FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2034233309> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2034233309 endingPage "68" @default.
• W2034233309 startingPage "50" @default.
• W2034233309 abstract "The Middle Dutch negative clitic en/ne disappeared from standard Dutch in the 17th and 18th centuries (in Flemish dialects it is still around). The factors favoring the deletion of the clitic in the initial stages of this change have been well-studied (cf. van der Horst and van der Wal, 1979, de Haan and Weerman, 1984, Burridge, 1993, Hoeksema, 1997, Zeijlstra, 2004, Postma and Bennis, 2006, Breitbarth, 2009), and show interaction of syntactic with phonological factors. The negative clitic is syntactically a proclitic on the finite verb, but phonologically an enclitic, which creates problems in V1 contexts (questions, conditionals and imperatives), precisely the contexts where ne-drop is most frequent. In the present paper, using a large database of occurrences from 1200 to 1800 covering most of the Dutch-speaking regions, we go over the evidence for this account, and look at some complications (some texts have phonological as well as syntactic proclisis when the clitic element is ne, rather than en) and refinements (difference between niet ‘not’ and n-words). Alongside factors favoring deletion, there are also factors favoring retention to consider, especially for the later periods (16th–18th centuries). In particular string adjacency of niet + en turns out to matter greatly in preventing deletion of the clitic element. As a result, we see mostly SOV-clauses retaining clitics. We argue that the adjacency effect is an interface effect, as a result of syntactic chunking: reanalysis of a frequently recurring string as a unit. Both types of effect, V1, and string adjacency in SOV-clauses, are still reflected in dialect patterns in the SAND atlas (Barbiers et al., 2008): SOV clauses with clitic negation are more wide-spread in Belgium than main clauses, and V2 main clauses with clitic negation in turn are more wide-spread than V1 clauses. The main new findings of this paper are (1) differences between niet and n-words, and (2) the importance of adjacency in accounting for the longer retention of clitic negation in SOV contexts. In addition, the paper uses a broader data spectrum (more dialects) and more data points (3800 negative sentences) than previous studies. Two recent theoretical proposals regarding the loss of clitic negation in Dutch (Zeijlstra, 2004, Breitbarth, 2009) are discussed and criticized." @default.
• W2034233309 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2034233309 creator A5058122280 @default.
• W2034233309 date "2014-08-01" @default.
• W2034233309 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W2034233309 title "The Middle Dutch negative clitic: Status, position and disappearance" @default.
• W2034233309 cites W120891387 @default.
• W2034233309 cites W1569142713 @default.
• W2034233309 cites W1993186272 @default.
• W2034233309 cites W1999856637 @default.
• W2034233309 cites W2013126524 @default.
• W2034233309 cites W2027536564 @default.
• W2034233309 cites W2029779541 @default.
• W2034233309 cites W2055344156 @default.
• W2034233309 cites W2058251350 @default.
• W2034233309 cites W2084627311 @default.
• W2034233309 cites W2095804569 @default.
• W2034233309 cites W2109161720 @default.
• W2034233309 cites W2113540672 @default.
• W2034233309 cites W2121699065 @default.
• W2034233309 cites W2130501173 @default.
• W2034233309 cites W2466512044 @default.
• W2034233309 cites W4229652946 @default.
• W2034233309 cites W4238842804 @default.
• W2034233309 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.02.004" @default.
• W2034233309 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W2034233309 type Work @default.
• W2034233309 sameAs 2034233309 @default.
• W2034233309 citedByCount "2" @default.
• W2034233309 countsByYear W20342333092015 @default.
• W2034233309 countsByYear W20342333092018 @default.
• W2034233309 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2034233309 hasAuthorship W2034233309A5058122280 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConcept C110484373 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConcept C114614502 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConcept C157486923 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConcept C2776397901 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConcept C2779627504 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConcept C37914503 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConceptScore W2034233309C110484373 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConceptScore W2034233309C114614502 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConceptScore W2034233309C138885662 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConceptScore W2034233309C157486923 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConceptScore W2034233309C2776397901 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConceptScore W2034233309C2779627504 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConceptScore W2034233309C33923547 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConceptScore W2034233309C37914503 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConceptScore W2034233309C41895202 @default.
• W2034233309 hasConceptScore W2034233309C95457728 @default.
• W2034233309 hasLocation W20342333091 @default.
• W2034233309 hasOpenAccess W2034233309 @default.
• W2034233309 hasPrimaryLocation W20342333091 @default.
• W2034233309 hasRelatedWork W1986178659 @default.
• W2034233309 hasRelatedWork W2032101120 @default.
• W2034233309 hasRelatedWork W2198315370 @default.
• W2034233309 hasRelatedWork W223546419 @default.
• W2034233309 hasRelatedWork W2340112310 @default.
• W2034233309 hasRelatedWork W2497009369 @default.
• W2034233309 hasRelatedWork W2756476889 @default.
• W2034233309 hasRelatedWork W2931015744 @default.
• W2034233309 hasRelatedWork W866093415 @default.
• W2034233309 hasRelatedWork W2000784238 @default.
• W2034233309 hasVolume "147" @default.
• W2034233309 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2034233309 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2034233309 magId "2034233309" @default.
• W2034233309 workType "article" @default.