Abstract
This paper explores the syntactic and semantic configurations of expletives “it” and “there.” It attempts to show that expletives are not just syntactic fillers; they are semantic markers and are pragmatically bound NPs that can be co-indexed with covert referents. The study follows a theoretical approach and applies Bolinger’s (1977) Meaning and Form model to the syntactic configurations of expletives. The syntactic structures of expletives are based on the syntactic theories of generativist linguists, namely Chomsky (1986). Chomskyan syntactic theories describe the various formal characteristics of expletives without analyzing their semantic and pragmatic implications. This study premises that Bolinger’s theoretical modal can fill these missing gaps and can provide a conclusive yet not final description of these gaps. The study recognizes expletives as discourse-bound markers and authenticates their contextual and sociological significance.
Highlights
In Chomskyan modules, expletives or “pleonastic elements” (Chomsky 1986, p. 91) are non-referential NPs; that is, they are not co-indexed with any referent in the immediate context
Arguments, according to theta theory, are assigned Ɵ-roles by the predicates and as Burzio (1986) says, “A verb Casemarks its object if and only if it Θ-marks its subject (p.139),” expletives are not marked with any Ɵ-role in English sentence
This paper provides a linguistic account of expletives and attempts to describe the syntactic and semantic environment wherein expletives find expression
Summary
In Chomskyan modules, expletives or “pleonastic elements” (Chomsky 1986, p. 91) are non-referential NPs; that is, they are not co-indexed with any referent in the immediate context. Arguments, according to theta theory, are assigned Ɵ-roles by the predicates and as Burzio (1986) says, “A verb (with an object) Casemarks its object if and only if it Θ-marks its subject (p.139),” expletives are not marked with any Ɵ-role in English sentence. They feature in sentences in which “be” function as predicates. The projection of the subject does not find any morphological expression due to poorly inflected property of verb This makes the phonological realization of subject obligatory in English. Dummy subjects like “it” and “there” are inserted when the sentence lacks any realized NP that can function as the subject of the sentence
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: University of Chitral Journal of Linguistics and Literature
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
