venezia This paper claims that feature sharing should be analyzed as the result of at least two different processes, which are named here Agreement and Concord, and inquires how these two ...

1. Introduction (by Cinque, Guglielmo) 2. Rumanian Genitive Constructions (by Cornilescu, Alexandra) 3. Clitic Clusters in Rumanian: Deriving Linear Order from Hierachical Structure (by Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen) 4. Agreement and Pronominal Reference (by Farkas, Donka F.) 5. Heads and Modifiers among Determiners: Evidence from Rumanian (by Giusti, Giuliana) 6. Free Relatives with "Missing Prepositions" in Rumanian and Universal Grammar (by Grosu, Alexander) 7. NP-Movement from Finite Clauses in Rumanian (by Motapanyane, Virginia) 8. Index

24 On the Syntax of Quantity Expressions in Bosnian b. с mnoge m any-NOM FEM mnoga many-NOM NEUT hrabre djevojcice brave girls-NOM FEM hrabra djeca brave childrcn-NOM NEUT Quantity nouns and quantifiers are lexical heads that select a full noun phrase as ...

This theory can explain why only universal Qs can remain in place, while other modifiers or determiners cannot. Unfortunately, Sportiche does not deal with the question of the position of quantifiers that do not appear in this configuration. This is what I will investigate in what follows. In a ...

GIULIANA GIUSTI A UNIFIED STRUCTURAL REPRESENTATION OF (ABSTRACT) CASE AND ARTICLE1 Evidence from Germanic ABSTRACT. In this paper, I will argue for the assumption of a nominal functional projec-tion FP that is the structural counterpart of (abstract) Case, ...

... comments and discussion. Particular thanks go to Laura Brugè and Anna Cardinaletti who have extensively commented on the paper and whose work largely inspired it and to Mila Dimitrova-... (2) a. ove la mia donna fue posta da l' altissimo sire, (Dante, Vita nuova 06.22) ...

Abney assumes an empty determiner in (lb) that would be identical to the lexical determiner in (la). Such a unification obscures rather than explains the syntactic behaviour of the two constructions, which appears to be different in many respects and should therefore be ...

In this paper it is tackled the issue of Latin nominal syntax. The paper is divided into two parts. In the first part, we offer an overview of previous literature, showing how different approaches in the course of last century have highlighted different aspects of noun phrase syntax in Latin. In the second part, we first sketch a generative approach of the unmarked order in the Latin noun phrase and then we turn to observe marked orders. We propose that marked orders can be accounted for by assuming that the noun phrase, parallel to sentences, has a left peripheral position which can host constituents moved for interpretive reasons. The aim of this study is twofold. On the one hand we want to introduce a recent formalism into the empirical domain of Latin syntax, and consequently support recent approaches to noun phrase structure, showing how they can capture Latin data with no further assumption. On the other hand, having assessed the structure for the unmarked word order in the Latin noun phrase we can start a project of research on the very many marked orders of Latin, which may at first sight challenge a structural analysis

(4) a. Ho letto un lunghissimo libro [I] read a very-long book b. *Ne ho letto un lunghissimo e. Ne ho letto uno lunghissimo According to Rizzi, the ungrammatically of (4b) is expected if ne is an N'. In other words, ne cannot be an N , leaving a prenominai adjective under N'. The ...

In the last two decades, the DP-hypothesis has opened up the possibility of extending the projection of Nominal Expressions (from now on NEs) with a (number of) functional head(s) above the NP-level. There are many reasons for assuming a DP in UG, most of them reside in the analogies between NEs and clauses. (For a detailed overview, cf. Alexiadou, Haegeman and Stavrou 2007). Parallel to clauses, NEs have subjects. For this reasons, the DP is often considered parallel to IP. Adverbs and Adjectives both modify the lexical head and are not selected by it. For this reason, they are conceived by competing theories either as adjoined to NP, or as filling the specifiers of dedicated functional heads. Both clauses and NEs can be arguments of an external head. For this reason, the DP is often considered parallel to CP. In the spirit of these and many more parallels, a number of functional nominal projections have been proposed in a tension between a cartographic approach which tends to assume functional heads in UG on the evidence of individual languages, and the minimalist approach which tends to minimize merging of features and proliferation of structure. In some literature (from Longobardi 1994 onwards), the DP layer is taken to be the syntactic counterpart of argumenthood and to convey definiteness and referentiality. In this respect, the existence of articleless languages, like Latin and most Slavic languages, poses the problem of whether the same relation between syntax and semantics can be

