Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-05-31T04:25:34.472Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

15 - Coordination and Subordination in Slavic Languages

from Part 3 - Syntax

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2024

By
Milan Mihaljević
Edited by
Danko Šipka  and
Wayles Browne
Danko Šipka
Affiliation:
Arizona State University
Wayles Browne
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Get access

Summary

This chapter addresses coordination and subordination in Slavic languages. The author presents the architecture of the following types of coordination: conjunctive, disjunctive, asyndetic and polysyndetic, adversative, correlative (initial), non-constituent, and comitative. He then goes on to discuss the architecture of subordination: complement clauses, relative clauses, and adverbial clauses.

Keywords

coordinationsubordinationrelative clauseadverbial clausecoordinatorparticlepronoun
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Slavic Linguistics , pp. 304 - 336
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andrejčin, L., Ivanov, M., & Popov, K. (1957). Săvremeni bălgarski ezik, čast II, Sofija: Dăržavno izdatelstvo ‘Narodna prosveta’.Google Scholar
Andrews, A. D. (2007). Relative clauses. In Shopen, T., ed., Language Typology and Syntactic Description. Second edition, Volume II: Complex Constructions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 206–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arxipov, A. V. (2005). K tipologii komitativnyx konstrukcij. Čast’ I. opredelenie i formal’naja tipologija. Voprosy jazykoznanija, 4, 76–100.Google Scholar
Arxipov, A. V. (2008). K tipologii komitativnyx konstrukcij. Čast’ II. polisemija komitativnyx konstrukcij. Voprosy jazykoznanija, 3, 22–50.Google Scholar
Browne, W. (1986). Relative Clauses in Serbo-Croatian in Comparison with English (New Studies, 4), Zagreb: Institute of Linguistics, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Zagreb.Google Scholar
Browne, W. (2009). On conjoined questions and conjoined relative clauses in English and Serbo-Croatian. In Franks, S., Chidambaram, V., & Joseph, B., eds., A Linguist’s Linguist: Studies in South Slavic Linguistics in honor of E. Wayles Browne, Bloomington, IN: Slavica, pp. 25–42.Google Scholar
Büring, D. & Hartmann, K. (2015). Semantic coordination without syntactic coordinators. In Toivonen, I., Csúri, P., & van der Zee, E., eds., Structures in the Mind. Essays on Language, Music, and Cognition in Honor of Ray Jackendoff, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 41–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carston, R. & Blakemore, D. (2005). Introduction to coordination: Syntax, semantics and pragmatics. Lingua, 115, 353–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cinque, G. (2020). The Syntax of Relative Clauses: A Unified Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cormack, A. & Smith, N. (2005). What is coordination? Lingua, 115, 395–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cristofaro, S. (2014). Is there really a syntactic category of subordination? In Herlin, I, Kalliokoski, J, & Visapää, L, eds., Contexts of Subordination – Cognitive, Typological and Discourse Perspectives, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 73–91.Google Scholar
Culicover, P. W. & Jackendoff, R. (1997). Semantic subordination despite syntactic coordination. Linguistic Inquiry, 28, 195–217.Google Scholar
Čordalija, N., Jovović, I., & Leko, N. (2020). Postverbal conjoined subjects and closest conjunct agreement in Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian: An experimental study. Suvremena lingvistika, 89, 25–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dagnac, A. (2012). How do you double your C? Evidence from an Oïl dialect. Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics, 9, 77–94.Google Scholar
Delmonte, V. & Fernández-Soriano, O. (2009). Force and finiteness in the Spanish complementizer system. Probus 21, 23–49.Google Scholar
Dobrušina, N. R. (2016). Soslagatel’noe naklonenie v russkom jazyke: opyt issledovanija grammatičeskoj semantiki, Prague: Animedia Company.Google Scholar
Fabricius-Hansen, C. & Ramm, W. (2008). Editor’s introduction: Subordination and coordination from different perspectives. In Fabricius-Hansen, C. & Ramm, W., eds., ‘Subordination’ versus ‘Coordination’ in Sentence and Text: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective (Studies in Language Companion Series 98), Amsterdam: Benjamins 2008, pp. 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franks, S. (2017). Slavic generative syntax. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 25(2), 199–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franks, S. & Willer-Gold, J. (2014). Agreement strategies with conjoined subjects in Cro. In Jaworski, S. & Witkoś, J., eds., New Insights into Slavic Linguistics, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 91–113.Google Scholar
Fried, M. (2010). Accusative resumptive pronoun in the Czech relative clauses with absolutive relativizer co. Korpus – gramatika – axiologie, 1, 16–29.Google Scholar
