Microvariation in Verbal and Nominal Agreement: An Analysis of Two Lombard Alpine Dialects

In Bregagliotto and Mesolcinese, two Lombard Alpine dialects, feminine plural agreement/concord is marked by the formative -n, a reflex of the third person plural verbal ending. In Bregagliotto, plural -n triggers mesoclisis of the feminine subject clitic in contexts of inversion, whereas in the noun phrase -n behaves as a second-position element marking plural feminine concord. Mesolcinese exhibits verbal gender agreement as the formative -n occurs on the inflected verb whenever a feminine plural subject or the feminine plural object clitic occurs; in feminine plural DPs, -n is attached to any element except the definite article. I argue that the Bregagliotto system emerged when -n was reanalysed as an adjunct pluraliser, whereas in Mesolcinese -n has been turned into a marker of morphophonological concord/agreement.

Microvariation in Verbal and Nominal Agreement: An Analysis of Two Lombard Alpine Dialects

In Bregagliotto and Mesolcinese, two Lombard Alpine dialects, feminine plural agreement/concord is marked by the formative -n, a reflex of the third person plural verbal ending. In Bregagliotto, plural -n triggers mesoclisis of the feminine subject clitic in contexts of inversion, whereas in the noun phrase -n behaves as a second-position element marking plural feminine concord. Mesolcinese exhibits verbal gender agreement as the formative -n occurs on the inflected verb whenever a feminine plural subject or the feminine plural object clitic occurs; in feminine plural DPs, -n is attached to any element except the definite article. I argue that the Bregagliotto system emerged when -n was reanalysed as an adjunct pluraliser, whereas in Mesolcinese -n has been turned into a marker of morphophonological concord/agreement.

The Marxist Tradition Against the Grain Anna Yegorova. Rethinking the Category of Class: Tempora Multa of the Plural Subject

The author develops the concept of plural temporality as a tool for revising the Marxist tradition. This concept was not explicitly formulated by Marx, but the author maintains that it takes a latent form in those of his works which expose the inadequacy of understanding historical development through a linear model or as unfolding in stages. The author finds traces of plural temporality in the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right where Marx contrasts the modernity of German philosophy with the anachronistic nature of the German state. The article outlines the concept’s growing influence over a series of works from the Manifesto of the Communist Party to The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte. However, it is most distinct in two later texts by Marx devoted to the Russian rural commune (obshchina). Marx notes its unprecedented historical character as a product of pre-capitalist social relations that is nevertheless contemporary with capitalism. Therefore, it is not so a hindrance to the development of capitalism in Russia, but more a model of the type of collective labor and collective property that are an alternative to capitalism. Marx thought that the future revolution, if it happens at the “appropriate time,” would necessarily establish the free development of the rural community and the superiority of Russian society over those countries in which capitalism dominates. The author analyzes the works of Marx’s followers who already consciously use the concept and metaphors of plural temporality in their works such as Ernest Bloch, Antonio Gramsci and Louis Althusser. In conclusion, the concept of plural temporality is not meant to completely refute the idea of a continuous course for history, but instead to elucidate its complex and contingent nature.

Broken plurals and (mis)matching of ɸ-features in Tunisian Arabic

The aim of this paper is to explain an unusual agreement pattern that arises between Tunisian Arabic broken plurals and their targets. For example, a verb may agree with a plural subject in all ɸ-features or, rather oddly, in singular/feminine, even when the subject (the controller) is masculine plural. Developing an idea first briefly sketched—but ultimately not adopted—by Zabbal (2002), we argue that broken plurals are hybrid nouns. Hybrid nouns have been the topic of much recent research (Corbett, 2000, 2015; den Dikken, 2001; Wechsler and Zlatić, 2003; Danon, 2011, 2013; Matushansky, 2013; Landau, 2015; Smith, 2015): either their syntactic or semantic features can be the target of agreement, creating the possibility of an agreement mismatch. Using Harbour’s (2011, 2014) theory of number, coupled with some innovations, we provide the featural make-up of Tunisian Arabic broken plurals and contrast it with that of collectives, on the one hand, and sound plurals, on the other. We propose that the feminine agreement seen with broken plurals is associated with a [+ group] feature, one that is exponed as -a. In the course of the discussion, we will argue that all gender features are visible at LF (Hammerly, 2018) and that semantic agreement is routinely possible with nouns that are low on the Animacy Hierarchy.

