Nominal number in cushitic

Cushitic languages have a number of interesting properties in the category of number. None of these are valid for all Cushitic languages. Number is not obligatorily expressed in various Cushitic languages which have a general number form that is unspecified for number. Nonetheless morphological number marking in the noun is often complex in two ways: there are many competing lexically determined morphological markers and many different constellations of derived singular and derived plurals. Number and gender show complex interactions in Cushitic. Number formatives impose gender and hence different gender values for different number forms in the same lexeme, sometimes apparent gender polarity (singular and plural having opposite values for gender). A theoretically challenging property of some languages is that that there is a third gender, here labelled ‘plural’ because it takes the agreement morphology of 3pl pronouns.

Pro-drop in interrogatives across older Germanic and Romance languages

This chapter investigates the mechanisms of null subject licensing in direct interrogatives, an environment which is generally neglected in investigation into null subjects, using data from a range of early Romance and Germanic languages considered to be asymmetric pro-drop languages, i.e. languages in which null subjects are favoured in main clauses. We find that there is subtle variation between the languages in question, but that two factors in particular – interrogative type and person – are crucial in conditioning this variation, and we sketch analyses based on the differential availability of Agree relations with left-peripheral elements. Therefore, null subjects in main interrogative clauses are licensed in two slightly different manners in the two language families – a fact which we show follows from differences in the structure of their left periphery and in agreement morphology

Agreement morphology errors and null subjects in young (non-)CLIL learners

There is a wealth of studies on L2 English acquisition in CLIL contexts in Spain, but most have underexplored the potential impact of CLIL in the longer run on the morphosyntax of earlier starters from monolingual regions. This paper fills this gap by exploring agreement morphology errors and subject omission in the oral production of Primary Education English learners from the Spanish monolingual community of Cantabria. The sample investigated consists of the individual narration of a story by learners in two age-matched (11-12 year-olds) groups, one CLIL (n=28) and one non- CLIL (n=35). The results show no statistically significant differences between both groups for the provision of specific linguistic features at a younger age, though some evidence also points to a subtle effect of additional CLIL exposure. Both groups show moderately low rates of null subjects; they omit affixal morphology (*he eat ) significantly more frequently than suppletive inflection (*he _ eating) and they seldom produce commission errors (*they eats). Interestingly, non-CLIL learners show far greater rates of omission with auxiliary be than copula be and frequently use the placeholder is (*he is eat), which evinces an earlier stage of acquisition than that of CLIL learners.

Acquisition of null objects in Mandarin Chinese by heritage speakers

The acquisition of the grammatical knowledge related to inflectional morphology and syntax-pragmatics interface have both been shown to be challenging for heritage speakers (e.g., Montrul et al. 2008; Polinsky 2006, 2008; Sorace et al. 2009; Montrul 2009; Benmamoun et al. 2013a; Laleko & Polinsky 2016). In these previous work on heritage language acquisition, the acquisition of inflectional morphology (e.g. either agreement morphology or topic marking) is also a relevant acquisition task associated with the syntax-discourse phenomena under investigation. In this paper we focus on the acquisition of discourse-conditioned structures by heritage speakers when inflectional morphology is not part of the learning task. Specifically, we report results of a picture-verification experiment focusing on English-dominant heritage Chinese speakers’ grammatical knowledge of null objects. As a topic-prominent language lacking verbal tense/agreement morphology, the licensing and identification of null arguments in Chinese has nothing to do with agreement morphology. In addition, unlike other topic-prominent pro-drop languages, Chinese has no inflectional morphology associated with grammatical subjects/objects and topic phrases. Without the interference of co-occurring inflectional morphology, we found that there is no significant difference between heritage Chinese speakers and the monolingual baseline in their acceptance of null objects in contextually appropriate contexts. The results of our study cast doubt on the thesis that heritage speakers are unable to acquire discourse-related knowledge (cf. Sorace & Serratrice 2009; Laleko 2010; Laleko & Polinsky 2016) and support Yuan’s (2010) claim that interface categories should not be considered holistically.

Do simple syntactic heuristics to verb meaning hold up? Testing the structure mapping account over spontaneous speech to Spanish-learning children

Experimental research has shown that English-learning children as young as 19 months, as well as children learning other languages (e.g., Mandarin), infer some aspects of verb meanings by mapping the nominal elements in the utterance onto participants in the event expressed by the verb. The present study assessed this structure or analogical mapping mechanism (SAMM) on naturalistic speech in the linguistic environment of 20 Spanish-learning infants from Argentina (average age 19 months). This study showed that the SAMM performs poorly – at chance level – especially when only noun phrases (NPs) included in experimental studies of the SAMM were parsed. If agreement morphology is considered, the performance is slightly above chance but still very poor. In addition, it was found that the SAMM performs better on intransitive and transitive verbs, compared to ditransitives. Agreement morphology has a beneficial effect only on transitive and ditransitive verbs. On the whole, concerns are raised about the role of the SAMM in infants’ interpretation of verb meaning in natural exchanges.

