South Asia Syntax-Semantics Newsletter With this issue SASS enters its third year of publication and I am happy to report that the number of people on the mailing list has doubled in this period. I take its success to reflect the vitality of the South Asian linguistic community and its growing visibility in the field of general linguistics. To the extent that this newsletter serves the needs of the community, some effort is needed to keep it viable. There are two counts on which I must draw upon the support of readers, namely funding and contributions. The SASS Newsletter has been supported for three years now by the Department of Linguistics, Rutgers University. This has been particularly creditable at a time when the University has cut back departmental budgets. Since the newsletter has become fairly established, it seems time to try and reduce the financial burden on the home department. I must therefore request donations from readers to help defray the cost of mailing and photocopying. Checks should be made out in the name of "SASSN, Rutgers University" and sent to the address below. This donation is, of course, completely voluntary and no one will be taken off the mailing list. However, if you are in a position to make a donation, I would urge you to do so in order to ensure long term viability of this project. On a related topic, I must urge readers to send me contributions so that we may have optimal coverage of the work being done in the field. I have included the statement of purpose in this issue to remind readers of the goals of the newsletter. Submissions by email are particularly welcome. Let me also request you to keep within the space limits. It would mean that much less work for me and save you from the vagaries of my editorial skills. Thanks to all of you who have contributed, particularly readers from India whose work would otherwise remain unknown to us here in the US. Again, if you want your work to be made available to other readers, please send a reduced photocopy (2 pages to one) on single-sided 8.5" by 11" paper with an authorization for Rutgers University to distribute it. I have had several requests for copies of theses but have been unable to fulfill these requests. Veneeta Dayal Department of Linguistics Rutgers University 18 Seminary Place New Brunswick, NJ 08903 Phone: (908) 932-6903 email:srivastav@zodiac.rutgers.edu SASSN: STATEMENT OF PURPOSE The South Asian Syntax and Semantics Newsletter is designed to enhance communication between researchers and to facilitate the distribution of current work on syntax and semantics. It is published biannually and includes news and announcements, lists of recent papers as well as annotated bibliographies on specific subjects, and author-written abstracts of recent work (one page or less for dissertations; half page or less for articles). The newsletter covers work in generative syntax, such as Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar, Lexical Functional Grammar, Relational Grammar, Extended Standard Theory (including Government and Binding Theory) and any other recent variety of generativist syntax. It also covers work in formal semantics, where "formal semantics" includes any version of model-theoretic, truth conditional semantics such as Montague Grammar, Discourse Representation Theory, Situation Semantics etc. In addition, it also covers work that does not explicitly adopt a generative approach but deals with syntactic and semantic issues. UPCOMING MEETINGS Sixteenth South Asian Languages Analysis Roundtable University of Pennsylvania, May 20-22, 1994. The theme of the conference will be Languages in Contact. Proposals on papers are invited on any topic related to the theme, such as Multilingualism, Indian English, Diglossia, Code-Switching. Other proposed panels include South Asian Language Teaching and Acquisition and Language of Political Rhetoric. In addition proposals for panels and papers will be accepted in all other areas of South Asian languages and linguistics, including syntax, semantics, phonology, language and literature, translation theory, poetic theory, and historical linguistics. Abstracts and panel proposals (including one-page abstracts for each paper and a cover letter) should be sent by 15th March, 1994 to: Organizing Committee, SALA XVI South Asia Regional Studies 820 Williams Hall University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA 19104-6305 Abstracts may also be sent by FAX: (215-573-2138). Information by email: scholars-request@southasia.upenn.edu DISSERTATION ABSTRACTS Miriam Butt The Structure of Complex Predicates in Urdu Doctoral Dissertation, Stanford University, 1993. Thesis Supervisor: Peter Sells This thesis conducts a detailed examination of two differing Urdu complex predicates: the permissive and the Aspectual complex predicates. The Urdu permissive brings into focus the essential problem complex predicates pose for theories of syntax. The permissive is a complex predicate formed by the combnination of two distinct semantic heads in the syntax (not the lexicon) which correspond to a single syntactic predicate, which may be discontinuous. It