Fried, M. & Lipská, K. (2020). Dvě relativizační strategie v češtině: konstrukčněgramatický přístup. Naše řeč 103(1–2), 37–54.Google Scholar
Gladrow, W. & Kosta, P. (1999). Syntax und Syntaxkonzeptionen. In Jachnow, H., ed., Handbuch der sprachwissenschaftlichen Russistik und ihrer Grenzdisziplinen, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, pp. 386–424.Google Scholar
Gołąb, Z. & Friedman, V. A. (1972). The relative clause in Slavic. In Peranteau, P. M., Levi, J. N., & Phares, G. C., eds., The Chicago Which Hunt: Papers from the Relative Clause Festival, Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society, pp. 30–46.Google Scholar
González i Planas, F. (2014). On quotative recomplementation: Between pragmatics and morphosyntax. Lingua, 146, 39–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, M. (2004). Coordinating constructions: An overview. In Haspelmath, M., ed., Coordinating Constructions [Typological Studies in Language 58], Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 3–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, M. (2007). Coordination. In Shopen, T., ed., Language Typology and Syntactic Description. Second Edition, Volume II: Complex Constructions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–51.Google Scholar
Hoekstra, E. (1993). Dialectal variation inside CP as parametric variation. In Abraham, W. & Bayer, J, eds., Dialektsyntax (Linguistische Berichte, Sonderheft 5), Opladen: WestdeutscherVerlag, pp. 161–179.Google Scholar
Hudeček, L. & Vukojević, L. (2006). Ne samo … nego/već (i) ustrojstva. Rasprave Instituta za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovlje, 32, 127–158.Google Scholar
Hurford, J. R. (2014). The Origins of Language, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jahić, D., Halilović, S., & Palić, I. (2000). Gramatika bosanskoga jezika, Zenica: Dom štampe.Google Scholar
Johannessen, J. B. (2005). The syntax of correlative adverbs. Lingua, 115, 419–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordanoska, I. (2017). Coordination, Conditionals and Questions: A Cross-Linguistic Investigation. MA Thesis, University of Leiden.Google Scholar
Katičić, R. (1991). Sintaksa hrvatskoga književnog jezika, Zagreb: HAZU – Globus.Google Scholar
Keenan, E. L. & Comrie, B. (1977). Noun phrase accessibility and Universal Grammar.Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 63–99.Google Scholar
Klemensiewicz, Z. (1953). Zarys składni polskiej, Warsaw: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.Google Scholar
Koneski, B. (1976). Gramatika na makedonskiot literaturen jazik, Skopje: Kultura.Google Scholar
Kordić, S. (1995). Relativna rečenica, Zagreb: Hrvatsko filološko društvo – Matica hrvatska.Google Scholar
Kordić, S. (2008). Koordinacija i subordinacija u složenim rečenicama slavenskih jezika.Južnoslovenski filolog, 64, 189–197.Google Scholar
Kortmann, B. (2001). Adverbial clauses. In Smelser, N. J. & Baltes, P. B., eds., International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Vol 1, Amsterdam: Pergamon, pp. 162–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krvina, D. & Žele, A. (2018). Vezniki: poskus opredelitve njihove vloge v slovenskih zloženih povedih. Jezikoslovni zapiski, 24, 1–25.Google Scholar
Ledgeway, A. (2005). Moving through the left periphery: The dual complementiser system in the dialects of Southern Italy. Transactions of the Philological Society, 103(3), 339–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ledgeway, A. (2006). The dual complementizer system in Southern Italy: Spirito Greco, materia Romanza? In Lepschy, A. L. & Tosi, A., eds., Rethinking Languages in Contact: the Case of Italian, London: Modern Humanities Research Association and Routledge, pp. 112–126.Google Scholar
Lohninger, M. & Wurmbrand, S. (2020). Typology of complement clauses. In Benz, A., Frey, W., Krifka, M., McFadden, T., & Żygis, M., eds., Handbook of Clausal Embedding, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marušič, F., Nevins, A., & Saksida, A. (2007). Last-conjunct agreement in Slovenian. FASL, 15, 210–227.Google Scholar
Marušič, F. & Nevins, A. (2010). Two types of neuter: Closest-conjunct agreement in the presence of ‘5&ups’. FASL, 18, 301–317.Google Scholar
Marušič, F., Nevins, A., & Badecker, B. (2015). The grammars of conjunction agreement in Sln. Syntax, 18(1), 39–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mascarenhas, S. (2014). Complementizer doubling in European Portuguese. Rivista di grammatica generativa, 36, 105–116.Google Scholar
McCloskey, J. (2006). Questions and questioning in a local English. In Zanuttini, R., Campos, H., Herburger, E., & Portner, P. H, eds., Crosslinguistic Research in Syntax and Semantics: Negation, Tense, and Clausal Architecture, Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, pp. 87–126.Google Scholar
Mihaljević, M. (2013). Parenteza s glagolima govorenja u hrvatskom jeziku. Rasprave: Časopis Instituta za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovlje, 39(2), 527–544.Google Scholar
Mihaljević, M. (2018). The structure of coordination: Evidence from Croatian Church Slavonic. FASL, 25, 200–213.Google Scholar
