Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Introduction: impersonalization from a subject‐centred vs. agent‐centred perspective

2008; Wiley; Volume: 106; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1111/j.1467-968x.2008.00211.x

1467-968X

Anna Siewierska,

Spanish Linguistics and Language Studies

Transactions of the Philological SocietyVolume 106, Issue 2 p. 115-137 Introduction: impersonalization from a subject-centred vs. agent-centred perspective Anna Siewierska, Anna Siewierska Lancaster UniversitySearch for more papers by this author Anna Siewierska, Anna Siewierska Lancaster UniversitySearch for more papers by this author First published: 28 July 2008 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-968X.2008.00211.xCitations: 42 Department of Linguistics and English LanguageLancaster UniversityLancaster LA1 4YTUnited KingdomEmail:[email protected] Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL References Aleksandra Y. Aikhenvald, R.M.W. Dixon and Masayuki Onishi (eds.), 2001. Non-canonical Marking of Subjects and Objects. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Alonso-Ovalle, Luis, 2002. ` Arbitrary-pronouns are not that indefinite’. In C. Beyssade, R. Bok-Bennema, F. Drijkoningen & P. Monachesi (eds.), Proceedings of Going Romance 2000, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1– 14. Ariel, Mira, 1991. `The function of accessibility in a theory of grammar’, Journal of Pragmatics. 16: 141– 161. Bascom, Burton, 1982. ‘ Northern Tepehuan’. In R. W. Langacker (ed.), Uto-Aztecan Grammatical Sketches: Studies in Uto-Aztecan Grammar 3. Summer Institute of Linguistics Publications in Linguistics, 56(3). Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics and the University of Texas at Arlington, 267– 393. Barðdal, Johanna, 2004. ‘ The semantics of the impersonal construction in Icelandic, German and Faroese: beyond thematic roles’. In W. Abraham (ed.), Focus on Germanic Typology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 106– 135. Bauer, Brigitte, 2000. Archaic Syntax in Indo-European: The Spread of Transitivity in Latin and French. Berlin: de Gruyter. Blevins, James P., 2003. ‘Passives and impersonals’, Journal of Linguistics 39: 473– 520. Bresnan, Joan, 2001. Lexical Functional Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell. Burzio, Luigi, 1986. Italian Syntax. Dordrecht: Reidel. Chomsky, Noam, 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Chomsky, Noam, 2000. ‘ Minimalist inquiries’. In Roger Martin, David Michaels & Juan Uriagereka (eds.), Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 89– 156. Chomsky, Noam, 2001. ‘ Derivation by phase’. In Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1– 52. Chomsky, Noam, 2005. ‘Three factors in language design’, Linguistic Inquiry 36: 1– 22. Cinque, Guglielmo 1988. `On Si constructions and the theory of arb’, Linguistic Inquiry 19: 521– 581. Croft, William, 2001. Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Mark Donohue & Søren Wichmann (eds), 2008. Typology of Languages with Semantic Alignment. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Egerland, Verner, 2003. ‘ Impersonal pronouns in Scandinavian and Romance’, Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 71, Department of Scandinavian Languages, University of Lund, 75– 103. Gair, James W., 1990. ‘ Subjects, cases, and INFL in Sinhala’. In M. Verma and K.P. Mohanan (eds), Experiencer Subjects in South Asian Languages. Stanford: Centre for the Study of Language and Information, 13– 41. Goldberg, Alice, 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Goldberg, Alice, 2006. Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Givón, Talmy, 2001. Syntax: A Functional-Typological Introduction, vol. 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Hermon, Gabriella, 2001. ‘ Non-canonically marked A/S in Imbabura Quechua’. In Aikhenvald et al (2001): 149– 176, forthcoming. Holmberg, Anders, 2005. ‘Is there a little pro? Evidence from Finnish’, Linguistic Inquiry 36: 533– 564. Holmberg, Anders. ‘ The null generic subject pronoun in Finnish’. In E. Kaiser, K. Hiietam, S. Manninen & V. Vihman (eds.), Passives and Impersonals in European Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Kański, Zbigniew, 1992. ‘ Impersonal constructions as a strategy for second-order predication’, in Michel Kefer & Johan Van Der Auwera (eds.), Meaning and Grammar: Cross-Linguistic Perspectives, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Kayne, Richard S., 1993. ‘Towards a modular theory of auxiliary selection’, Studia Linguistica 47, 3– 31. Lambert, Pierre-Yves, 1998. ‘ L’impersonnel’. In J. Feuillet (ed.). Actance et valence dans les langues de l’Europe. Berlin: Mouton, de Gruyter, 295– 347. Langacker, Ronald, 1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. II: Descriptive Application. Standford: Stanford University Press. Lazard, Gilbert, 1994. L’Actance. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Lazard, Gilbert, 1998. Actancy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Malchukov, Andrej, 2007. ‘ Split intransitives, experiencer objects and “transimpersonal” constuctions: (re-)establishing the connection’. In Donohue and Wichmann (eds), 2007, 1– 32. Malchukov, Andrej & Ann Siewierska (forthcoming). Impersonal Constructions: Cross-Linguistic Perspectives. Papers from the Workshop on Impersonal constructions, Societas Linguistica Europea, Forli, 18 September 2008. Seefranz-Montag, Ariane von, 1984. ‘ Subjectless sentences and syntactic change’, In J. Fisiak (ed.). Historical Syntax. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 521– 533. Siewierska, Anna, 2007. ‘ Ways of impersonalizing: pronominal vs. verbal Strategies’, in Lachlan Mackenzie, Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen, Elsa Gonzáles Álvare & María de los Angele Gomez-González (eds.), Languages and Cultures in Contrast and Comparison. Amsterdam John Benjamins, 27– 61. Słoń, Anna, 2003. ‘Impersonal constructions in English and Polish: a cognitive grammar approach’. Ph.D. Dissertation, Maria Curie-Skłodowska University in Lublin. Sun, Hongkai, 1982. Dŭlóngŭ Jiănzhü [A brief description of the Dulong Language]. Sun, Jackson T.S. (forthcoming) ‘Linguistic coding of generic human arguments in rGyalrongic languages’, Linguistic Typology. Torn-Leesik, Reeli, 2007. ‘ The voice system of Estonian’, MS, University of Tartu. Ziv, Yael, 1982. ‘Getting more mileage out of existentials in English’, Linguistics 20: 7: 747– 762. Citing Literature Volume106, Issue2July 2008Pages 115-137 ReferencesRelatedInformation