shows that the discontinuity at phrase structure does not affect the status of the permissive as a complex predicate. The problematic aspect for theories of syntax is thus the question of how to represent the fact that a complex predicate may behave both like a syntactically complex structure with respect to certain phenomena, and like a syntactically simple structure with respect to other phenomena. Within Lexical-Functional Grammar (LFG), this mismatch in semantic and syntactic information is easily represented in terms of independent levels of representation which are related to one another by a theory of linking. However, LFG as orginally formulated does not allow for the existence of a semantically complex but syntactically discontinuous single head. This thesis follows Alsina (1993) in proposing an analysis of complex predicate formation at argument structure. However, rather than moving towards a progressively minimalistic and abstract structure, which does not explicitly contain thematic or other semantic information, as proposed in Grimshaw (1990), S. Rosen (1993) and Alsina (1993), it takes up the kind of argumentation found in Van Valin (1990), for Role and Reference Grammar (RRG), and proposes an elaborated argument structure based on Jackendoff's (1990) theory of Conceptual Semantics. Urdu Aspectual complex predicates provide evidence for an elaborated level of argument structure. An Aspectual complex predicate is well-formed only if constraints on semantic properties asuch as volitionality and inception/completion are met: a main verb negatively specificied for one of these domains cannot combine with a light verb positively specific for the same domain. In conclusion, this dissertation presents an in-depth examination of the structure and properties of two differing Urdu complex predicates, the permissive and the Aspectual complex predicates. It formulates a unifying theory of complex predicate formation and in the process addresses issues concerned with argument structure, linking, and case marking. Finally, it shows that the thoery of complex predicates presented not only allows a successful account of Romance restructuring verbs and Japanese suru 'do', but can also be used as a firm base of comparison for an analysis of serial verb constructions. Lalitha Murthy Participial Constructions: A Cross-Linguistic Study Doctoral Dissertation. University of Delhi, 1993 Thesis Supervisor: K.V.Subbarao This thesis attempts to analyze the syntactic nature of participial constructions in selected South Asian languages within the framework of Government and Binding theory. The languages chosen are Hindi-Urdu, Punjabi, Dakkhini, Bengali, Oriya and Sinhalese (Indo-Aryan); Telugu, Tamil and Kannada (Dravidian); and Mizo, Thangkhul Naga, Angami Naga and Manipuri (Tibeto-Burman). Data from verb final languages spoken outside India such as Quechua and Japanese are used as comparison. Conjunctive Participial clauses and Relative Participial clauses are analyzed and discussed with a view to testing the main hypothesis of the thesis. It is shown that the issues related to Conjunctive Participial clauses and Relative Participial clauses which were raised in transformational-generative framework can be adequately explained by means of theta theory, case theory and X'- theory in Government and Binding framework. The cross-linguistic differences and similarities found in the study are reduced to parameters in which binary values are used for indicating the presence or absence of certain features. These conclusions have theoretical importance and implications for certain modules of the Government and Binding theory. Furthermore, the occurence of negative relative participial clauses and the reduplication of negative conjunctive participles in languages belonging to different language families provides further evidence in support of the notion of India as a linguistic area. ABSTRACTS OF ARTICLES Achla Misri Raina. 1994. "Dual and Triple Verbal Agreement in Kashmiri" South Asian Language Review (volume and page number information not available). This paper identifies a range of facts concerning verbal agreement in Kashmiri. The verb in this language is marked for agreement with more than one nominal pharse in the clause. The paper proposes generalisations about the appearance of dual and triple verbal agreement. It is shown that the linear order of multiple agreement markers in the verb is invariant despite the relative freedom of occurence of the nominal phrases "triggering" agreement. PAPERS PRESENTED AT RECENT CONFERENCES South Asian Languages Analysis XV May 1993. University of Iowa Anvita Abbi and Devi Gopalakrishnan (Jawaharlal Nehru University) in "Why Explicators are not Auxiliaries? An Area Between Morphology and Syntax" distinguishes between explicators and auxiliaries at formal and functional levels. It suggests that explicators together with main verbs function as a single though complex unit represented by V, while constructions consisting of a main verb and auxiliary form a VP. AUX is a concern of syntax and the verb nucleus of morphology. The explicator comes somewhere