Finiteness, nominalization, and information structure
Convergence and divergence
The correlation between finiteness and nominalization is frequently discussed in the literature. This paper will introduce information structure as a third factor that has an important impact on processes of grammaticalization. Nominalized verb forms can be used in the formation of relative clauses and clefting. With these functions, they can become part of focus constructions. At a subsequent stage, they are reanalyzed either as finite forms with tense-aspect functions or as markers of stance. With the integration of the focus function of nominalized verb forms, a considerable part of what is described as insubordination (Evans 2007) can be explained in terms of a grammaticalization process, moving from the use in a focus construction to the reanalysis as a finite form.
References (41)
References
Adger, David. 2007. Three domains of finiteness: A minimalist perspective. In Finiteness: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations, Irina Nikolaeva (ed.), 24-58. Oxford: OUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Beffa, Marie-Lise & Hamayon, Roberte. 1975. Eléments de grammaire mongole. Paris: Dunot, Documents de linguistique quantitative.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Biber, Douglas & Finegan, Edward. 1989. Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text 9: 93-124.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bickel, Balthasar. 1999. Nominalization and focus constructions in some Kiranti languages. In Yogendra P. Yadava & Warren W. Glover (eds), Topics in Nepalese Linguistics, 271-96. Kathmandu: Royal Nepal Academy.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bisang, Walter. 1995. Verb serialization and converbs—differences and similarities. In Converbs in Cross-Linguistic Perspective, Ekkehard König & Martin Haspelmath (eds), 137-188. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bisang, Walter. 2001. Finite vs. non finite languages. In Language Typology and Language Universals, Vol. 2, Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher & Wolfgang Raible (eds), 1400-1413. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bisang, Walter. 2007. Categories that make finiteness: Discreteness from a functional perspective and some of its repercussions. In Finiteness: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations, Irina Nikolaeva (ed.), 115-137. Oxford: OUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bisang, Walter. 2009. On the evolution of complexity—sometimes less is more in East and mainland Southeast Asia. In Language Complexity as an Evolving Variable, Geoffrey Sampson, David Gil & Peter Trudgill (eds), 34-49. Oxford: OUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Corston-Oliver, Simon H. 1996. Ergativity in Roviana, Solomon Islands [Pacific Linguistics B-113]. Canberra: Australian National University.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Corston-Oliver, Simon H. 2002. Roviana. In The Oceanic Languages, John Lynch, Malcolm Ross & Terry Crowley (eds), 467-497. Richmond: Curzon Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Evans, Nicholas. 2007. Insubordination and its uses. In Finiteness: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations, Irina Nikolaeva (ed.), 366-431. Oxford: OUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Givón, T. 1979. On Understanding Grammar. New York NY: Academic Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Haiman, John. 1978. Conditionals are topics. Language 54: 564-589. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hengeveld, Kees. 1998. Adverbial clauses in the languages of Europe. In Adverbial Constructions in the Languages of Europe, Johan van der Auwera & Donall P. Ó Baoill (eds), 335-419. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hinds, John. 1986. Japanese [Croom Helm Descriptive Grammars Series]. London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kalinina, Elena & Sumbatova, Nina. 2007. Clause structure and verbal forms in Nakh-Daghestanian languages. In Finiteness: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations, Irina Nikolaeva (ed.), 183-249. Oxford: OUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kiss, Katalin É. 1998. Identificational focus versus information focus. Language 74(2): 245-73. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kornfilt, Jaklin. 2007. Verbal and nominalized finite clauses in Turkish. In Finiteness: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations, Irina Nikolaeva (ed.), 305-32. Oxford: OUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form. Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representation of Discourse Referents. Cambridge: CUP. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lehmann, Christian. 1988. Towards a typology of clause linkage. In Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse [Typological Studies in Language 18], John Haiman & Sarah G. Thompson (eds), 181-225. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lehmann, Christian. 1995. Thoughts on Grammaticalization. Munich: Lincom.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Matisoff, James A. 1972. Lahu nominalization, relativization, and genitivization. In Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 1, John P. Kimball (ed.), 237-257. New York NY: Academic Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Neeleman, Ad & Szendröi, Kriszta. 2007. Radical pro drop and the morphology of pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 38: 671-714. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Noonan, Michael. 1997. Versatile nominalizations. In Essays on Language Function and Language Type. In Honor of T. Givón, Joan Bybee, John Haiman, & Sandra A. Thompson (eds), 373-394. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Poppe, Nicholas. 1970. Mongolian Language Handbook. Washington DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pulleyblank, Edwin G. 1995. Outline of Classical Chinese Grammar. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ross, Malcolm D. 2002. Takia. In The Oceanic Languages, John Lynch, Malcolm Ross & Terry Crowley (eds), 216-248. Richmond: Curzon Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Senderjav, Alimaa. 2003. Parataktische Teilsätze im Khalkha-Mongolischen verso hypotaktische Teilsätze im Deutschen. Ein Beitrag zur Sprachlehrforschung. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1990. The Languages of Japan. Cambridge: CUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Staalsen, P. 1972. Clause relationships in Iatmul. Pacific Linguistics A.31: 45-69.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Street, John C. 1963. Khalkha Structure [Research and Studies in Uralic and Altaic Languages, Project No. 25]. Bloomington IN: Indiana University.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Vietze, Hans-Peter. 1974. Lehrbuch der mongolischen Sprache. Leipzig: VEB Verlag Enzyklopädie.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Von Heusinger, Klaus, Klein, Udo & Guntsetseg, Dolgor. 2011. The case of accusative embedded subjects in Mongolian. Lingua 121: 48-59. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Robbeets, Martine
2017.
The development of finiteness in the Transeurasian languages.
Linguistics 55:3
► pp. 489 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Evans, Nicholas & Honoré Watanabe
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 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.