V2 word order
V2 -position or Verbzweitstellung referred to in linguistics a word order pattern in which the finite verb is in second position in the sentence, with the occupation of the first position is chosen ( and the so-called run-up group). This word order pattern is thus outside the division in word order types the type SVO, SOV, etc. The V2 position is typical of the grammar of the German and the Germanic languages as a whole, with the exception of English. In traditional grammar of the German pattern to be referred ( by E.Drach ) as a core set.
- 3.1 Languages with V2 as an obligatory word order in the main clause
- 3.2 differences in the base position for the V2
- 3.3 Verbzweitsätze as subordinate clauses
- 3.4 V2 position in comparison with " inversion" in English
Examples and their derivation
Variants in German law
In English is available in the finite verb statement sets (ie, the verb, indicating the shapes and staff time delay ) to the second place; any set of parts can occupy the first position in the sentence:
- Klaus buys fruit.
- In winter, Klaus buys fruit.
- The day before yesterday Klaus fruit has bought.
- Despite the hard winter Klaus buys fruit daily.
- Why buy Klaus fruit?
Derivation of Verbzweitsätzen
The traditional German describes Verbzweitsätze as part of the so-called field model as a static arrangement: The set is divided into a series of "boxes ", and the V2 set is characterized as a set of form in which the apron is occupied by any member of a sentence and following it the finite verb in the "left sentence bracket " is (rather than in the right ). All remaining material then follows from the midfield:
From the perspective of a transformational grammar, the Verbzweitstellung a standard example of a derived word order is: The diversity of the German sentence patterns in the above list of examples can be detected by two transformation rules, starting from a basic word order stated. The basis of the derivation can be in English, the sequence " subject - object - verb ' ( SOV ) identify which is to be found in pure form in subordinate clauses. This remains the approach in many main clauses recognizable, but is modified by two transformations: First, the finite verb (the last V possibly of several in the SOV - structure ) is placed ( so that a Verberstsatz ), then an arbitrary more constituent considered as occupation of the apron to the front. All parts of sentences that were not affected by the transformation, continues to show the character of the German SOV. The derivation of an example sentence looks like this:
1 basic word order: In German SOV ( = word order )
Because ... Klaus (S ) yesterday fruit ( O) has bought (V finite ) 2 fronting of the finite verb (gives a set of V1 position)
Hat1 bought ... Klaus (S ) yesterday fruit ( O) [- 1] 3 Cast of the apron, gives V2 -position:
Vorgestern2 hat1 Klaus (S ) [- 2] fruit ( O) bought [- 1] or: Bought - Obst2 hat1 Klaus (S ) yesterday [2 ] [- 1] or: Klaus2 hat1 [- 2] yesterday bought fruit [- 1] or: [ Fruit bought ] 2 hat1 Klaus yesterday [- 2] [- 1] Such a transformational analysis was first proposed by Manfred Bierwisch (1963). With such a derivation can be explained why the finite verb appears in the front set, but Verbpartikel which remain at the end of a sentence, although actually both should together form a word. example:
- 40,000 letters tüteten a staff, and nothing happened.
A verb bags on their own are in German otherwise not, it exists only bagging. From the fact that the particles one stands alone at the end of a sentence, one can conclude that this position, the original position of the finite Verbteils tüteten must be, and that therefore a plausible analysis is that the finite verb from there " away " was, as shown in the above derivation.
Verbs in the infinitive can never occur in the Verbzweitposition, verbs and particles thus remain in the infinitive always be together in the end position (as in " bagging "). Thus the Verbzweitregel must be formulated so that the smallest possible part of the predicate that contains the finite features, is pulled forward.
Occupation of the apron
The movement of the units in advance, which was shown in the above example, is sometimes referred to as topicalisation (although not necessarily the importance of Topiks present ). Can be topicalized almost every part of the sentence (except the finite verb ), not just parts of a sentence such as subject and object, but also adverbials, and as much a part of the predicate, which are in the infinitive, with associated supplements, such as " Bought fruit " in the last example of the above list (" a verb phrase topicalization "). Also, all subordinate clauses can fill in the run-up to its parent's main theorem, if they have the status of a subject, object or adverbials:
[ Although it rained ] we set out for a walk Another option is to occupy the apron with a special Füllpronomen ( Expletiv ). The pronoun "it" in this example only serves to fill the apron, so that the shape of the German main clause remains intact, even if you want to single out any part of the sentence by prefixing. - This " it " therefore represents no subject:
There was a Bishop dead in a river Mur at the foot of Cedar Mountain The case of the run - Expletivs shows that even in a transformational model does not have to be based on occupation prior to any movement. Likewise, it is considered in the literature that some adverbials in advance could be used directly.
Position of the finite verb
Both fields in the model as well as in the generative transformational grammar adopted by a majority that the position of the finite verb in V2 position is the same in the subordinating conjunctions are also or complementizer, ie fields in the model, the "left sentence bracket " and in generative syntax, the "C " position. The main argument for this is that Verbvoranstellung and the appearance of a conjunction of mutually exclusive choices in German, and that therefore they would both compete for the same position. If this is so, a syntactic head must be generated ° C without occupation and the verb are moved into this, as in the picture in the generative model:
Some authors have, in contrast, suggested that conjunctions are higher in the sentence structure and that the V2 - position is an underlying deeper position, which is specifically designed for V2 structures. Then rules must be defined for the German, always allow only the cast of one of the two positions, whereas this may not be so in other languages (see below).
