Henk Verkuyl. “On the Semantics of Complementizers”:http://www.let.uu.nl/~Henk.Verkuyl/personal/tense/semcomp.pdf.
bq. This paper is about the semantic differences between a sentential complement headed by a subordinate conjunction and a infinitival complement. A proper description of these differences requires a choice between two types of tense systems available in the literature. Both use points of reference but they are different as to the dimensions determining the set up of the system. From this point of view, it will be argued that Reichenbach’s 1947-system fails to account for the difference between the two types of complement due to its 3×3 design, whereas a 2×2x2 set up of Te Winkel’s 1866-system accounts much more adequately for the (temporal) semantic properties of the complements in question. As for the content of the differences between the two types of complements, it will be argued that these can be found in the different ways of matching the indices of the subordinate and the main clauses.
Home > About This Post
This entry was posted by fintel on Thursday, December 18th, 2003, at 11:41 am.
Subscribe to the
RSS 2.0 feed for all comments to this post.
Post a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.