The Subject Agreement Cycle

2011 ◽  
pp. 37-85
Author(s):  
Elly van Gelderen
Keyword(s):  
The Subject ◽  
Subject Agreement

Reflexive constructions in German, Spanish, and French as a product of cyclic interaction

2021 ◽  
pp. 137-164
Author(s):  
Matthew L. Maddox ◽  
Jonathan E. MacDonald
Keyword(s):  
Old French ◽  
Null Subject ◽  
Reflexive Pronoun ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Subject Agreement ◽  
Categorial Status

German sich and Spanish se can have reflexive or anticausative interpretations but only Spanish se can have a passive interpretation. We argue that Spanish Passse is the result of interaction between the subject agreement cycle and the reflexive object cycle. We make two claims: i) pro merges in Spec-Voice in Passse, due to the subject agreement cycle; and ii) se heads Voice due to the reflexive cycle. The types of reflexive constructions a language has depends on the presence/absence of pro and the categorial status of the reflexive pronoun (head or DP). French appears problematic since it has Passse but lacks subject pro. However, Passse existed in Old French (Cennamo 1993), which was a null subject language (Vance 1997). Thus, French is consistent with this claim; i.e., it developed Passse when it had subject pro and se as a head. Passse survived into Modern French as a historical remnant.

scholarly journals Re-examining the relationship between the subject agreement morpheme and (in)definiteness in Northern Sotho

Literator ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mampaka L. Mojapelo
Keyword(s):  
Noun Phrase ◽  
Noun Phrases ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Primary Role ◽  
Northern Sotho ◽  
Class 1 ◽  
Subject Noun ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Subject Agreement

The grammatical position of the subject noun phrase in Northern Sotho is to the left of the predicate. The subject agreement morpheme is a compulsory link between the subject noun phrase and the predicate. Scholars have examined the role of this morpheme from various perspectives. It is also extensively documented that the morpheme has dual functions. Its primary function is to mark agreement between the subject and the predicate. Its secondary function is pronominal, whereby it is co-referenced to some antecedent. This article reexamined the primary role of the subject agreement morpheme in Northern Sotho in relation to the interpretation of a subject noun phrase as definite or indefinite. This was accomplished by (1) revisiting existing works that are directly or indirectly linked to (in)definiteness and subject agreement, (2) analysing texts that may facilitate discussion on the issue, and (3) relating the findings from previous works to current analyses. The first hypothesis in this article was that when some class 9 subject noun phrases, denoting persons, agree with the verb stem by a class 1 agreement morpheme, the noun phrases are interpreted as definite. The second hypothesis was that although the subject position is considered predominantly topical and definite it may not categorically exclude indefinite noun phrases. Therefore some indefinite noun phrases may also agree with predicates by means of this morpheme.

The emergence of creole subject–verb agreement and the licensing of null subjects

2000 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miriam Meyerhoff
Keyword(s):  
Solomon Islands ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Null Subjects ◽  
Null Subject ◽  
Verb Agreement ◽  
Person Features ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Subject Agreement ◽  
Finite Clause ◽  
Consistent Support

A corpus of conversational Bislama (a Melanesian creole spoken in Vanuatu, related to Tok Pisin and Solomon Islands Pijin) suggests that during the 20th century the creole has developed a set of regular inflectional morphemes on the verb that agree in person and number with the subject of the finite clause. It is shown that, where the agreement paradigm is referentially richest, the language is also beginning to grammaticize a tendency towards phonetically null subjects (pro-drop). Three possible analyses of the Bislama verb phrase are evaluated; consistent support for only one is found in the spoken Bislama corpus. The resulting paradigm of subject–verb agreement (i, oli, and Ø) is analyzed in terms of the historical development of Bislama. It is argued that the synchronic agreement marking reflects properties derived from (i) the lexifier (English), (ii) the substrate languages, and (iii) universal grammar. No one component fully accounts for the patterns of agreement marking observed. Instead, a synthesis of all three is required, as previously observed by, for example, G. Sankoff (1984) and Mufwene (1996). Substrate languages provide a model for subject agreement prefixing on the verb; the person features associated with the lexifier ‘he’ continue to be reflected in the distribution of Bislama i; and phonetically null subjects are emerging as the norm where the agreement paradigm best serves to identify the subject referent. This is consonant with generative accounts of null subject systems. Parallels with other languages (e.g., Italian, Franco-Provençal, Hebrew, Finnish) are examined.

