verb agreement
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

494
(FIVE YEARS 130)

H-INDEX

34
(FIVE YEARS 1)

Languages ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 14
Author(s):  
José Camacho

Subject-verb agreement mismatches have been reported in the L2 and heritage literature, usually involving infinitives, analyzed as default morphological forms for fully specified T-heads. This article explores the mechanisms behind these mismatches, testing two hypotheses: the default form and the surface-similarity hypotheses. It compares non-finite and finite S-V mismatches with subjects with different persons, testing whether similarity with other paradigmatic forms makes them more acceptable, controlling for the role of verb frequency. Participants were asked to rate sentences on a Likert scale that included (a) infinitive forms with first, second and third person subjects, and (b) third person verbal forms with first, second and third person subjects. Two stem-stressed verbs (e.g., tra.j-o ‘brought.3p.past’) and two affix-stressed verbs (e.g., me.ti-o ‘introduced.3p.past’), varying in frequency were tested. Inflectional affixes of stem-stressed verbs are similar to other forms of the paradigm both phonologically and in being unstressed (tra.j-o ‘brought.3p.past’ vs. trai.g-o ‘bring.1 p.pres’), whereas affixes of affix-stressed verbs have dissimilar stress patterns (me.ti-o ´introduced.3p.past’ vs. me.t-o ‘introduce.1p.pres’). Results show significantly higher acceptability for finite vs. non-finite non-matching, and for 1st vs. 2nd person subjects. Stem-stressed verbs showed higher acceptability ratings than affix-stressed ones, suggesting a role for surface-form correspondence, partially confirming previous findings.


2022 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taiping Deng ◽  
Dongping Deng ◽  
Qing Feng

This study explored the syntactic transfer effect of the non-local subject-verb agreement structure with plural head noun after two intensive phases of input training with event-related potentials (ERP). The non-local subject-verb agreement stimuli with the plural head nouns, which never appeared in training phases, were used for the stimuli. A total of 26 late L1-Chinese L2-English learners, who began to learn English after a critical period and participated in our previous experiments, were asked back to take part in this syntactic transfer experiment. Results indicated that a significant ERP component P600 occurred in the key region (the verb) of the sentences with syntactic violations in the experimental group, but none occurred in the control group. This demonstrated that there was a significant transfer effect of the input training. The possible theoretical explanation was provided and also the malleability of the late L2 learners was discussed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 118-131
Author(s):  
Ahmed Ibrahim Alsalami

This study aims to find out the most common challenges of writing short sentences encountered by first-year English-major undergraduate students of English language departments. A mixed method was used including quantitative and qualitative as data was obtained using student questionnaires and interview questions for the lecturers. About 122 first-year English-major undergraduate students (%50.4 female and %49.6 male) from the English Language Departments at all colleges of Al-Baha University were randomly chosen, including 30 lecturers, and were interviewed in the study (15 males and 15 females). The study revealed significant results which have shown difficulties in constructing short sentences, the distinction of active and passive voice, and the use of conjunctions, punctuations, quantifiers, and the correct auxiliary. Also among common issues, students find difficulties in using comparative and superlative degree, subject–verb agreement and the use of articles. Thus, the study recommends that first-year English-major undergraduate students should be given more written exercises as well as written feedback so that students can be able to write more effective short sentences. The study suggests that more studies could be conducted qualitative researches for first-year students of English language department to investigate and analyze the most common challenges and difficulties of the students’ written samples or documents.


2021 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Anna Aksenova

The agreement of subject and predicate in Russian is actually much less trivial than it might seem at first glance. This paper deals with the case when the subject is realized by a combination of a noun with a quantifier. I analyze a set of examples with the words двое, трое, пара, тройка, десяток, сотня, тысяча, миллион and миллиард where there is a variation in predicate number agreement. Using Random Forest, CIT and Logistic Regression algorithms I prove that collective (двое, трое) and non-collective (пара, тройка, десяток, сотня, тысяча, миллион, миллиард) quantifiers exhibit different patterns of agreement. The first group tends to trigger more plural agreement, while for the second one singular agreement is more typical. Moreover, the quantifier phrase position relative to the predicate can also influence the choice of number marker on the verb.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (8) ◽  
pp. 773-785
Author(s):  
Nadiya Arnillah

This study is a classroom action research that focuses on the implementation of grammatical error analysis to improve students’ writing skill on recount text for students. The study conducted at SMA Tri Dharma Kosgoro Class X MIA that consisted of 25 students; 15 male and 10 female. Apart from implementing the grammar error analysis to enhance students’ writing skill, the researcher also identify some errors of students’ writing particularly on grammatical error and analyze some factors of these errors. The implementation of this research was in cycle I that consist of eight meetings.  Study shows that the implementation of grammatical error analysis can enhance the students’ understanding in writing recount text. This has been shown by the improvement of student’s score. Moreover,  the kinds of the students’ grammatical errors could be classified into seven categories namely errors in verb groups, errors in subject and verb agreement, errors in article, errors in pluralization, errors in conjunction, errors in preposition, and errors in pronoun. The identification of these type of grammatical error is paramount due to these could help students understand some components of grammar that students should master to improve their understanding in writing recount text.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Kemel Jouini

