Complementizer

With the English term complementizer ( category "C" icon; German also complementizer ) is called in linguistics va grammatical elements that introduce a subordinate clause, in German, for example, the conjunctions that, if, although, because, inter alia, in sentences like:

• I know that you have a car.

• I do not know if you have a car.

• The car has broken down, even though it is brand new.

In the first two examples, the subordinate clause is a Komplementsatz, ie a request made by the verb complement ( engl. complement ); apparently the term " complementizer " is hereby initially motivated. However, all other types of subordinate clauses complementers may have, such as in the third example above, an Adverbial with though.

The term complementizer was introduced by Rosenbaum (1967). The label is in German V.A. used in generative grammar because the usual German term " conjunction" has two different meanings that can be distinguished in English as complementizer = next record introductory ( subordinating ) conjunction and Conjunction = co-ordinating conjunction (such as and, but, because ). In addition, there is a difference from the traditional notion of conjunction is that not only words tagged as " conjunction" can serve as a complementizer, but also unspoken ( phonetically empty ) elements that are present in the abstract representation of sentence structure only in the form of features. In this form, then not only subordinate clauses, but also main sets can contain such a position (eg in Verbzweit set).

Similarly, the concept of origin, in particular aspects of conjunctions are shown in this article, arising from the model of generative grammar, for a general review, see the article in conjunction ( part of speech ).

Demarcation

No complementers are question words and relative pronouns (at least according to prevailing doctrine), because it is in these is representative of all constituents. This can be seen in cases where questions or relative clauses are introduced by a whole group of words ( up to the so-called Pied construction in the example e in the worst case ):

A I do not know who has called .. b. I do not know who I was on the phone. c. The man who had called ... d The man with whom I believed to phone ... e people with whom to phone calls he had imagined ... Complementizer can be extended to larger syntactic groups, however, never, in particular, they do not act itself as additions of other categories (such as in the above examples, whom and which occur as a complement of a preposition ).

In relative clauses of English, there are two variants, namely relative clauses with " wh - " words ( who, etc. ) and those with that. This did is a complementizer, but who is a relative pronoun. A similar distinction may exist in yes / no questions; Here it is argued that the English "if" is a conjunction in interrogative sentences, the same significant " Whether " but a phrase that other " wh - words" equivalent.

Complementizer in the structure of the sentence

Phrase structure

Complementizer form with the rest following sentence a constituent, in turn, for example, can act as a syntactic complement of a verb:

I know [ that [ you have a car ] ] I know it According to an analysis which was represented by Noam Chomsky 1986 complementers fit into the system of X -bar theory, by which to establish their own phrase (CP ) results from the heads of the category C, . The other set is therefore its complement. If one refers to those subordinate clauses in German as " that set " to play in this speech also expressed that the conjunction " that" is a head which characterizes the type of the entire set. Question - and relative pronouns are in the X -bar theory, however phrases that occupy the specifier of CP.

Empty complementers

If the difference between heads and phrases is consistently applied, results from the X -bar theory that at the level of complementers two different positions are present ( the former, the position of a phrase in front of the head, is the specifier ):

I do not know [- if you [ you a car ] ] [- I [ I phoned ] [ with whom ] ] I do not know In the second set the position of the complementer C is logically empty. That they still exist separately, can be seen in data from German dialects, in which appear both a relative or interrogative pronoun and a complementizer series, eg in the following example of Bavarian

[A Meichmaschin ] is a komplizierta apparatus with (...) four Saugnäpf, de where to de Zitzn vo since Kua oneghengt wern. ( four suction cups, which are attached to the teats of the cow. ) Here de acts as a relative pronoun (and thus as a phrase, so specifier ) and the following where is a relative clause complementizer, which is not available in standard German ( it is not to the identical interrogative pronouns where, because it's in the Bavarian example in no way an adverbial geographic location corresponds ).

Complementers as position in the sentence

In models of the generative grammar can also be filled by means of a movement transformation with another material, the position of the complementer when it was first produced without cast. So the Verbzweitsatz and Verberstsatz in German is described as a movement of the verb to the position C. For example you have in German in conditional sentences, the choice of whether you want to use the complementizer or if instead, tries to pull the verb in its position to the front:

If the place can not be filled by a woman, it may also be offered to a man Can the vacancy can not be filled by a woman - she may also be offered to a man swell

• General Linguistics