in between. Tista Bagchi (University of Chicago) in "Participial Constructions in Bangla: the Morphology- Syntax-Semantics Interface in Clausal Subordination" discusses three kinds of participial phrases in Bangla, namely, the conjunctive (or perfective), imperfective and conditional and the diferences between the ways in which their morphological, syntactic and semantic representations match up (or fail to do so) with one another, from the point of view of autolexical grammar. Gurprit Bains (Long Island University) in "Correlatives are Relatives of Relatives" argues that only those correlatives in Hindi that have more than one Rel are IP adjoined, the others being generated NP-internally. Thus correlativization is not a unified phenomenon and that Hindi has NP-embedded correlatives just as it has NP-embedded relatives. Tanmoy Bhattacharya (University of Hyderabad) in "Disembedding in Telugu Internal Relative Clauses" proposes that Telugu IRC's should be treated differently from Telugu RC's. He derives the fact that IRC's retain case by incorporating a particular Feature Expansion into their representation. Susan Blair (University of Pennsylvania) in "Subjects and Objects in the Derivation of Hindi Psych Verbs" argues that the Theme of an intransitive Hindi psych-verb is an S-structure but not a D-structure subject. She derives certain specificity effects from this. Comparison between Hindi and Italian are also made. Probal Dasgupta and Tanmoy Bhattacharya (University of Hyderabad) in "Classifiers in Bangla DP" argues that Det is not the D head of Bangla DP. The postnominal Classifier in a Bangla DP occupies what is described as a Badge site (conflating number and gender) and is immediately followed by a Case site which is the real D. Alice Davison (University of Iowa) in "Binding and Case Properties of Dative Experiencers" proposes that experiencer NP's originate in VP and optionally raise to Spec IP. This accounts for the fact that it can antecede not only anaphors but also pronouns. Certain differences between parallel Hindi and Italian constructions are also discussed. Claire Foley and James W. Gair (Cornell University) in "The Distribution of no in Sinhala, or Is Subordination Required to Get Ahead?" claim that the distribution of the preverbal negative prefix no- can be systematically characterized only if the notions of subordination and finiteness in Sinhala are refined so that some clauses standardly considered to be main clauses are treated as subordinate. David Gil (National University of Singapore) in "Conjunctive Operators in South Asian Languages" studies the broad range of meanings of enclitic or suffixal operators. An in-depth semantic analysis of Punjabi vi and Malayalam -um is given, using a binary relation of conjunction. He shows that they mark an element within their syntactic scope as the conjunctive target, while characterizing another parallel item as the conjunctive source. M. Hariprasad (University of Hyderabad) in "Agreement System in Telugu" argues that there is no AGR node in Telugu. Instead agreement morpheme (a set of agreement features) is generated as an adjunction to each NP at D-structure and is incorporated into the verb since it is subcategorized as bound in the lexicon. Doug Jones (MIT) in "The Binding of Anaphors: Reflexives vs. Reciprocals and the Implications for A-binding in Scrambling and Subject-orientation" that a scrambled element can indeed serve as a binder, but only for reciprocals, not reflexives. This shifts the theoretical weight of supporting the A-type movement of scrambling from SELF anaphor to the reciprocal. Peter E. Hook (University of Michigan) in "Phantom Constituents" presents evidence to show that in western Indo-Aryan the lateralization of agreement of adjectives with controlling nouns creates false constituencies. The underlying laterality of case-concord can be revealedy examining agreement pattern of adjectives which to the right of their controllers and concordant adverbs which come to the left of all clause-mate nouns. Onkar N. Koul (LBS National Academy of Administration, Mussoorie) in "Relative Clauses in Kashmiri" discusses finite and non-finite relatives. Among finite relative clauses, he describes restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses, focusing on the position of the head, the relative element. He also relates it to word order. Patrick E. Marlow (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) in "On the Origins of Embedded Relative Clauses in Hindi" suggests that embeddings behave more like right-adjoined constructions and must derive from right adjoined constructions, not from correlative constructions. He also discusses the arguments for an alternative approach. Jayashree Nadahalli (New York University) in "Is it Coordination or Subordination?" shows that Kannada has two types of conjunctions that are semantically distinct from each other and that it uses syntactically non-distinct surface structures to express the two. Zemira Nunez del Prado and James Gair (Cornell University) in "The Position of Negation in Bengali" note that Bengali -na can occur in pre-Tense or post-Tense