Virtual Workshop

The nominal approach to clausal complementation

May 27, 2021

University of Patras, Greece

Abstract submission deadline extended!

The deadline for abstract submission is extended until 8th February 2021.

2nd Call for Papers

In the context of the Research Program “Selecting wh-Questions: Integrating Theoretical with Experimental and Applied Linguistics” (SeQuest: InTEAL), funded by the Hellenic Foundation for Research and Innovation, through the University of Patras, we are pleased to announce the workshop “The nominal approach to clausal complementation”, to be held online on May 27th, 2021.

Typically, predicates like verbs (cf., (1)), nouns (cf., (2)) and adjectives (cf., (3)) may take clausal complements that are either introduced by complementizers, such as that (cf., (1a), (2), (3a)) and whether/if (cf., (1b), (3b)), or by wh-elements (cf., (1c), (3c)).


(1) a. I believe that John left

b. She asked me whether/if John was drunk

c. I know who left

(2) The news that John is missing shocked Alan

(3) a. I am happy that you liked my present

b. I am not sure whether/if you received my email

c. I am not sure who she is


Regarding the structural representation of clausal complements, by and large, two major approaches have been put forward, within the generative literature: On one view, dating back to Emonds (1970) and Stowell (1981), a complement clause is “sentential” in nature (CP); on another view, tracing back to Rosenbaum (1967), a complement clause is “nominal” in nature (CP headed by N). This workshop seeks to bring together accounts that belong to the “nominal” camp of clausal complementation. Some questions to be addressed during the workshop are:

a) How is the complement clause combined with the main clause?

b) What is the status of the element that introduces the complement clause?

c) Is the complementizer placed inside or outside the C-layer?

d) Is clausal complementation an instance of nominalization or relativization?

e) What is the role of (c-/s-)selection?

f) Is there any other kind of syntactic/semantic licensing?

g) Can the nominal approach extend to the selection of wh-clauses?

h) Do clausal complements constitute a unitary phenomenon?


Invited Speakers

• Maria Rita Manzini, Università degli Studi di Firenze (University of Florence)

• Keir Moulton, University of Toronto


Organizing committee

Christos Vlachos & Konstantina Balasi, University of Patras

Contact person: Konstantina Balasi (k.balasi@upnet.gr)

Abstract submission guidelines

Abstracts should meet the following submission guidelines:

• Abstracts must be anonymous and should not exceed two pages, including data, references, and diagrams.

• Abstracts should be typed in Times New Roman, 11-point font size and be single spaced.

• Each author may submit up to two abstracts: either one single-authored and one co-authored or two co-authored.

Please submit your abstract by 8th February 2021 through the EasyChair platform at the address given below: https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=nacc2021

Notification of acceptance will be sent by 26th March 1st April 2021.

Please note that presentations should be 30 minutes long, followed by a 10-minute discussion. Also, due to the online nature of the workshop, poster presentations will be accepted as lightning talks that should be 15 minutes long, followed by a 5-minute discussion.

Important dates

• Second call for papers: January 4, 2021

• Abstract submission deadline: January 15, 2021

• Abstract submission deadline - extended: February 8, 2021

• Notification of acceptance: March 26 April 1, 2021

• Workshop day: May 27, 2021

Selected Bibliography

  • Abney, Steven. 1987. The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.

  • Aboh, Enoch. 2005. Deriving relative and factive clauses, In L. Brugè, G. Giusti, N. Munaro, W. Schweikert, G. Turano (eds.) Contributions to the thirtieth Incontro di Grammatica Generativa. 265-285. Venezia: Liberia Editrice Cafoscarina.

  • Adger, David, and Josep Quer. 2001. The syntax and semantics of unselected embedded questions. Language 77/1, 107-133.

  • Agouraki, Yoryia. 2005. WH-clauses in dp-positions. In Advances in Greek Generative Syntax, eds. Melita Stavrou and Arhonto Terzi. Vol. 76 of Linguistik aktuell /linguistics today, 285-329. John Benjamins Publishing Company

  • Alrenga, Peter. 2005. A sentential subject asymmetry in English and its implications for complement selection. Syntax 8: 175–207.

  • Angelopoulos, Nikolaos. 2019. Complementizers as probes: insights from Greek. Doctoral Dissertation, UCLA.

  • Arsenijević, Boban. 2009. Clausal complementation as relativization. Lingua 119: 39-50.

  • Baunaz, Lena. 2015. On the various sizes of complementizers. Probus 27. 193–236.

  • Baunaz, Lena and Eric Lander. 2017. Syncretisms with nominal complementizers. Studia Linguistica 72. 537-570.

  • Bhatt, Rajesh. 2010. Comments on “Referential CPs and DPs: An operator movement account”. Theoretical Linguistics 36:173–177.

  • Bianchi, Valentina. 2002. Headed Relative Clauses in Generative Syntax. Glot International, 6(7), 197-204; 6(8), 1-13.

  • Bošković, Željko. 1997. The Syntax of Non-finite Complementation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

  • Bresnan, Joan W. 1972. Theory of complementation in English syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.

  • Chomsky, Noam. 1977. On wh movement. In Culicover, Peter W., Thomas Wasow & Adrian Akmajian (eds.), Formal syntax, 71–132. Academic Press, New York,

  • Dayal, Veneeta. 1996. Locality in Wh-quantification: Questions and Relative Clauses in Hindi. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers

  • Dayal, Veneeta. 2016. Questions. Oxford: Oxford University Press

  • de Cuba, Carlos & Barbara Ürögdi. 2010. Clearing up the ‘facts’ in complementation. UPenn Working Papers in Linguistics 16. 41-50.

