CONTROL AND RAISING IN THE LANGUAGES OF EURASIA

Morphosyntactic Questionnaire

A. V. Zimmerling, N. V. Serdobolskaya, G. I. Kustova, E. Yu. Ivanova
© 2024

For the RSF project application "Control and Raising in the Languages of Eurasia" (instructions for project participants)

• When describing a language of the Russian Federation or a European language, fill out the attached questionnaire.
• For positive answers to questionnaire questions, provide supporting examples.
• For negative answers to a question, if possible, illustrate the grammatical constraint observed in the given language with a sentence marked with an asterisk, cf. Russ. *Василию приятны читать книги
• Note discrepancies between the terminology adopted in the linguistic tradition devoted to the given language and the terminology you adhere to. Illustration example 1: some form in language L is traditionally called "supine" or "masdar", but you categorize it differently. Illustration example 2: in the grammar of language L, some elements are called "suffixes" or "prefixes", but you, based on distributional analysis or other considerations, qualify them as "clitics".
• When filling out section 11, provide lists of verbs of the designated thematic groups and indicate their meanings in Marr quotes. Reference to the source of interpretation/translation is optional. Illustration: Arab. kād-a, karaba 'to be about to', 'to be on the verge of' <[Haddad 2012]>.

1. Clause boundaries and multiplicity of description

1.1. Is diagnostics for determining the boundaries of dependent and main clauses available for the studied language, independent of the choice of formal language model (yes / no)

1.2. In some cases, the boundaries of the dependent clause can be determined in more than one way (yes / no)

1.3. In some cases, the composition of the main clause can be determined in more than one way (yes / no)

2. Word order, clause structure and clitics

2.1. What is the basic word order in the studied language

2.2. Is the word order the same in the main and dependent clauses (yes / no)

2.3. What possibilities for placing the dependent clause relative to the main clause (postposition, preposition, nesting) are available

2.4. What position(s) in the studied language is focal (position of linear-accent highlighting)

2.4.1. Position at the left periphery of the clause (CP)

2.4.2. Pre-verbal position (..XV)

2.4.3. Other

2.5. Are argument inversions possible in the studied language (argument scrambling), for example, alternations of orders SOV ~ OSV, VOS ~ VSO (yes / no)

2.6. Is verb inversion possible in the studied language within the same type of clauses, for example, alternation of orders SV ~ VS (yes / no)

2.7. Is complement inversion possible in the studied language relative to the verbal head, for example, alternation of order OV ~ VO within the same type of clauses (yes / no)

2.8. Are there clitics in the studied language (yes / no)

2.9. Are there clitic chains (clitic clusters) in the studied language. If yes, what is the rule of internal ordering of clitics (clitic internal ordering, template rule) (yes / no)

2.10. Where is the position of clitic clustering

2.11. Are there pronominal arguments (clitics, bound forms, affixes) embedded in the verbal complex (yes / no)

2.12. Are there null pronominal subjects: is the language pro-drop / non pro-drop

3. Are there constructions in the studied language

3.1. Standard control (yes / no)

3.2. Backward control (yes / no)

3.3. Standard raising of non-sentential argument (forward raising) (yes / no)

3.4. Backward raising of non-sentential argument (backward raising) (yes / no)

3.5. Raising of sentential argument, cf. subnorm. Russ. Полиции стало известным, [что Иван в городе] (yes / no)

3.6. With clitic extraction (clitic climbing) (yes / no)

3.7. Object control (yes / no)

3.8. Indirect control (yes / no)

4. Syntactic domain of raising

4.1. Raising from non-finite clauses (yes / no)

4.2. Raising from finite clauses (hyperraising) (yes / no)

4.3. Raising from small clauses (yes / no)

4.4. Quantifier raising (yes / no)

4.5. Negation raising (cf. Russ. Я не думаю, чтобы он мог выполнить эту работу) (yes / no)

4.6. External possessor

5. Biclausal structures and restructuring

5.1. Is there diagnostics distinguishing biclausal structures with control and raising from sentences with restructuring (restructuring, clause union), i.e., removal of the clausal boundary between main and dependent predication (yes / no)

5.2. Are there partially restructured sentences in the studied language that combine properties of biclausal and monoclausal structures (yes / no)

5.3. Are there constructions with long passive (yes / no)

6. Morphosyntax and argument structure

6.1. Is there case marking of arguments in the studied language (yes / no)

6.2. Is there differential argument marking in the studied language (yes / no)

6.3. Are there unmarked (lacking non-zero morphological case markers) noun phrases in the studied language (yes / no)

6.4. Are binominative (biabsolutive) sentences possible in the studied language (yes / no)

6.5. What (syntactic and semantic) actant controls predicate agreement (Subject, Agent, Principal, etc.)

6.6. Is there reason to postulate morphological case for the unexpressed subject of dependent predication (PRO). Which (which exactly)