Mihaljević, M. (2019). Udvajanje dopunjača u hrvatskome crkvenoslavenskom jeziku. Rasprave: Časopis Instituta za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovlje, 45(2), 571–600.Google Scholar
Mihaljević, M., Šimić, A., & Vela, J. (2021). Iz sintakse Drugoga beramskog brevijara. In Mihaljević, M. & Radošević, A., eds., Studije o Drugome beramskom brevijaru, Zagreb: Staroslavenski institut, pp. 325–350.Google Scholar
Minova-Gjurkova, L. (2011). Sintaksa na makedonskiot standarden jazik, treto dopolneto izdanie, Skopje: 2-ri Avgust S.Google Scholar
Mithun, M. (1988). The grammaticization of coordination. In Haiman, J. & Thompson, S. A., eds., Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse [Typological Studies in Language 18], Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 331–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munaro, N. (2016). A diachronic approach to complementizer doubling in Italo-Romance and the notion of downward reanalysis. Rivista di grammatica generativa, 38, 215–228.Google Scholar
Paoli, S. (2004). The ‘double CHE constructions’: A comparative perspective. Antwerp Papers in Linguistics, 107, 193–209.Google Scholar
Pašov, P. (2005). Bălgarska gramatika, Sofia: Izdatelska kăšta “Hermes”.Google Scholar
Palašić, N. (2018). O granicama (i dodirima) koordinacije i subordinacije. In Palić, I., ed., Sarajevski filološki susreti 4. Zbornik radova (knjiga 1), Sarajevo: Bosansko filološko društvo, pp. 11–23.Google Scholar
Petrović, V. (2004). Upotreba veznika kako i da u komplementnoj klauzi srpskog jezika.Slavia Meridionalis, 4, 35–44.Google Scholar
Plesničar, V. (2015). Podvajanje veznikov okoli podrednih stavkov v slovenščini. In Marušič, F., Mišmaš, P., & Žaucer, R., eds., Škrabčevi dnevi 9: Zbornik prispevkov s simpozija 2015, Nova Gorica: Založba Univerze v Novi Gorici, pp. 113–126.Google Scholar
Plesničar, V. (2020). Complementizer doubling in Sln. subordinate clauses. In Marušič, F., Mišmaš, P., & Žaucer, R., eds., Advances in Formal Slavic Linguistics 2017, Berlin: Language Science Press, pp. 233–255.Google Scholar
Radford, A. (2013). The complementiser system in spoken English: Evidence from broadcast media. In Camacho-Taboada, V., Jiménez-Fernández, Á. L., Martín-González, J., & Reyes-Tejedor, M., eds., Information Structure and Agreement, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 11–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radford, A. (2018). Colloquial English: Structure and Variation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ribarova, Z. & Ribarova, S. (2015). Češka gramatika s vježbama, Zagreb: Porfirogenet d.o.o.Google Scholar
Sesar, D. (2018). Pregled slovačke sintakse, Zagreb: Filozofski fakultet Sveučilišta u Zagrebu FF press.Google Scholar
Silić, J. & Pranjković, I. (2005). Gramatika hrvatskoga jezika za gimnazije i visoka učilišta, Zagreb: Školska knjiga.Google Scholar
Stankovska, P. (2013). Češka skladnja, Ljubljana: Univerza v Ljubljani, Filozofska fakulteta.Google Scholar
Stankovska, P. (2018). Infinitiv jako pravovalenční doplnění sloves v češtině a ve slovinštině. Prace filologiczne, 72, 345–355.Google Scholar
Stassen, L. (2000). AND-languages and WITH-languages. Linguistic Typology, 4, 1–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Švedova, N. J., ed. (1980). Russkaja grammatika. Tom II: Sintaksis, Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Thompson, S. A., Longacre, R. E., & Hwang, S. J. (2007). Adverbial clauses. In Shopen, T., ed., Language Typology and Syntactic Description. Second edition, Volume II: Complex Constructions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 237–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uhlik, M. & Žele, A. (2019). Sln. comitative constructions with dual personal pronouns. Rhema, 3, 115–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Večerka, R. (1961). Syntax aktivních participií v staroslověnštině, Prague: Státní pedagogické nakladatelství.Google Scholar
Večerka, R. (1996). Altkirchenslavische (altbulgarische) Syntax III. Die Satztypen: der einfache Satz, Freiburg im Breisgau: Weiher.Google Scholar
Večerka, R. (2002). Altkirchenslavische (altbulgarische) Syntax IV. Die Satztypen: der zusammengesetzte Satz, Freiburg im Breisgau: Weiher.Google Scholar
Villa-García, J. (2015). The Syntax of Multiple-que Sentences in Spanish. Along the Left Periphery, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Viti, C. (2013). Forms and functions of subordination in Indo-European. Historische Sprachforschung/Historical Linguistics, 126, 89–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wälchli, B. (2009). Co-Compounds and Natural Coordination, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wiemer, B. (2021). A general template of clausal complementation and its application to South Slavic: Theoretical premises, typological background, empirical issues. In Wiemer, B. & Sonnenhauser, B., eds., Clausal Complementation in South Slavic, Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 29–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willer-Gold, J. et al. (2016). Conjunct agreement and gender in South Slavic: From theory to experiments to theory. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 24(1), 187–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×