Syntactic approach Clause Samples

Syntactic approach. The idea that syntactic numeration can be regulated by information- structural properties is rejected in Den Dikken (2006). He insists that the pragmatic functions can only be determined at the level of discourse analysis. In addition, as has also been pointed out in Bresnan (1994), Den Dikken argues that languages always have alternative mechanisms to focalise the subject in addition to movement to an object position. Hence, it remains unexplained for Bresnan why other methods are not applied. In contrast to the approach from the information structure aspect, Den Dikken (2006) proposes that inversion takes place when an empty-headed predicate needs to be licensed. The same account applies to predicate inversion and canonical locative inversion, as well as to so- called “beheaded” locative inversion. I will briefly present his analysis of predicate inversion below. In the spirit of ▇▇▇▇’▇ (1997) analysis of it in the English it-cleft structure and ▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ (2003) proposal of the pronominal augement e in the Augmented Copular Construction (ACC) in Scottish Gaelic, Den Dikken (2006) analyses the precopular constituent in an inverse sentence as a reduced free relative. For instance, the precopular constituent the best candidate in (26a) is analysed as the predicate of the small clause embedded in a reduced free relative clause, which serves as the predicate of the postcopular subject ▇▇▇▇▇, as shown in (27a).11 In addition, equative sentences (defined in some other studies, such as ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 1979 and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇ 1999) are taken to be inverse sentences. The analysis of the precopular constituent Cicero in (26b) is presented in (27b). A free relative analysis is similarly proposed. Unlike the best candidate in (26a), ▇▇▇▇▇▇ in (26b) is analysed as the subject of small clause embedded in the reduced free relative clause, which also serves as the predicate of the postcopular subject ▇▇▇▇▇.