positions. They propose that a functional projection structurally generated above TP in OB provided the landing site for [NEG + X] which in time was reanalyzed as the functional projection NEGP in MB. Vasu Ranganathan (University of Washington) in "Tamil Anaphor Binding in Distant Clauses" focuses on the deviant characteristics of taan, which obeys Principle A when the verb is marked with kol, and otherwise behaves like a logophoric pronoun. He shows that the facts fall out from general syntactic principles if the two elements are related to the nature of the verb. Nalini Rau (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) in "Reflexives in Kannada and the HPSG Binding Theory" proposes that the reflexive's antecedent is the least oblique argument of the verb. From this one rule various facts noted in the literature are derived. Anjum Saleemi (National University of Singapore) in "If That's the Case, I Don't Agree!: Case, Agreement and Phrase Structure in Hindi-Urdu" argues against the existence of AGR projections. He explains the agreement facts as Spec-head agreement mediated by NP-movement and V-movement or alternatively as a case of Head-head agreement. Steven Schaufele (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) in "Lexical Fronting in Vedic Sanskrit and the Head-Movement Constraint" argues that the gaps in many Vedic sentences are really Bar-0 and therefore the Head-Movement Constraint is not a linguistic universal. He also shows that Vedic violates the Coordinate Structure Constraint. He then suggests ways of incorporating these facts into the Principles and Parameters theory. Joga Singh (York University) in "Case-Dependencies in Hindi" brings out theoretical and empirical problems with standard approaches to the phenomenon. It proposes that Hindi has a several functional projections, some of whose heads are case assigners. Using the idea that structural case can be assigned at D-structure and the view this is done under the c-command definition of government, a large body of data is accounted for. K. Srikumar (Osmania University) in "Clefts in Malayalam: A Focussed Movement Perspective" proposes that a Focussed Movement approach for deriving Clefts in Malayalam. The idea is that Focus is an abstract syntactic feature like case and may be base-generated in some constructions in a language and needs to be discharged to some constituent. K. V. Subbarao and M. Lalitha (University of Delhi) in "Thematic Roles and Their Syntactic Representation: The Case of Anaphora in South Asian Languages" demonstrate that a descriptively adequate analysis of lexical anaphors in South Asian languages can be provided only in terms of Thematic Relations rather than in terms of notions such as c-command. K. Thilagawathi in "The Complexity of Case Markers in Tamil" points out that cases are generally marked by suffixes which are affixed to nouns but at times by so-called particles too. The paper analyses the complex functions associated with these case particles. Kashi Wali (Syracuse and Cornell Universities) in "Clitics and Case: A Cross Language Perspective" compares the variations in Kashmiri, Poguli, Sindhi, Lahanda, Marathi, and Marwari and their implication for the interpretation of ergative, dative and nominative based on a condition of Case Matching that has been proposed for Kashmiri. Second-Position Clitics Workshop July 1993. Ohio State University Steven Schaufele (University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign) in "Now that we're All Here, Where do we Sit? Phonological Ordering in the Vedic Clause-Initial String" addresses the sometimes complex issues involved in the ordering relations of the 'clause-initial string' in early Vedic Sanskrit. He shows that the relationship of these words vis-a-vis each other can best be viewed as the consequence of interaction of several independently-motivated prosodic, semantic, and pragmatic tendencies. Mark Hale (Harvard University) in "Deriving Wackernagel's Law: Prosodic and Syntactic Factors Determining Clitic Distribution in the Language of the Rigveda" deals with the status of external sandhi processes, as well as syntactic processes like topicalization, focus, verb movement, WH-movement. He presents an alternative to Hock's 'templatic' approach to the 'initial string' of clitics and particles. North Eastern Linguistic Society 24 November 1993. University of Massachusetts, Amherst. (Proceedings published) Anoop Mahajan (UCLA) in "The Ergativity Parameter: have-be Alternation, Word Order and Split Ergativity" provides a unified account of the observations that (i) SVO languages are never ergative and (ii) ergative languages usually lack a verb corresponding to Romance/Germanic have and use be as an auxilliary. He shows how a typical ergative construction results from the fact that the auxilliary does not govern and be adjacent to a subject in SOV and VSO languages. Editor's note: These conference reports are prepared on the basis of secondary information. Any errors or omissions are regretted. If you wish to to ensure accuracy, please send me a three to four line summary of papers presented by you.