Distinguish from the word order pattern SVO
Verbzweitsprachen should be distinguished from languages that a fixed word order " subject - object - verb" require (SVO ), although at SVO, the verb is in second position in some way. One difference, however, is that the nature of the first position is different: In SVO languages , the verb always follows the subject, though in real Verbzweitsprachen the subject can serve as occupation of the apron, but it does not and it can instead always other are parts of a sentence prefixed. In the latter case, it appears as a sure sign of a V2 structure that then the finite verb precedes the subject.
The difference between a V2 structure and a SVO structure is apparent when the following word order patterns of German and English compares: Even when preceded by a adverbials (except for negative adverbials, see below) remains in English SVO order then intact, while the V2 position is directly followed by the adverbial.
Paul bought fruit. Yesterday Paul bought fruit. John bought apples. Yesterday, John bought apples. * not *: Yesterday John bought apples. It follows that also sets bought from the fruit in the form of Paul Germans are not SVO sentences, but that is produced here in the same order in the German of the V2 rule (actually [SV [- O -]] ). However, the difference only comes to, as soon as the predicate still has components in the infinitive: the infinite verb and the object then form immediately an OV sequence. Comparisons again the real SVO position in English: Here are all the verbs before the object.
Paul has fruit ( O) Bought (V). Paul has bought (V ) apples (O). Another difference is that SVO as a basic structure of the sentence is usually also available, if the verb in the infinitive is in contrast to Verbzweitstellung, which is restricted to finite verbs and in German the infinitive of a verb -end position differs. That in English infinitives also retain the SVO -position, is visible when a construction for ... to be used that allows the appearance of a subject in the infinitive:
For John (S ) to buy ( V) apples (O) would be unexpected. see to let Hans (S ) Apples (O ) at (V ) ... would be reckless. Occurrence and variants
Languages with V2 as an obligatory word order in the main clause
The Verbzweitstellung is a typical characteristic of the Germanic languages, but is otherwise rare in the languages of the world before. Among the few other cases in Europe include the modern Breton and historic Old French; outside Europe, the Indo-Iranian language Kashmiri, and outside the Indo-European family of languages apparently the Austronesian languages Taiof and Sisiqa, the Brazilian Indian language Karitiana from the Tupi family and the Uto- Aztec language Tohono O'odham.
Differences in the base position for the V2
The continental West Germanic languages ( ie German and its closely related neighbors such as Dutch) are Verbzweitsprachen SOV - output structure. Here is to be found, as shown above, a SOV sequence in a subordinate clause, which serves as the basis for the prefixing rules of V2 formation. It is also possible that a language with the base sequence SVO is extended by a rule preceded by the formation of V2 sentences, this case represent the Scandinavian languages , eg Swedish, Norwegian, Icelandic.
Swedish: Nebensatzworstellung S- V -O ( eftersom ) [ jag köpte s glass efter det] ( because) I bought an ice cream afterwards Main clause word order V2, for example: Efter det2 köpte1 [ jag - 1 s glass - 2] Then I bought an ice cream • See also: Isländische_Sprache # syntax
Verbzweitsätze as subordinate clauses
In German, there are certain verbs in subordinate clauses, which takes the conjunction that allow V2 structure; Such verbs are called " bridge verbs ":
I suspect [ that grilling steaks over there ] I suspect [ grilling steaks over there ] I doubt [ that grilling steaks over there ] ' * Not: I doubt [ grilling steaks over there ] From this comparison is to see that no doubt Brückenverb (as many verbs with negative or faktiver meaning).
While the Germans, the embedded Verbzweit set alternatively to appear at a that rate, Verzbweit phrases come in other Germanic languages , together with the conjunction that before, as in the following example from the Danish (also this case of V2 subordinate clause is restricted to designs with bridge verbs):
Vi ved at denne turned har ikke Bo laest We know that this book has not been read Bo The theorem follows after at ( that ) must be a Verbzweitsatz because the object of this book is in front of the finite verb, and only then follows the subject. Vikner (1995 ) explains this to mean that although the verb in the C ° position is as in the above tree diagram shown for German, but that two C ° positions are consecutively generated so that the conjunction can be in the first of the two.
V2 position in comparison with " inversion" in English
As the only Germanic language that modern English has no consistent V2 usually more. However, there are question sets and some other constructions, a phenomenon that is traditionally called " inversion" and the V2 set shape resembles. In addition to questions with a question word is in English prefixed and (except for subject questions ) pulled an auxiliary verb before the subject. According to conventional analysis here is the question word and the auxiliary verb a CP structure, as was also shown in the figure to the German Verbzweitsatz above:
English declarative sentence: S- Aux - V -O I can say something English interrogative sentence (object - issue ) What2 can1 [I - 1 say - 2] Because of such parallels the modern English as a "residual V2 - language" ( "residual verb second" ) has been called. Unlike in V2 languages such as German or Swedish here is the Verbvoranstellung only possible for auxiliary verbs and does not come in simple declarative sentences before ( but in this example by the set of questions requires setting ). Another type of inversion constructions in English sentences are preceded by negative adverbials (eg never ). Such structures, however, differ grammatically from German Verbzweitsätzen because the inversion can occur much deeper in the sentence:
(I promise ) did falling on the holidays on no account will I write a paper ( that during the holidays no way I 'm going to write an essay ) Appears here, unlike in German V2 - sentences, the prefixed verb is not next to a topicalized phrase ( here: "during the holidays " ), but only after the addition prefixed negative adverbial "on no account". Both are below the conjunction " that", so in this inversion constructions, the verb can not be in the C position, unlike those assumed for the German.