6.7. Is there clause harmonization by transitivity in the studied language (transitive concord), when an intransitive predicate in the dependent clause requires an intransitive predicate in the main clause, and a transitive predicate in the main clause requires a transitive predicate in the main clause (yes / no)

6.8. Is there opposition of clauses by degree of agentivity in the studied language, when a non-agentive predicate in the main clause requires the predicate of the dependent clause to be agentive (yes / no)

7. Morphosyntactic type of dependent predication in control and raising structures

7.1. Finite clause without subordinating conjunction (complementizer)

7.2. Finite clause with subordinating conjunction

7.3. Non-finite clause, including

7.3.1. Participial

7.3.2. Gerundial

7.3.3. Expressed by nominalization

8. Transparent agreement and its manifestation in polypredicative structures

8.1. Is there transparent agreement of the main predicate with an argument of the dependent clause in the studied language (yes / no)

8.2. By means of which agreement categories (number, gender, class, person, etc.) can it be checked

8.3. Are there predicates in the studied language for which transparent agreement is obligatory (yes / no)

8.4. Are there discrepancies between native speakers in terms of the acceptability of transparent agreement (yes / no)

8.5. Does linear order change with transparent agreement

8.6. Semantics of construction with transparent agreement

8.7. Form of dependent predicate in construction with transparent agreement

9. Indexical shift

9.1. Does indexical shift occur in the studied language, where a proximal deixis marker ("I", "you", "here", "now") is transferred to an intensional context associated with a speaker different from the subject of the utterance, cf. subnorm. Russ. Иванi сказал, что яi ушел = 'Иванi сказал, что онi ушел'; (yes / no)

9.2. In what contexts is indexical shift possible

9.3. What predicates allow indexical shift

9.4. Are there discrepancies between speakers in terms of the acceptability of indexical shift (yes / no)

9.5. Can indexical shift be associated in the studied language with morphosyntactic marking of the dependent clause (yes / no)

9.6. Is indexical shift possible/obligatory for temporal and spatial adverbials and temporal verb forms (here, now, cf. Russ. Иван сказал: «Я сейчас уйду» - Иван сказал, что он (*сейчас) собирается уходить)

10. Actant derivation and structure of polypredicative complex

10.1. Can dependent clauses be clearly divided into actant and adverbial ones in the studied language (yes / no)

10.2. Is there reason to believe that sentential and non-sentential actants occupy the same syntactic positions with the same predicate of the main clause, cf. Russ. Иван видит Петра and Иван видит, что Петр ошибся (yes / no)

10.3. Are there mechanisms for adding actants (applicative strategies) common to sentential and non-sentential actants (yes / no)

10.4. Are there structures with external possessor in the described language (yes / no)

10.5. Is possessive marking of sentential actants possible (yes / no)

10.6. Are there grammatical and lexical markers of decreased agentivity / degree of situational controllability in the studied language (yes / no)

10.7. Are there grammatical and lexical markers of increased agentivity / degree of situational controllability in the studied language (yes / no)

11. What syntactic constructions (control, raising, other) do the following choose in the studied language

11.1. Speech verbs

11.2. Speech causation verbs, cf. order, ask

11.3. Mental verbs, cf. think, consider, suppose

11.4. Sensory perception verbs, cf. see, hear

11.5. Verbs with the meaning "seem"

11.6. Representation correction verbs ("turn out"), cf. Russ. Фильм оказался воспевающим понятие «Офицерская Честь»

11.7. Phase verbs, cf. begin, continue, complete

11.8. Verbs with meanings "happen", "occur"

11.9. Verbs and non-verbal predicates with the meaning "have a tendency to implementation", cf. rain is coming, rain will start soon

11.10. Verbs of volition and strong desire (volitive)

11.11. modal verbs, including

11.11.1. in contexts of deontic, alethic and epistemic modality, cf. Russ. Иван может поехать туда вместо меня 'Ivan is allowed to do p'

11.11.2. In contexts of internal modality, cf. Russ. Иван может проплыть два километра 'Ivan is able to do p'

11.12. Existential, locative and possessive verbs

11.13. Verbs and non-verbal predicates of affect, cf. fear, hope, have suspicion

11.14. Verbs of knowledge, cf. know, understand, discover that p

11.15. Causatives

12. External possessor

12.1. Basic noun phrase construction in the studied language: head and/or dependent marking

12.2. Is there a construction with external possessor in the language, i.e., a construction in which the possessor (in the broad sense) is expressed outside the noun phrase?

12.3. Properties of construction with external possessor: case marking or adpositions, agreement with verb in languages with head marking, applicative or other verbal derivations, linear order, topicalization and focusing

12.4. Semantics and functions of construction with external possessor

12.5. Obligatoriness or optionality of construction with external possessor for different semantic types of verbs

12.6. Lexical restrictions on external possessor: semantic classes of nouns