Languages are not often very flexible in reordering their heads and complements. Many languages have a fixed preference, for example, for either prepositions or postpositions (Dryer, 2013). If...Show moreLanguages are not often very flexible in reordering their heads and complements. Many languages have a fixed preference, for example, for either prepositions or postpositions (Dryer, 2013). If there are any occurrences of inversion, they are either obligatory, or at least, when optional, bound by restrictions; as can be seen in Broadwell (2006). Bidayuh - an Austronesian language of Borneo, a language not very well documented - shows some peculiar inversions of preposition and noun phrase. These inversions only occur with movement. The current study examines P-DP reordering for DP’s that have moved to the front of their simple matrix clause; to the front of their embedded clause; or out of their embedded clause, to the front of the matrix clause. It looks into several different prepositions and different matrix verbs, as well as different DP complements. All three movement conditions elicit different sets of restrictions on reordering P and DP. The data are discussed in the light of Merchant’s (2002) theory of swiping and Hartman and Ai’s (2009) account of it. Unfortunately, the current study cannot draw any hard conclusions. More research is needed.Show less
Westergaard et al. (2005, 2012) have shown that some dialects of Norwegian, contrary to Standard Norwegian, may violate the Verb Second requirement in some or all types of wh-questions. Focussing...Show moreWestergaard et al. (2005, 2012) have shown that some dialects of Norwegian, contrary to Standard Norwegian, may violate the Verb Second requirement in some or all types of wh-questions. Focussing on Northern Norwegian, I discuss the optionality of the Verb Second requirement in wh-questions with simplex wh-phrases in this dialect. Based on data from Norwegian informants, as well as previous literature on this dialect, an analysis of the optionality of Verb Second will be given. This analysis builds on Sportiche’s approach on clitic movement in Romance languages (1996). It is shown that in Northern Norwegian complex wh’s move like phrases, whilst simplex wh’s can move (long-distance) as phrases as well as heads, analogous to the movement of Romance clitics. As an alternative analysis, the possibility that Northern Norwegian simplex wh’s undergo phrasal movement but merge into C0, is also discussed on the basis of the head movement account by Matushansky (2006).Show less
