{"id":{"repo_id":"mit","oai_identifier":"oai:dspace.mit.edu:1721.1/124089"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/mit/oai:dspace.mit.edu:1721.1/124089","repository":{"repo_id":"mit","name":"MIT","base_url":"https://dspace.mit.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Intervention effects in German : a contiguity approach","abstract":"This paper explores to what extent Richards' Contiguity Theory can insightfully be applied to so-called Intervention Effects in German, a set of phenomena which were originally described as constraining the syntax in an interesting way and have mostly been studied in Alternative Semantics terms by S. Beck et al, and H. Kotek. Branan (2018) has offered a Contiguity-theoretic account of Japanese, Korean, and Mongolian intervention facts. I will try to do so for German here. German, as will be discussed, differs crucially from the languages explored by Branan's (2018) cross-linguistic study. Japanese, Korean, and Mongolian, being syntactically right-headed, prosodically left-active languages, first destroy but then reestablish a Contiguous Probe-Goal relationship in the course of the derivation of intervention effect examples. In German, a prosodically left-active but syntactically mixed-headed language, by contrast, Contiguity relationships in multiple wh-questions are terminally destroyed in intervention configurations. This, I claim, triggers the familiar unacceptability judgments. I will further show that, contrary to the languages that Branan examines, in German the effect of Grouping cannot be observed in the prosody.","abstract_html":"This paper explores to what extent Richards' Contiguity Theory can insightfully be applied to so-called Intervention Effects in German, a set of phenomena which were originally described as constraining the syntax in an interesting way and have mostly been studied in Alternative Semantics terms by S. Beck et al, and H. Kotek. Branan (2018) has offered a Contiguity-theoretic account of Japanese, Korean, and Mongolian intervention facts. I will try to do so for German here. German, as will be discussed, differs crucially from the languages explored by Branan's (2018) cross-linguistic study. Japanese, Korean, and Mongolian, being syntactically right-headed, prosodically left-active languages, first destroy but then reestablish a Contiguous Probe-Goal relationship in the course of the derivation of intervention effect examples. In German, a prosodically left-active but syntactically mixed-headed language, by contrast, Contiguity relationships in multiple wh-questions are terminally destroyed in intervention configurations. This, I claim, triggers the familiar unacceptability judgments. I will further show that, contrary to the languages that Branan examines, in German the effect of Grouping cannot be observed in the prosody.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Hehl, Verena,S.M.Massachusetts Institute of Technology."],"institution":"Massachusetts Institute of Technology","degree_name":"Master","degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":"Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Linguistics and Philosophy","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Norvin Richards and David Pesetsky."],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2019,"date_issued":"2019","date_published":"2019","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:22:08Z","subjects":["Linguistics and Philosophy."],"languages":["eng"],"rights":["MIT theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed, downloaded, or printed from this source but further reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission."],"rights_urls":["http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582"],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/124089","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Norvin Richards and David Pesetsky."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Linguistics and Philosophy","Ling"]},{"key":"dc:contributor.other","label":"Dc Contributor Other","values":["Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Linguistics and Philosophy."]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Hehl, Verena,S.M.Massachusetts Institute of Technology."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2020-03-09T18:53:00Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2020-03-09T18:53:00Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2019"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Massachusetts Institute of Technology"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Linguistics and Philosophy."]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["eng"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["MIT theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed, downloaded, or printed from this source but further reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission."]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/124089"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["Thesis: S.M., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, 2019","Cataloged from PDF version of thesis.","Includes bibliographical references (pages 63-66)."]},{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This paper explores to what extent Richards' Contiguity Theory can insightfully be applied to so-called Intervention Effects in German, a set of phenomena which were originally described as constraining the syntax in an interesting way and have mostly been studied in Alternative Semantics terms by S. Beck et al, and H. Kotek. Branan (2018) has offered a Contiguity-theoretic account of Japanese, Korean, and Mongolian intervention facts. I will try to do so for German here. German, as will be discussed, differs crucially from the languages explored by Branan's (2018) cross-linguistic study. Japanese, Korean, and Mongolian, being syntactically right-headed, prosodically left-active languages, first destroy but then reestablish a Contiguous Probe-Goal relationship in the course of the derivation of intervention effect examples. In German, a prosodically left-active but syntactically mixed-headed language, by contrast, Contiguity relationships in multiple wh-questions are terminally destroyed in intervention configurations. This, I claim, triggers the familiar unacceptability judgments. I will further show that, contrary to the languages that Branan examines, in German the effect of Grouping cannot be observed in the prosody."]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["S.M."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Intervention effects in German : a contiguity approach"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Norvin Richards and David Pesetsky."],"dc:contributor.department":["Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Linguistics and Philosophy","Ling"],"dc:contributor.other":["Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Linguistics and Philosophy."],"dc:creator":["Hehl, Verena,S.M.Massachusetts Institute of Technology."],"dc:date.accessioned":["2020-03-09T18:53:00Z"],"dc:date.available":["2020-03-09T18:53:00Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2019"],"dc:description":["Thesis: S.M., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, 2019","Cataloged from PDF version of thesis.","Includes bibliographical references (pages 63-66)."],"dc:description.abstract":["This paper explores to what extent Richards' Contiguity Theory can insightfully be applied to so-called Intervention Effects in German, a set of phenomena which were originally described as constraining the syntax in an interesting way and have mostly been studied in Alternative Semantics terms by S. Beck et al, and H. Kotek. Branan (2018) has offered a Contiguity-theoretic account of Japanese, Korean, and Mongolian intervention facts. I will try to do so for German here. German, as will be discussed, differs crucially from the languages explored by Branan's (2018) cross-linguistic study. Japanese, Korean, and Mongolian, being syntactically right-headed, prosodically left-active languages, first destroy but then reestablish a Contiguous Probe-Goal relationship in the course of the derivation of intervention effect examples. In German, a prosodically left-active but syntactically mixed-headed language, by contrast, Contiguity relationships in multiple wh-questions are terminally destroyed in intervention configurations. This, I claim, triggers the familiar unacceptability judgments. I will further show that, contrary to the languages that Branan examines, in German the effect of Grouping cannot be observed in the prosody."],"dc:description.degree":["S.M."],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/124089"],"dc:language.iso":["eng"],"dc:publisher":["Massachusetts Institute of Technology"],"dc:rights":["MIT theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed, downloaded, or printed from this source but further reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission."],"dc:rights.uri":["http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582"],"dc:subject":["Linguistics and Philosophy."],"dc:title":["Intervention effects in German : a contiguity approach"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:22:08Z"}