Kanuri DP Hypothesis: A Minimalist Approach

This paper examines the structure of Kanuri DP (structure) Hypothesis within the framework of Abney (1987) and Chomsky (1995) Minimalist Programme (MP). In conducting the research, the researcher uses his native speaker intuition and other three competent native speakers of Kanuri to validate the data of this study. The study identifies Kanuri determiners as post head modifier language. The study identifies also two types of demonstrative modifiers –near and far demonstratives. The near demonstratives agree with their head nouns while the far demonstratives take both singular and plural head nouns. The far demonstratives do not show any form of agreement morphology between the nouns and their demonstrative modifiers. The analysis of DP Hypothesis shows the NP complement moves to the specifier position in the surface syntax which give rise to complement-head (C-H) order. The study further analyzes possessives, demonstratives and quantifiers under the DP hypothesis. The outcome of the study reveals that possessive determiner ‘nde’ (our) is base generated at the possessive position, moves and fills the D position under the DP in Kanuri while the far demonstrative ‘tudu’ (that) is also base generated at the Dem. Position of the determiner phrase (DP) -hence the D position is strong head position moves and fills the D position and the noun ‘fato’ (house) moves to the specifier position of the determiner phrase (DP) in order to check agreement feature in Kanuri.

Agreeing Adpositions in Avar and The Directionality-of-Valuation Debate

Given the central spot afforded to unvalued features in current theorizing, the directionality of feature valuation is the subject of a lively debate in the syntactic literature. The traditional conception of upward valuation, whereby the unvalued probe inherits features from a valued goal in its c-command domain ( Chomsky 2000 , 2001 , Carstens and Diercks 2013 , Preminger 2013 ), has to compete with downward valuation ( Zeijlstra 2012 ), Hybrid Agree ( Bjorkman and Zeijlstra 2019 ), and bidirectional Agree ( Baker 2008 ), among others. Here, using data from Avar, I discuss the crosslinguistically rare phenomenon of adposition agreement, whereby certain adverbs, postpositions, and locative case forms undergo agreement with an absolutive argument. I set the stage by sketching the mechanism of case assignment and argument-predicate agreement in Avar ( section 1 ) and introducing the phenomenon of adposition agreement ( section 2 ). I then show that the agreement morphology on agreeing adpositions is a result of agreement rather than concord ( section 3 ). In sections 4 – 5 , I explore the consequences of adposition agreement in Avar for upward and downward valuation, concluding that upward valuation is better equipped to account for the observed patterns. In section 6 , I summarize the results of the discussion.

Agreement Morphology

Agreement is defined as the systematic covariance of one element with another. The most uncontroversial agreement configuration is that between a controller—an element intrinsically specified for a value of an agreement feature—and the target of agreement—the element reflecting a displaced feature value of the controller. The distribution of morphological agreement markers is however much wider than controller–target configurations: targets can express agreement values for features that are not visible on the controller and even show agreement morphology in the absence of a lexical controller. A second source of variation is due to the fact that in certain contexts there is a choice between syntactic agreement (with formal features of the controller) and semantic agreement (with semantic features of the referent of the controller). The choice between syntactic and semantic agreement is correlated in part with cross-linguistically observed regularities that have been formulated as the agreement hierarchy and the animacy hierarchy. Agreement morphology harnesses the same morphological devices found with derivation and inflection. Like inflectional morphology more generally, agreement morphology is only present in a subset of the world’s languages.

Czech analytic agreement and the characteristics of little pro

This study deals with subject predicate agreement in Czech and the structure of a null subject. First, it introduces the concept of Null Subject Languages as it has been used in a generative framework. Then it shows the complex feature content of the Czech subject-predicate agreement morphology, arguing that the data repeatedly signal a division of the agreement features into two clear cut feature sets and two distinct agreement domains: (a) the lower, lexical domain inside vP containing the nominal n[±φ] feature set (Gender and N-Number), and (b) the higher, functional domain on the T head, which contains the functional D[±φ] feature set (Person and D-Number). The study relates the analysis to the present day microparametric concept of a Null Subject Parameter as in, e. g., the studies in Biberauer (2010), accepting the hypothesis of the checking of the subject-predicate agreement with two levels of predicate (separate heads v and T). It proposes that with pronominal subjects, the φ feature values can be re-set with respect to the speech act information located in the Aboutness Topic. Given the several levels of agreement, each of which can be licensed by a zero morpheme, the study proposes that pro is a complex entity consisting of two separate parts, each endowed with a distinct set of φ features.