Différences entre les versions de « Stephens (1993) »

De Arbres
(Remplacement de texte — « ‘ » par « ' »)
Ligne 7 : Ligne 7 :
   I propose to re-examine the structure of the Breton noun phrase within the GB model. The similarities between the finite clause and the noun phrase will be discussed in terms of [[structure]] and [[Système casuel|Case assignment]].
   I propose to re-examine the structure of the Breton noun phrase within the GB model. The similarities between the finite clause and the noun phrase will be discussed in terms of [[structure]] and [[Système casuel|Case assignment]].
    
    
   The paper is organized as follows: the introduction presents a brief description of the theoretical model. The second part investigates the status of the various [[DET|determiners]] and will show that although [[art|articles]] and [[POSS|possessive pronouns]] are superficial clitics, there is at least one determiner, the [[quantifier]] ''[[kement]]'', which is a strong [[constituent]]. Having established that the functional constituent Determiner exists in Breton, the structure of the genitive construction, also reffered to as the [[CSN|construct state]] in the litterature, is then examined in the second part. Finally consideration is given to the derivation of non-construct state [[NP]]s: ordinary, [[POSS|possessive]] and [[DEM|demonstrative]]. The data is taken from the dialect of Tregor but the conclusions are relevant to the other dialects."
   The paper is organized as follows: the introduction presents a brief description of the theoretical model. The second part investigates the status of the various [[DET|determiners]] and will show that although [[art|articles]] and [[POSS|possessive pronouns]] are superficial clitics, there is at least one determiner, the [[quantifier]] ''[[kement]]'', which is a strong [[constituent]]. Having established that the functional constituent Determiner exists in Breton, the structure of the genitive construction, also referred to as the [[CSN|construct state]] in the literature, is then examined in the second part. Finally, consideration is given to the derivation of non-construct state [[NP]]s: ordinary, [[POSS|possessive]] and [[DEM|demonstrative]]. The data is taken from the dialect of Tregor but the conclusions are relevant to the other dialects."




=== à propos ===
=== à propos ===


Il existe une version légèrement antérieure de cet article en français:
Il existe une version légèrement antérieure de cet article en français. La différence dans la conclusion semble venir d'une review de Jean-Yves Urien et Steve Hewitt :
 
* [[Stephens (1992)|Stephens, J. 1992]]. 'Structure du groupe nominal en breton', ''Recherches Linguistiques 21'', 143-156.
* [[Stephens (1992)|Stephens, J. 1992]]. 'Structure du groupe nominal en breton', ''Recherches Linguistiques 21'', 143-156.




[[Category:ouvrages de recherche|Categories]]
[[Category:ouvrages de recherche|Categories]]

Version du 18 mai 2022 à 08:16


 Abstract:
 "This paper examines the structure of the noun phrase in Breton within Government and Binding (GB) theory. Urien (1982) has argued that, the clause and the noun phrase in Breton have common characteristics, observable in the absence of agreement between the verb and its subject in the ordinary finite clause and between the possessor and possessum in the genitive nominal construction. 
 I propose to re-examine the structure of the Breton noun phrase within the GB model. The similarities between the finite clause and the noun phrase will be discussed in terms of structure and Case assignment.
 
 The paper is organized as follows: the introduction presents a brief description of the theoretical model. The second part investigates the status of the various determiners and will show that although articles and possessive pronouns are superficial clitics, there is at least one determiner, the quantifier kement, which is a strong constituent. Having established that the functional constituent Determiner exists in Breton, the structure of the genitive construction, also referred to as the construct state in the literature, is then examined in the second part. Finally, consideration is given to the derivation of non-construct state NPs: ordinary, possessive and demonstrative. The data is taken from the dialect of Tregor but the conclusions are relevant to the other dialects."


à propos

Il existe une version légèrement antérieure de cet article en français. La différence dans la conclusion semble venir d'une review de Jean-Yves Urien et Steve Hewitt :

  • Stephens, J. 1992. 'Structure du groupe nominal en breton', Recherches Linguistiques 21, 143-156.