By Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König
This can be pattern textual content this is often pattern textual content this can be pattern textual content this is often pattern textual content
Read or Download Converbs in Cross-Linguistic Perspective PDF
Similar grammar books
Artful Sentences: Syntax as Style
In crafty Sentences: Syntax as Style,Virginia Tufte exhibits how common sentence styles and varieties give a contribution to which means and artwork in additional than one thousand exceptional sentences from the 20 th and twenty-first centuries. The publication has detailed curiosity for aspiring writers, scholars of literature and language, and an individual who unearths pleasure in examining and writing.
Modern Dutch Grammar: A Practical Guide
Sleek Dutch Grammar: a realistic consultant is an cutting edge reference advisor to Dutch, combining conventional and function-based grammar in one quantity. With a powerful emphasis on modern utilization, all grammar issues and capabilities are richly illustrated with examples.
The Grammar is split into elements. half I covers conventional grammatical different types reminiscent of nouns and verbs. half II is punctiliously equipped round language capabilities and contexts such as:
Giving and looking details Describing procedures and effects Expressing attitudes, psychological states and feelings Registers and elegance Formal and casual communique, e. g. formative years talk
Main beneficial properties of the Grammar include:
• transparent, succinct and jargon-free factors
• huge cross-referencing among the several sections
• Emphasis on components of specific trouble for inexperienced persons of Dutch
This is the right reference grammar for beginners of Dutch in any respect degrees, from ordinary to complicated; no earlier wisdom of grammatical terminology is believed and it presents indices of grammatical phrases and features. This Grammar is complemented through a spouse site that includes similar workouts and actions to enhance studying.
Cohesion in English (English Language Series)
Harmony in English is worried with a comparatively missed a part of the linguistic process: its assets for textual content building, the variety of meanings which are speciffically linked to pertaining to what's being spoken or written to its semantic atmosphere. A crucial element of those assets is 'cohesion'.
Je Pratique - Exercices De Grammaire Livre A1
Ce cahier dexercices sadresse à des apprenants de niveau débutant à fake débutants en français. Il présente des activités dentraînement correspondant au niveau A1 du Cadre Européen commun de référence pour les langues.
- The Little Oxford Guide to English Usage
- Cases and Thematic Roles. Ergative, Accusative and Active
- Principles of Syntactic Reconstruction
- Grammaticalization: Studies in Latin and Romance Morphosyntax
- Information Highlighting in Advanced Learner English: The Syntax–Pragmatics Interface in Second Language Acquisition
- The Isizulu: a revised edition of a Grammar of the Zulu Language, etc.
Extra resources for Converbs in Cross-Linguistic Perspective
Sample text
24) also tells us that the complement of that is the TP/tense phrase we are trying to help you. Clauses introduced by complementisers have been taken to have the status of CP/complementiser phrase constituents since the pioneering work of Stowell (1981) and Chomsky (1986b). e. as projections of head words (in conformity with the Headedness Principle). g. a verb phrase like help you is a projection of the verb help), so too a sentence like We will help you is a projection of the auxiliary will, and a complement clause like the bracketed that-clause in I can’t promise [that we will help you] is a projection of the complementiser that.
A clause denoting an ‘unreal’ or hypothetical event which hasn’t yet happened and may never happen). ) for as a preposition, that as a determiner, and if as an adverb. The answer is ‘No’, because there are significant differences between complementisers and other apparently similar words. For example, one difference between the complementiser for and the preposition for is that the preposition for has substantive lexical semantic content and so (in some but not all of its uses) can be intensified by straight/right, whereas the complementiser for is a functor and can never be so intensified: cf.
So far, we have relied mainly on intuition in analysing the structure of sentences – we have in effect guessed at the structure. However, it is unwise to rely on intuition in attempting to determine the structure of a given expression in a given language. For, while experienced linguists over a period of years tend to acquire fairly strong intuitions about structure, novices by contrast tend to have relatively weak, uncertain, and unreliable intuitions; moreover, even the intuitions of supposed experts may ultimately turn out to be based on little more than personal preference.