In this paper, we discuss known and less known properties of Latin Nominal Expressions that apparently create a paradox. Despite lack of articles and high productivity in left branch extraction, Latin is not a typical NP‐language in the sense of Chierchia () and Bošković (, ). In many respects, it behaves like its daughter languages, all of which have articles. We solve this paradox proposing a complex nominal structure made of a DP, which hosts overt demonstratives, and a left‐peripheral projection (LPP), parallel to the split CP in clauses. This split DP, based on Giusti (, ), can account both for the freedom of the orders found inside the Nominal Expression and for the occurrence of discontinuous Nominal Expressions.

A brief overview of the main syntactic structures of Latin shows that it is possible to express in a unified way the partial similarity and the partial differences characterizing simple sentences in Latin, English and Italian, because these languages, and probably all languages, make use of the same universal principles of phrase structure, even if some parameters are set differently in each language. In general, we suggest that the concepts of \u201cphrase\u201d and \u201cremerge\u201d (namely, syntactic movement) are highly useful tools of contemporary formal linguistics: they are intuitive to native speakers of every language, they are appropriate for a scientifically advanced theoretical model, and they can be easily applied to language pedagogy. Our main point has been that there are compelling reasons to formulate a new methodology of language teaching that emphasizes linguistic awareness more than traditional approaches. This methodology newly conceptualizes grammar as a science of the mind that both contributes to the students\u2019 overall education and facilitates learning modern and classical languages

Rizzi (1997) splits C into Force and Fin, which head separate projections if discourse pragmatic features Top and /or Foc are merged in the clausal left periphery. In this paper, I revise a proposal of mine (Giusti 1996, 2006) on the upper layer of the nominal expression originally inspired by Rizzi’s proposal. In the course of the discussion here, I reconsider the parallels and the similarities between Case and Force and between Fin and Num, con-cluding that Case and Num do not actually split, but are bundled together either higher or lower than the left peripheral portion of the nominal expres-sion.

This paper examines linguistic sexism and misogyny in the light of the philosopher Kate Manne’s recent proposals regarding the general definitions of these concepts and their relationship. Using the reception of female politicians’ speech as an illustration, it argues that misogyny can be expressed through a range of interactional and representational practices; many of these would not amount to ‘hate speech’ in the legal sense, but that does not mean they are innocuous. From a feminist perspective linguistic misogyny, together with sexism, can most usefully be understood as fulfilling an important political function in patriarchal societies: policing women’s public speech and undermining their claims to authority.

Vi comunico che sono aperte le iscrizioni alla nuova tornata del corso LINGUAGGIO, IDENTITà DI GENERE E LINGUA ITALIANA
https://learn.eduopen.org/course/view.php?id=113

se siete studenti o docenti di una università che partecipa al consorzio eduopen è nel consorzio di eduopen si può accedere dalla pagina di autenticazione dell'università.

il corso parte il 26 settembre ed è rivolto a tutte le persone interessate
un caro saluto e a presto

Questo contributo si propone di presentare le dimensioni di variazione in ambito italoromanzo nella realizzazione di un possessivo pronominale all’interno del sintagma nominale. La variazione si riscontra nella posizione prenominale o postnominale del possessivo e nella possibilità di realizzare il possessivo nelle forme di pronome (con morfologia di caso genitivo), come loro, cui e altrui o di aggettivo (con accordo per i tratti di genere e numero del nome che denota il possesso), come mia, tua, sua, nostra, vostra.
La metodologia seguita sarà quella dei protocolli linguistici  che si prefigge uno studio sistematico, basato sui progressi della linguistica teorica ma non legato ai tecnicismi tipici delle analisi formali che possono essere inaccessibili a chi non ha familiarità con un determinato quadro teorico.
Il paragrafo 2 presenta le diverse proprietà che caratterizzano i possessivi in Italo-Romanzo. Il paragrafo 3 presenta tre diversi studi teorici sui possessivi. Il paragrafo 4 sviluppa il protocollo linguistico basato sui dati e sulle ipotesi trattate nei paragrafi 2-3. Il paragrafo 5 formula le prospettive di ricerca empirica, qualitativa e quantitativa, che ne derivano.