Pinkster, Harm (1942-) [1990], Latin Syntax and Semantics [info], xii, 320 p.: ill.; 24 cm. [word count] [Pinkster].
Previous Sub2Sect

7.4.8 Survey of the restrictions and criteria relevant to complex sentences

In this section I review a number of important restrictions treated in this chapter:

(i) Addibility of Disjuncts that limit the `truth value' of a sentence to certain sentence types (fortasse etc.: excluded with imperative modality (p. 101; p. 129)).

(ii) Factivity: the use of the dominant participle construction in embedded predications is restricted to those main predicates which presuppose that the event has taken place, is taking place or will take place. On the noun phrase level the dominant participle competes with the (non-factive) gerundive (p. 79; p. 133).

(iii) Referential identity: often there is referential identity between arguments of the main predication and the embedded predictaion (e.g. with persuadere alicui). In cases of referential identity the argument concerned may be omitted in the embedded predication. (In transformational-generative grammar this is called `Equi-NP-deletion') (p. 125 f.).

(iv) Tense: in embedded predications with verbs meaning `to order', `to wish', etc. the state of affairs referred to by the embedded predication must be posterior to the moment referred to by the main predication.

-- 135 --

(v) Controllability: embedded predications with verbs meaning `to order' must be controllable; this becomes clear e.g. in the restriction on the tense of the embedded predication mentioned in (iv) and in the impossibility of referential identity between the Addressee of the main predication and the Patient of the embedded predication.

Previous Sub2Sect


Pinkster, Harm (1942-) [1990], Latin Syntax and Semantics [info], xii, 320 p.: ill.; 24 cm. [word count] [Pinkster].
Powered by PhiloLogic