Aesthetic Perspectives in Group Decision and Negotiation Practice

This paper explores the role of the aesthetics in Group Decision and Negotiation (GDN) practice, specifically how it affects the methods and the cognitive processes in the architectural field. We intend aesthetics as “scientia cognitionis sensitivæ”, a particular process and way of knowing and experiencing the problem through senses, imagination and empathy. We argue that (a) aesthetics and aesthetic features can (and do) convey knowledge about the problem; (b) we can distinguish between two kinds of aesthetics, one of the process and one of the product and (c) the aesthetics can contribute to create a “plural subject”. The issue is investigated through a decision problem about the transformation of an iconic building in the centre of Turin (Italy), in two ways: (1) by merging the Strategic Choice Approach (SCA) with architectural design and (2) by approaching the same issue with Storytelling, as a method for problem-based instruction. Considering the aesthetics as a specific form of language, the paper offers innovative considerations about the role of representation and visualisation tools and models—drawing, scheme, diagrams, but also video and text—as support for group decisions and negotiations, in the construction of knowledge within decisional processes.

The Korean hortative construction revisited

This paper revisits the hortative -ca construction in Korean from a usage-based perspective, examining its functions in natural interactional spoken data The examination of the actual occurrence of -ca reveals its various functions: -ca indicates that the performer of the focal-event encoded in the utterance may be 1st person plural subject, i.e., the speaker and other interlocutors; 2nd person, i.e., the addressee(s); 1st person, i.e., the speaker; and 3rd person. Our findings provide direct evidence for the different degrees of prototypicality among these functions, which are reflected in their different frequency counts. Furthermore, this study proposes two novel functions of ca, the accordant imperative (to demand that the addressee agree with the speaker that the addressee perform the focal-event) and the speaker hortative (to ask the addressee to perform an action so that the speaker him-/herself can perform the focal-event).

Analysis of Deixis in the Subtitle Movie of “First Kiss”

The objective of this research is to analyze the type and its examples of deixis found in the subtitle movie of “First Kiss”. This research method of this method is qualitative methodology. In data collection, the research use document analysis in this research. The result of this research shows that three types of deixis found in the subtitle movie of “First Kiss” movie such as a person, time, and place deixis. In-person deixis, the deictic expressions are the personal pronoun “I” as a singular subject pronoun, ‘Me” as singular object pronoun, “My” as a possessive adjective, “We” as a plural subject pronoun, “Us” as object pronoun, “Our” as a possessive adjective. In the second person, they are “You” as a subject and object pronoun, and “Your” as an object pronoun. The third person “He” as a subject pronoun, “Him” as object pronoun, and “His” as a possessive adjective, ‘She” as a subject pronoun, “Her” as object pronoun and as possessive adjective, “It” as subject and object pronoun. In space/spatial/place deixis, the deictic expressions are “here” and “there”. While in the temporal/time deixis, the deictic expressions are “now” and “tomorrow”.

Verbal Anti-Agreement with Non-Human DPs

This paper examines the unexpected verbal anti-agreement with non-human plural subjects in Standard Arabic. In this language, when the plural subject denotes non-humans, the verb fails to establish plural agreement with that subject. Non-human DPs refer to nominals which denote any animate life-form other than humans as well as all inanimate entities. In this paper, I provide two competing analyses to account for this phenomenon. In the first analysis, I build on the assumption (Mohammad, 2000) that preverbal subjects in this language are Topics and argue that the singular number marker on the anti-agreeing verb is the result of establishing partial agreement with the non-human subject in its base-position before movement/dislocation to TopP. In the second account, I borrow Corbett’s (2004) notion of ‘individuated nominals’ where it is assumed that plural nominals can either refer to collective individuals or distinct individuals; subsequently the intended referent dictates agreement on the verb. Hence, I argue that non-human plural subjects are collective nominals that are not individuated, therefore they are inherently singular and the plural marker in this case carries morphosyntactic information that does not affect the inherently imposed singular feature.

A Hegelian Logic of ‘Us’: Implicit Forms and Explicit Representations of Actions and Practices

In order to understand Hegel's gnomic oracle according to which the ‘I’ is a ‘We’, the notion of a personal subject is explained by its competence to perform personal roles in a pre-given partition of roles. Explicit divisions of labour by contractual promises are special cases that presuppose the general case of an already established social practice. On the other hand, methodological individualism is right to stress that we actualize joint intentions only via corresponding instantiations. In performing our parts, we form a plural subject, a we-group. The result of what each of us does is what we do, and the generic ‘We’ turns into the generic ‘I’.