<p>My thesis deals with dependency relations in the structure of sentences in Arabic and how properties of verbal morphology and associated lexical items dictate how sentences are derived. I adopt the probe-goal-Agree Minimalist view that variation between languages (even those that are closely related, such as Standard Arabic and Tunisian Arabic) is due to the 'feature structure' of functional elements that enter into the derivation.  In particular, the essential architecture of sentences expressing the dependency relations verbs and associated elements have with the 'functional' portion of sentences (i.e., tense/modality properties) is universal in that these dependency relations will be expressed on the basis of the same feature structure cross-linguistically. However, this architecture still allows for the kind of parametric variation that exists even between closely related languages.  In this context, I am interested in the status of subject-verb agreement configurations, in both VSO and SVO word orderings, and wh- and other A’-dependencies in Standard Arabic (with comparisons to some modern spoken varieties of Arabic, where appropriate). The analysis is shown to extend to other V-raising languages of the Semitic/Celtic type with ‘basic’ VSO word ordering. A possible extension of the analysis to the V2 phenomenology is also discussed and the major role played by the raising of V-v to T and the raising of T to Agr(s) or T to Fin is highlighted.  An important aspect of my analysis is a proper understanding of the dependency relations involved in the derivation of the relevant sentences where the role of the CP domain projections, verb-movement, feature identification and/or feature valuation along with clause type is essential for interpretation at the interface at the output of syntax. In this feature-based analysis of parametric and micro-parametric variation, I show that variation between typologically similar and typologically different languages is minimal in that it is limited to the interaction of feature combinations in the derivation of sentences.  These feature combinations concern the feature structure of the T-node in relation to the position where T is spelled out at the interface. In particular, T raises to Agr(s) or to Fin in some languages and/or structures. Such raising processes are important in subject-verb agreement configurations cross-linguistically involving combinations of T-features and D-features, which would differ in interpretability (i.e., interpretable vs. uninterpretable) as the basis for feature valuation. Similar feature combinations also drive the raising processes in wh-dependencies with some F-feature (mainly related to ‘focus’) interacting with the T-features of Fin.  I propose that two modes of licensing of these feature combinations are at work. The first mode of licensing is the basic head-head agreement relation. This agreement relation is the basis for verb-movement to the functional field above vP/VP in V-raising languages. The second mode of licensing is the Spec-head agreement relation, brought about by the Merge (internal or external) of D(P) elements in A-dependencies and the Merge of wh-elements in A’-dependencies.  In dependency relations other than subject-verb agreement and wh-dependencies, I propose that the licensing of these feature combinations is strictly a question of ‘identification’ via head-head agreement whereby a feature on a functional head does not need to be valued, but it still needs to be ‘identified’ for the well-formedness of the C-(Agr[s])-T dependency. This is the case of the interpretable D-feature of the Top node in Topic-comment structures and the interpretable F-feature of the two functional head nodes, Mod(al) and Neg, in relation to the T-features of Fin in a V-raising language like Standard Arabic.</p>


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Kemel Jouini

<p>My thesis deals with dependency relations in the structure of sentences in Arabic and how properties of verbal morphology and associated lexical items dictate how sentences are derived. I adopt the probe-goal-Agree Minimalist view that variation between languages (even those that are closely related, such as Standard Arabic and Tunisian Arabic) is due to the 'feature structure' of functional elements that enter into the derivation.  In particular, the essential architecture of sentences expressing the dependency relations verbs and associated elements have with the 'functional' portion of sentences (i.e., tense/modality properties) is universal in that these dependency relations will be expressed on the basis of the same feature structure cross-linguistically. However, this architecture still allows for the kind of parametric variation that exists even between closely related languages.  In this context, I am interested in the status of subject-verb agreement configurations, in both VSO and SVO word orderings, and wh- and other A’-dependencies in Standard Arabic (with comparisons to some modern spoken varieties of Arabic, where appropriate). The analysis is shown to extend to other V-raising languages of the Semitic/Celtic type with ‘basic’ VSO word ordering. A possible extension of the analysis to the V2 phenomenology is also discussed and the major role played by the raising of V-v to T and the raising of T to Agr(s) or T to Fin is highlighted.  An important aspect of my analysis is a proper understanding of the dependency relations involved in the derivation of the relevant sentences where the role of the CP domain projections, verb-movement, feature identification and/or feature valuation along with clause type is essential for interpretation at the interface at the output of syntax. In this feature-based analysis of parametric and micro-parametric variation, I show that variation between typologically similar and typologically different languages is minimal in that it is limited to the interaction of feature combinations in the derivation of sentences.  These feature combinations concern the feature structure of the T-node in relation to the position where T is spelled out at the interface. In particular, T raises to Agr(s) or to Fin in some languages and/or structures. Such raising processes are important in subject-verb agreement configurations cross-linguistically involving combinations of T-features and D-features, which would differ in interpretability (i.e., interpretable vs. uninterpretable) as the basis for feature valuation. Similar feature combinations also drive the raising processes in wh-dependencies with some F-feature (mainly related to ‘focus’) interacting with the T-features of Fin.  I propose that two modes of licensing of these feature combinations are at work. The first mode of licensing is the basic head-head agreement relation. This agreement relation is the basis for verb-movement to the functional field above vP/VP in V-raising languages. The second mode of licensing is the Spec-head agreement relation, brought about by the Merge (internal or external) of D(P) elements in A-dependencies and the Merge of wh-elements in A’-dependencies.  In dependency relations other than subject-verb agreement and wh-dependencies, I propose that the licensing of these feature combinations is strictly a question of ‘identification’ via head-head agreement whereby a feature on a functional head does not need to be valued, but it still needs to be ‘identified’ for the well-formedness of the C-(Agr[s])-T dependency. This is the case of the interpretable D-feature of the Top node in Topic-comment structures and the interpretable F-feature of the two functional head nodes, Mod(al) and Neg, in relation to the T-features of Fin in a V-raising language like Standard Arabic.</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document