Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Hittite correlatives are paratactic
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Hittite correlatives are paratactic
Do you wish to request the book?
Hittite correlatives are paratactic
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Hittite correlatives are paratactic
2023
Overview
This paper argues that correlative constructions in Hittite are paratactically structured. The relative clause is essentially a clausal hanging topic, sitting at the left edge of the main clause in linear juxtaposition without actually being an integrated part of it, syntactically speaking. I defend this claim in two stages. First, I argue that correlatives in Hittite are base-generated in their left-edge position rather than derived through movement (as advocated for Hindi by, e.g., Bhatt 2003). I adduce as evidence the fact that the main clause correlate appears to be simply a discourse anaphor and need not even be present in the construction; these observations are incompatible with a movement-based derivation that generates the relative clause as a modifier of the correlate. There is also evidence for a lack of locality effects. The second part of my claim, that Hittite correlatives are not syntactically integrated, differs from most base-generation accounts of correlatives, which take correlatives to be clausal adjuncts. I support my position with parallels to hanging topics and peripheral adverbials (Haegeman 2012) and with examples of intervening non-subordinate clauses, and I offer some comments on why syntactic adjunction is less well suited to the Hittite situation. I also show that Segmented Discourse Representation Theory (Asher & Lascarides 2003) accommodates these structures, including some notably non- canonical ones, in a simple and principled way.
