[Lingtyp] neither simple nor complex clause

[Eitan Grossman]

How about sesquiclausal, on the model of sesquisyllabic, which is well
established.

בתאריך יום ג׳, 8 באפר׳ 2025, 10:45, מאת Sylvain Kahane via Lingtyp ‏<
lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>:

> simplex clause = a simple clause with a complex predicate
>
> Le 7 avr. 2025 à 18:16, Christian Lehmann via Lingtyp <
> lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org> a écrit :
>
> Dear colleagues, here is another terminological question.
>
> The following definitions do not claim originality; cf. Martin Haspelmath
> on https://dlc.hypotheses.org/1725.
>
> A *clause* is a construction based on a predicate and comprising its
> dependents. A *simple clause* is a clause comprising one predicate. A *complex
> clause* is a clause comprising more than one clauses.
>
> Now assume a grammatical description organized by levels of grammatical
> complexity. One level is the simple clause, the (apparently) next higher
> level is the complex clause. Grammaticalization teaches us that a complex
> clause may be condensed into a simple clause. The process gives rise to
> constructions halfway between a complex and a simple clause. Thus, there
> are constructions like the following:
>
>    -
>
>    Constructions based on a periphrastic verb form like the famous Vulgar
>    Latin *librum comparatum habeo*.
>    -
>
>    Causative constructions like *She had me rewrite the text*.
>    -
>
>    Constructions such as '[finite_clause] EXIST' in Cabecar (cf. my post
>    of 03/09/24), where the EXISTENTIAL that may appear to be the main
>    predicate is in no way expandable.
>
> Such constructions involve more than one verb form, one of which may, but
> need not be non-finite. There is something like an inner simple clause and
> a component outside its boundaries.
>
>    -
>
>    There are also pseudo-cleft-sentences on their way towards simple
>    clauses, as in Brazilian Portuguese (from Lehmann 2024, ch. 7.1.8.1).
>
>
> Ele
>
> disse
>
> que
>
> vai
>
> para
>
> Piracicaba,
>
> he
>
> said
>
> SR
>
> goes
>
> to
>
> Piracicaba
>
> He said he would go to Piracicaba,
>
> mas
>
> ele
>
> vai
>
> é
>
> para
>
> Manhurimim.
>
> but
>
> he
>
> goes
>
> is
>
> to
>
> Manhurimim
>
> but he does go to Manhurimim.
>
>
>
>    -
>
>    And the collection does not end with focus constructions which show
>    vestiges of being grammaticalized from cleft sentences.
>
> All of these share a simple clause combined with material which is outside
> its proper boundaries but which does not attain the level of a complete
> clause.
>
> I am not asking for definitions which will allow us to call each and every
> of the constructions mentioned a simple or a complex clause. Nor do I wish
> to be taught that these traditional terms are not cross-linguistically
> applicable and that each language has its own levels of grammatical
> structure. If it is true that there are constructions which are not readily
> classifiable as either simple or complex clauses, this by no means entails
> that there are no (simple and/or complex) clauses.
>
> What I am asking for is a practical term that may be used in a grammatical
> description which distinguishes simple and complex clauses and needs a
> chapter heading to comprise constructions which exceed the boundaries of
> the simple clause without being complex clauses. I would be grateful for a
> viable term (no matter whether the concept I propose is well-founded). I
> have in mind something like 'transgressive clause' or 'excessive clause'
> (both adjectives have unwanted connotations) or 'cross-border' or
> 'transboundary clause' (both adjectives appear to require an action noun as
> head). Neither does 'expanded clause' seem to be the term looked for; this
> seems to be well-established to designate a clause that comprises adjuncts,
> thus still a simple clause.
>
> All ideas welcome!
> --
>
> Prof. em. Dr. Christian Lehmann
> Rudolfstr. 4
> 99092 Erfurt
> Deutschland
> Tel.: +49/361/2113417
> E-Post: christianw_lehmann at arcor.de
> Web: https://www.christianlehmann.eu
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20250408/2a0a8aa8/attachment.htm>