In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:
  • Word order in Hungarian: The syntax of A’-positions by Genoveva Puskás
  • Kleanthes K. Grohmann
Word order in Hungarian: The syntax of A’-positions. By Genoveva Puskás. (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 33.) Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2000. Pp. xv, 396.

This 1996 dissertation from the University of Geneva is an exquisite study of the clausal left periphery in general, with special emphasis put on Hungarian. Puskás is concerned with apparent word order variation in this part of the clause, which she identifies as well-motivated movement for scopal or discourse reasons, and consequently presents a detailed investigation of A’-bar syntax. Ch. 1 is a meticulous ‘Introduction’ (1–54) to the theoretical framework employed, basic concerns regarding the left periphery, and the structure of Hungarian. Of all the elements that can appear in the left periphery (focus, topic, wh-phrases, negation), P distinguishes quantificational from nonquantificational expressions; formulates specific criteria for their distribution, licensing, and (im)possibility of co-occurrence; and treats each phenomenon in a separate chapter (also discussing their interaction).

Ch. 2 investigates the syntax of ‘Focus’ (55–144) in considerable depth. New information is systematically displaced into the left periphery of the clause, into a designated F(ocus)P(hrase). This FP is part of the Comp-domain, here taken to be finer articulated, in line with much recent research. The adjacency requirement that can be observed in Hungarian between the fronted focus phrase and the (finite) verb follows from the focus criterion, a structural condition which postulates the filling of specifier and head of FP. ‘Topic’ (145–210) is the theme of Ch. 3 which discusses preposed constituents that represent ‘old’ rather than ‘new’ information, i.e. topicalized elements. The discussion concentrates on Hungarian topics but also includes related constructions in other languages, such as clitic left dislocation in Italian or contrastive left dislocation in Dutch. The analysis of topicalization in Hungarian exploits the analytical insights from these phenomena and also explores a [End Page 378] more articulated left periphery (Comp), viz. Top(ic)P, dominating FP in Hungarian. Topics involve A’-chains without quantificational properties.

Ch. 4, ‘Wh-questions’ (211–94), connects to Ch. 2 in that it identifies FP as the locus of another class of quantificational A’-moved elements. The impossibility of fronting both a focused and a wh-expression follows if both target the same position. In one case, the focus criterion applies and in the other the wh-criterion—the latter enforces adjacency between the fronted wh-phrase and the finite verb, just as the former does for focus. This chapter presents the characteristics that both types share (such as ‘new’ information, quantificational properties etc.), and it also touches on multiple wh-question, partial wh-movement, yes/no questions, and other phenomena relevant in this context.

In the final contentful chapter, P considers ‘Negation’ (295–376), tying in issues of negation with all previously presented material. She identifies a sentential Neg(ation)P as part of IP, but it too is subject to an affect criterion, namely the Neg-criterion, which involves a negative operator. This chapter discusses primarily focusing of entire (negative) sentences (parallel to verb-focusing and yes/no questions), negative expressions (which are not subsumed under the Neg-criterion), and negative concord (considering Neg-chains and absorption).

The ‘Conclusion’ (377–9) summarizes the main points of the book. It shows that the topics picked out in this study all relate to each other, apart from making fine topics of discussion in and of themselves. The range of data and phenomena discussed in detail is impressive, and the book offers valuable insights into the syntax of A’-movement, the left periphery of the Hungarian clause, in particular. It should make a valuable addition to any syntactician’s personal library.

Kleanthes K. Grohmann
University of Stuttgart
...

pdf

Share