2. Overview of the Literature
In section 2.1 I present an overview of the literature that discusses the issue of da-complementation in Serbian. In Section 2.2, I describe the syntactic and semantic approaches to the analysis of Greek particles/complementizers from which my analysis of da in Serbian stems. I conclude this chapter by reviewing the benefits of Progovac’s (2005) syntactic clausal structure proposed for Serbian, which I have adopted for the syntactic analysis of da-complements, discussed later in Chapter Five.
2.1 Different Approaches to the Analysis of da-complementation
Many scholars have analyzed da differently in complement constructions. Some have argued that da is strictly modal (in Croatian Grivičić 2004) while others (Gołąb 1964, Ivić 1970, 1972, 1973, Bibović 1971, Browne 1986, Progovac 1993, Vrzić 1996, Mišeska-Tomić 2003, Radišić 2006) supported the idea that there are two different da(s). Some claim that, although there are two different da(s), they both are complementizers (Browne 1986, Progovac 1993, Vrzić 1996), yet others claim that one da is a subordinator/complementizer while the second da is a particle (Gołąb 1964, Jakab 1999).
Of all the approaches to the analysis of da mentioned in this section, the one that perhaps provides the most exhaustive overview is found in Gołąb (1964). Starting with da+present, Gołąb (1964:6) mentions that not all da+present constructions in Serbo-Croatian should be treated “as dependent (subordinate) clauses comprising the conjunction da and indicative.” He points out that there are two...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.