scholarly journals Phonological allomorphy in Swahili on the form of inanimate pronominal clitics

1987 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 263-298
Author(s):  
Camillia N. Barrett-Keach
Keyword(s):  
Semantic Feature ◽  
The Other ◽  
Present Account ◽  
Basic Assumptions ◽  
Segmental Phonology ◽  
Phonological Rule ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Subject Agreement ◽  
Relative Pronouns ◽  
Verbal Complex

Swahili has two forms of inanimate pronominal clitics. One, like the relative pronouns, typically ends with /o/ and the other, like the subject agreement affixes, are never /o/ final. According to the traditionalists, a semantic feature associated with /o/ differentiates two sets of clitics semantically as well as phonetically. The present account argues that the two sets do not form separate morphemes. They are instead allomorphs of the same morpheme derived by a phonological rule, o-Epenthesis, which suffixes /o/ onto any constituent final pronominal clitic. This virtually exceptionless account provides synchronic evidence for a dual constituent analysis of the verbal complex. The discussion of such well known forms adopts basic assumptions from lexical and auto segmental phonology.

Agreeing How? Implications for Theories of Agreement and Locality

2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vicki Carstens ◽  
Michael Diercks
Keyword(s):  
Traditional Notion ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Subject Agreement ◽  
Locative Inversion ◽  
Subject Extraction ◽  
Insight Into

In Lubukusu and Lusaamia, the wh-expression ‘how’ agrees in φ-features with the subject of its clause. We show that agreement on ‘how’ is not always identical to subject agreement on the verb: the two diverge in certain locative inversion and subject extraction environments. On the basis of these facts, we argue that ‘how’ is a vP adjunct with downward-probing uφ independent of the uφ that underlies subject agreement. We also explore locality paradoxes that arise in connection with agreeing ‘how’ in locative inversion constructions. These present challenges to the traditional notion of equidistance from a probe as an explanation for inversion, show that operators may have ‘‘active’’ φ-features even while they are Ā-opaque, and offer insight into the mechanisms making locative inversion possible.

Infinitival Clauses in the Romance Languages

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guido Mensching
Keyword(s):  
Special Property ◽  
Prepositional Phrase ◽  
Romance Languages ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Object Control ◽  
Different Types ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Infinitival Clauses ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Subject Agreement

“Infinitival clauses” are constructions with a clausal status whose predicate is an infinitive. Romance infinitive clauses are mostly dependent clauses and can be divided into the following types: argumental infinitival clauses (such as subject and object clauses, the latter also including indirect interrogatives), predicative infinitival clauses, infinitival adjunct clauses, infinitival relative clauses, and nominalized infinitive clauses (with a determiner). More rarely, they appear as independent (main) clauses (root infinitival clauses) of different types, which usually have a marked character. Whereas infinitival adjunct clauses are generally preceded by prepositions, which can be argued to be outside the infinitival clause proper (i.e., the clause is part of a prepositional phrase), Romance argumental infinitive clauses are often introduced by complementizers that are diachronically derived from prepositions, mostly de/di and a/à. In most Romance languages, the infinitive itself is morphologically marked by an ending containing the morpheme {r} but lacks tense and agreement morphemes. However, some Romance languages have developed an infinitive that can be inflected for subject agreement (which is found in Portuguese, Galician, and Sardinian and also attested in Old Neapolitan). Romance languages share the property of English and other languages to leave the subject of infinitive clauses unexpressed (subject/object control, arbitrary control, and optional control) and also have raising and accusative-and-infinitive constructions. A special property of many Romance languages is the possibility of overtly expressing a nominative subject in infinitival clauses, mostly in postverbal position. The tense of the infinitive clause is usually interpreted as simultaneous or anterior to that of the matrix clause, but some matrix predicates and infinitive constructions trigger a posteriority/future reading. In addition, some Romance infinitive clauses are susceptible to constraints concerning aspect and modality.

scholarly journals Body as subject

2007 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 531-563 ◽  
Author(s):  
IRIT MEIR ◽  
CAROL A. PADDEN ◽  
MARK ARONOFF ◽  
WENDY SANDLER
Keyword(s):  
The Body ◽  
Human Language ◽  
States Of Affairs ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Verb Agreement ◽  
Lexical Structure ◽  
Privileged Status ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Subject Agreement ◽  
Iconic Signs

