Chapter 1
Embedding verbs and subjunctive mood
The emotive factor
I give a uniform account of French mood from a semantic and nano-syntactic perspective by revising the criteria for the distribution of indicative vs. subjunctive mood. I claim that the subjunctive is selected by the semantic property of emotivity encoded in the main clause verb. I develop a definition and a syntactic representation of emotive vs. non-emotive verbs and a set of diagnostics for the two classes. I also reexamine the notion of veridicality and show that it is not the determining factor in the choice of mood (contra Giannakidou 1998, 2009, a.o.).
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Theoretical background
- 2.1Nanosyntax (Starke 2009, 2011; Caha 2009)
- 2.2Veridicality, non-veridicality, and relative veridicality
-
3.Personal constructions
- 3.1Decomposing the meaning(s) of verbs
- 3.2
Dowty (1991)
- 3.3Emotive vs. non-emotive sentience
- 3.4Verbs optionally taking indicative or subjunctive CPs: Emotive vs. non-emotive readings
- 4.Impersonal constructions
- 5.The proposal
- 5.1The structures of personal constructions
- 5.2The structures of impersonal constructions
- 6.Conclusion
-
Acknowledgements
-
Notes
-
References
References (31)
References
Baunaz, Lena. 2015. On the various sizes of complementizers. Probus 27 (2): 193–236. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Baunaz, Lena. 2016. Deconstructing complementizers in Serbo-Croatian, Modern Greek and Bulgarian. Proceedings of NELS 46 (1): 69–77.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Baunaz, Lena, and Genoveva Puskás. 2014. “The Selection of French Mood.” In Selected Papers from the 41th LSRL, Ottawa, May 2011, ed. Eric Mathieu et Marie-Hélène Côté, 233–253. John Benjamins.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Baunaz, Lena, and Eric Lander. Under review. Nanosyntax: the basics. Ms. Universiteit Gent.
Becker, Martin G. 2010. “Principles of mood change in evaluative contexts: the case of French.” In Modality and mood in Romance, ed. by Martin G. Becker and Eva-Maria Remberger, 209–234. Berlin: de Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Caha, Pavel. 2009. The nanosyntax of case. PhD, University of Tromsø![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads. Oxford: OUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Costantini, Francesco. 2009. Interface Perspectives on Clausal Complementation. The Case of Subjunctive Obviation. Venezia, Libreria Editrice Cafoscarina.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dowty, David. 1991. “Thematic Proto-Roles and Argument Selection”, Language 67: 547–619. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Egré, Paul. 2008. Question-Embedding and Factivity. Grazer Philosophische Studien 77 (1): 85–125. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ernst, Thomas. 2002. The syntax of adjuncts. Cambridge: CUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Giannakidou, Anastasia. 2009. The dependency of the subjunctive revisited: temporal semantics and polarity. Lingua, special issue on Mood, 883–1908.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kelepouris, Stavros. 2012. The syntax and semantics of subject-oriented adverbs. A proposal for a new classification. Ms. University of Ghent.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kiparsky, Paul, and Carol Kiparsky. 1971. “Fact.” In Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader in philosophy, linguistics and psychology, ed. by Danny D. Steinberg and Leon A. Jakobovits, 345–369. CUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kratzer, Angelika. 2013. Modality and the semantics of embedding, slides from presentation at the Amsterdam Colloquium, December 2013.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Léger, Catherine. 2006. La complémentation de type phrastique des adjectifs en français. PhD, Université du Québec à Montréal.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Moulton, Keir. 2009. Natural Selection and the Syntax of Clausal Complementation, Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts Amherst.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Puskás, Genoveva. 2013. Subjunctives – a Family Business. Talk given at the Séminaire de Recherche, University of Geneva, 16.09.2013.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Quer, Josep. 2009. Twists of mood: The distribution and interpretation of indicative and subjunctive. Lingua 119 (12): 1779–1787. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ramchand, Gillian. 2008a. Verb Meaning and the Lexicon. CUP. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ramchand, Gillian. 2008b. Lexical Items in Complex Predications: Selection as Underassociation. Nordlyd, Tromsø Working Papers in Linguistics.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. “The fine structure of the left periphery.” In Elements of grammar: A Handbook of Generative Syntax, ed. by Liliane Haegeman, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rosch, Eleanor H. 1973. Natural categories, in Cognitive Psychology 4: 328–50. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ruwet, Nicolas. 1984.
Je veux partir / *Je veux que je parte: on the Distribution of Finite Complements and Infinitival Complements in French. In Cahiers de Grammaire 7: 75–138.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Socanac, Tomislav. 2011. Subjunctive in Serbian/Croatian. GG@G 7: 49–70.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Starke, Michal. 2009. “Nanosyntax. A short primer to a new approach to language.” In Nordlyd 36.1, special issue on Nanosyntax, ed. by Peter Svenonius, Gillian Ramchand, Michal Starke, and Knut Tarald Taraldsen, 1–6. CASTL, Tromsø.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Starke, Michal. 2011. Towards an elegant solution to language variation: Variation reduces to the seize of lexically stored trees. Ms. Barcelona, Spain.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tóth, Enikő. 2008. Mood Choice in Complement Clauses. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Villalta, Elisabeth. 2006. Context dependence in the interpretation of questions and subjunctives. PhD dissertation, Universität Tübingen![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.