  • de Cuba, Carlos. 2017. Noun complement clauses as referential modifiers. Glossa 2:1– 46

  • de Vries, Mark. 2002. The Syntax of relativization. Utrecht: LOT Publishing.

  • Davies, William D. and Stanley Dubinsky. 2009. On the existence (and distribution) of sentential subjects. In Donna B. Gerdts, John C. Moore J. C. & Maria Polinksy (eds.), Hypothesis A/hypothesis B: Linguistic explorations in honor of David M. Perlmutter, 111-128. Cambridge, MA; MIT Press.

  • Franco, Ludovico. 2012. Against the identity of complementizers and (demonstrative) pronouns. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 48. 565-596.

  • Emonds, Joseph. 1970. Root and structure-preserving transformations. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT

  • Grimshaw, Jane. 1979. Complement selection and the lexicon. Linguistic Inquiry 10, 279–326

  • Haegeman, Liliane, and Barbara Urogdi. 2010. Referential CPs and DPs: An operator movement account. Theoretical Linguistics 36:111–152.

  • Haegeman, Liliane. 2012. Adverbial clauses, main clause phenomena, and the composition of the left periphery. In The Cartography of Syntactic Structures 8. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199858774.001.0001.

  • Heim, Irene, and Angelika Kratzer. 1998. Semantics in Generative Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell

  • Hicks, Glyn. 2009. Tough-constructions and their derivation. Linguistic Inquiry 40, 535–566.

  • Hooper, Joan. B., 1975. On assertive predicates. In John P. Kimball (ed.), Syntax and Semantics IV, 91–124. New York: Academic Press

  • Karttunen, Lauri, 1977. Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 1: 3-44.

  • Kastner, Itamar. 2015. Factivity mirrors interpretation: the selectional requirements of Kayne, Richard. 1994. The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Kayne, Richard. 2010. Why isn’t this a complementizer? In Richard Kayne, Comparisons and contrasts, 190-227. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 190- 227

  • Kiparsky, Paul, and Carol Kiparsky. 1971. Fact. In Danny Steinberg and Leon Jakobovits (eds.), Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader in philosophy, linguistics and psychology, 345–369. Cambridge University Press.

  • Koster, Jan. 1978. Why subject sentences don’t exist. In Samuel Keyser (ed.), Recent transformational studies in European languages, 53–64. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

  • Krapova, Iliana. 2010. Bulgarian relative and factive clauses with an invariant complementizer. Lingua 120. 1240-1272.

  • Krapova, Iliana and Guglielmo Cinque. 2015. On noun clausal “complements” and their non-unitary nature. http://lear.unive.it/jspui/handle/11707/164.

  • Kratzer, Angelika. 2006. Decomposing attitude verbs. Ms. UMass, Amherst.

  • Lahiri, Utpal. 2002. Questions in Embedded Contexts. Boston: MIT Press.

  • Manzini, M. Rita, and Leonardo Savoia. 2003. The nature of complementizers. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 28:87–110

  • Manzini, M. Rita. 2010. The structure and interpretation of (Romance) complementizers. In Phoevos Panagiotidis (ed.), The complementizer phase, 167-199. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Manzini, M. Rita. 2014. The Romance k- complementizers. In Svenonius, Peter (ed.), Functional structure from top to toe. The cartography of Syntactic structures 9, 148–187. New York: Oxford University Press

  • Moulton, Keir. 2009. Natural Selection and the Syntax of Clausal Complementation. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

  • Moulton, Keir. 2015. CPs: copies and compositionality. Linguistic Inquiry 46: 305–342

  • Oehl, Peter. 2007. Unselected embedded interrogatives in German and English. S- selection as dependency formation. Linguistische Berichte 212, 403-437.

  • Pesetsky, David. 1991. Zero syntax, vol. II. Unpublished manuscript, MIT.

  • Roberts, Ian and Anna Roussou. 2003. Syntactic change. A minimalist approach to grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

  • Rosenbaum, Peter S. 1967. The Grammar of English Predicate Complement Constructions. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

  • Ross, J. Robert. n.d. Conjunctive and disjunctive wh-clauses. Unpublished manuscript, University of North Texas.

  • Ross, J. Robert. 1967. Constraints on variables in syntax. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass

  • Roussou, Anna. 1994. The syntax of complementizers. Doctoral Dissertation, University College London.

  • Roussou, Anna. 2010. Selecting complementizers. Lingua 120:582-603.

  • Sheehan, Michelle and Hinzen, Wolfram. 2011. Moving towards the edge. Linguistic Analysis 37: 1-54.

  • Stowell, Tim. 1981. Origins of phrase structure. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT

  • Takahashi, Shoichi. 2010. The hidden side of clausal complements. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 28: 343-380.

  • Uegaki, Wataru. 2016. Content Nouns and the Semantics of Question Embedding, Journal of Semantics 33: 623-66. https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffv009

  • Vlachos, Christos and Konstantina Balasi. 2020. Conjunctive wh-clauses as nominal complements: A reclassification of antirrogative predicates. Paper presented at ISTAL 24 (Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 03 October 2020)