The notion of subject in human language has a privileged status relative to other arguments. This special status is manifested in the behavior of subjects at the morphological, syntactic, semantic and discourse levels. Here we present evidence that subjects have a privileged status at the lexical level as well, by analyzing lexicalization patterns of verbs in three different sign languages. Our analysis shows that the sub-lexical structure of iconic signs denoting states of affairs in these languages manifests an inherent pattern of form–meaning correspondence: the signer's body consistently represents one argument of the verb, the subject. The hands, moving in relation to the body, represent all other components of the event – including all other arguments. This analysis shows that sign languages provide novel evidence in support of the centrality of the notion of subject in human language. It also solves a typological puzzle about the apparent primacy of object in sign language verb agreement, a primacy not usually found in spoken languages, in which subject agreement generally ranks higher. Our analysis suggests that the subject argument is represented by the body and is part of the lexical structure of the verb. Because it is always inherently represented in the structure of the sign, the subject is more basic than the object, and tolerates the omission of agreement morphology.

scholarly journals Sorani Kurdish and Minimalism

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 465
Author(s):  
Hiba Esmail Gharib
Keyword(s):  
Good Explanation ◽  
Past Tense ◽  
The Past ◽  
The World ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Subject Agreement ◽  
Syntactic Theories

Sorani is a dialect of Kurdish that is spoken in many countries of the world. In Sorani there is an agreement marker that appears on the verb and makes the verb agrees with the subject in person and number. A close examination of the nature of the agreement marker in Sorani shows that it is not obvious whether it is a suffix or a clitic. In this research I will discuss the properties of the affixes and clitics in general, and then apply them to the data in Sorani to decide whether the agreement marker is an affix or a clitic. The agreement marker in Sorani in the past tense verbs requires reconsideration as in the past tense; the agreement marker appears on the object instead of the verb. Subject agreement in Sorani is considered a challenge to the syntactic theories as there is no good explanation available to understand this phenomenon. In my research will explore the nature of this agreement marker as this would be the key to explaining the agreement phenomenon in Sorani.

scholarly journals Aurelia Mallya: Locative-subject alternation constructions in Kiwoso

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Aurelia Mallya
Keyword(s):  
Strong Evidence ◽  
Discourse Function ◽  
Verb Agreement ◽  
Grammatical Subject ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Subject Agreement

Locative subject alternation constructions show variation within and across languages in terms of subject agreement pattern and the type of predicates involved. In Kiwoso, the preverbal locative DPs with and without locative morphology are best analysed as canonical subjects, as evidenced by the subject diagnostics, such as subject-verb agreement and its occurrence as a subject of passive verb and relative verb clauses. The examined examples demonstrate that the postverbal subject neither behaves like canonical subject nor shows features of canonical object in that it cannot passivize in alternation constructions or appear on the verb as an object marker (i.e., cannot be object marked). However, there is strong evidence to suggest that the preverbal locative (subject) DP in Kiwoso locative-subject alternation constructions is a grammatical subject. As in most languages, locative-subject constructions in Kiwoso serve a pragmatic-discourse function of presentational focus. The locative subject argument of the locative-subject alternation constructions is interpreted as a topic, whereas the postverbal thematic subject of these sentences is understood as focus. The postverbal subject provides information which is usually discourse new in relation to preverbal locative DPs. The data examined from Kiwoso challenges the view that formal and semantic locative inversions cannot co-exist in a single language.

The subject agreement–accusative case connection in Turkish

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 117-160
Author(s):  
Cem Keskin
Keyword(s):  
Single Source ◽  
Basic Premise ◽  
Case Assignment ◽  
Accusative Case ◽  
The World ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Subject Agreement ◽  
Structural Case ◽  
Structural Object ◽  
The Relationship

This article is on the relationship between case and agreement. A noun phrase is assigned the structural case that it bears through agreement with a functional head. Several recent works assume this thesis, referred to as the George and Kornfilt Thesis, as a basic premise to provide an account of structural case assignment. The central thesis of the article is that there is at least one more dependency that needs to be assumed in case phenomena, namely that, in some languages of the world, structural object case, or more particularly accusative case, is dependent on subject agreement—the Subject Agreement–Accusative Case Conjecture. The article proposes the Jump-start Hypothesis in order to explain this dependency. According to this hypothesis, in a finite construction, case assignment to each argument is activated by a single source of agreement. The argumentation relies on data from Turkish nominalizations and restructuring infinitives.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document