Case alignment in Kabyle Amazigh

This paper examines the state alternation in Kabyle, arguing that state is the morphological realization of Case. The free state is accusative case, and the construct state is nominative case. Taking morphological patterns and syntactic distribution into account, Kabyle is found to be a Type 2 marked nominative language. Both states, or cases, are morphologically marked. The free state is the default case. This analysis accounts for the bulk of the distribution of free state and construct state nouns, and situates Kabyle as belonging to a typologically rare alignment system that is concentrated in Afroasiatic and African languages.

Strange nominative case in topicalized object pronominal relative clauses

In an online production experiment, we investigated the effect of sentence position on the preference for either a nominative or object form of an object pronoun restricted by a relative clause in Dutch. Results show a significant preference for the nominative form of the restricted object pronoun in sentence-initial position as it was chosen in 95% of the cases. In the original object position this percentage is only 20%. The preference for a nominative pronominal object is considered a grammatical norm violation. We account for this in terms of a combination of two factors. First, the presence of the relative clause makes the object ‘long’. Second, the sentence-initial position is a syntactic position that is relatively far removed from the original object position. We argue that when a long object is topicalized, there are too many intervening elements between the pronoun and the verb of which it is the complement. If the distance between the pronominal object and the verb has become too long, the object case fades from the working memory. This then results in the appearance of nominative case as the default case for topicalized object pronominal relative clauses in Dutch.

The Default Case in Standard Arabic

The default Case is a common phenomenon in Universal Grammar (UG). There are some languages which require that all Noun Phrases have Case. For these languages default Case meets something that has become known as the Case Filter (Rouveret and Vergnaud 1980). This is to say, if a particular Noun Phrase is not assigned a Case in association with some specification in some other part of the grammar, then default Case assignment principle can apply. Typical cross-linguistic default Cases are Nominative or Genitive, though the value of the default Case can vary from one language to another. While the default Case in English is accusative, it is nominative in most languages. The default mechanism which assigns this value is only invoked when the structural mechanism is not applicable. This paper argues, by citing multiple cross-linguistic examples, that assumption of a default Case in a language accounts for a better understanding of its syntactic and morphological structure. Based on Schütze’s (2001) proposal for English, it develops a theory to account for the default Case in Standard Arabic (SA). It argues that nominal expressions in SA do not receive nominative Case by assignment of other syntactic means. As such, its mechanism does not interact with the Case Filter, which is assumed to be a syntactic constraint. This paper shows that diverse phenomena in the distribution of nominative nominal expressions in SA can be treated using default Case. Previous studies have ample evidence that such phenomena from other languages have proved that instances for default Case are common, and furthermore, that there are opportunities within the Case framework to reduce the cross-linguistic differences in Case patterns in the event of choosing a default Case.

Morphosyntactic Restructuring in Child Heritage Georgian

This study investigates morphosyntactic restructuring in Heritage Georgian, a highly agglutinative language with polypersonal agreement. Child heritage speakers of Georgian (n = 26, age 3-16) completed a Frog Story narrative task and a lexical proficiency task in Georgian. Heritage speaker narratives were compared to narratives produced by age-matched peers living in Georgia (n = 30, age 5-14) and Georgian children and young adults who moved to the United States during childhood (n = 7, age 9–24). Heritage Georgian speakers produced more instances of non-standard nominal case marking and non-standard verbal subject agreement than their homeland peers. Individual morphosyntactic divergence was predicted by lexical score, but not by oral fluency or age. Patterns of divergence in the nominal domain included overuse of the default case (nominative) as well as over-extension of non-default cases (ergative, dative). In the verbal domain, person agreement was more consistently marked than number. Subject agreement exhibited more divergence from the baseline than object agreement, contrary to previous evidence from similar heritage languages (e.g., Heritage Hindi, Montrul et al., 2012). Results indicate that morphosyntactic production in child Heritage Georgian generally displays the same divergences as adult heritage-language grammars, but language-specific differences also underscore the need for continued documentation of lesser-studied heritage languages.

Give one species the task to come up with a theory that spans them all: what good can come out of that?

Does the progress in understanding evolutionary theory depend on the species that is doing the investigation? This question is difficult to answer scientifically, as we are dealing with an n = 1 scenario: every individual who has ever written about evolution is a human being. I will discuss, first, whether we get the correct answer to questions if we begin with ourselves and expand outwards, and second, whether we might fail to ask all the interesting questions unless we combat our tendencies to favour taxa that are close to us. As a whole, the human tendency to understand general biological phenomena via ‘putting oneself in another organism's shoes’ has upsides and downsides. As an upside, our intuitive ability to rethink strategies if the situation changes can lead to ready generation of adaptive hypotheses. Downsides occur if we trust this intuition too much, and particular danger zones exist for traits where humans are an unusual species. I argue that the levels of selection debate might have proceeded differently if human cooperation patterns were not so unique, as this brings about unique challenges in biology teaching; and that theoretical insights regarding inbreeding avoidance versus tolerance could have spread faster if we were not extrapolating our emotional reactions to incest disproportionately depending on whether we study animals or plants. I also discuss patterns such as taxonomic chauvinism, i.e. less attention being paid to species that differ more from human-like life histories. Textbooks on evolution reinforce such biases insofar as they present, as a default case, systems that resemble ours in terms of life cycles and other features (e.g. gonochorism). Additionally, societal norms may have led to incorrect null hypotheses such as females not mating multiply.