Locating agreement in grammar: An argument from agreement in conjunctions

Natural Language and Linguistic Theory

Volumn 31, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 951-1013

  Bhatt, Rajesh ^a   Walkow, Martin ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Agreement; Closest conjunct agreement; Hindi Urdu; Post syntactic processes; Right node raising

Indexed keywords

EID: 84888288682     PISSN: 0167806X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11049-013-9203-y     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Aissen, Judith. 2003. Differential object marking: iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 21: 435-483.
2. Anand, Pranav, and Andrew Nevins. 2006. The locus of ergative case assignment: evidence from scope. In Ergativity, emerging issues, eds. Alana Johns, Diane Massam, and Juvenal Ndayiragije, 3-25. Berlin: Springer.
3. Aoun, Joseph, and Elabbas Benmamoun. 1999. Gapping, PF merger, and pattern of partial agreement. In Fragments: studies in ellipsis and gapping, ed. Shalom Lappin, 170-187. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Chap. 7.
4. Aoun, Joseph, Elabbas Benmamoun, and Dominique Sportiche. 1994. Agreement, word order and conjunction in some varieties of Arabic. Linguistic Inquiry 25: 195-220.
5. Aoun, Joseph, Elabbas Benmamoun, and Dominique Sportiche. 1999. Further remarks on first conjunct agreement. Linguistic Inquiry 30: 669-681.
6. Asarina, Alya, to appear. Neutrality vs. ambiguity in resolution by syncretism: experimental evidence and consequences. In Proceedings of the 41th North East Linguistics Society, eds. Nicholas LaCara, Yelena Fainleib, and Yangsook Park.
7. Badecker, William. 2007. A feature principle for partial agreement. Lingua 117: 1541-1565.
8. Bahloul, Maher, and Wayne Harbert. 1992. Agreement asymmetries in Arabic. In Proceedings of the eleventh West Coast conference on formal linguistics.
9. Bailey, Thomas Grahame, and Thomas Fulton Cummings. 1994. Panjabi manual and grammar: a guide to the colloquial Panjabi. New Delhi: Asian Educational Services.
10. Béjar, Susana. 2000. Structural markedness in formal features: deriving interpretability. Revue Québécoise de Linguistique 28: 47-72.
11. Benmamoun, Elabbas. 1992. Functional and inflectional morphology: problems of projection, representation and derivation. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
12. Benmamoun, Elabbas. 1996. Agreement asymmetries and the PF interface. SOAS Working Papers in Linguistics 6: 106-128.
13. Benmamoun, Elabbas, Archna Bhatia, and Maria Polinsky. 2009. Closest conjunct agreement in head final languages. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 9: 67-88.
14. Bhatia, Archna. 2011. Agreement in the context of coordination Hindi as a case study. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
15. Bhatia, Archna, and Elabbas Benmamoun. 2009. Close conjunct agreement: role of linear adjacency. Slides from 83rd Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, San Francisco.
16. Bhatia, Tej K. 1993. Punjabi: a cognitive-descriptive grammar. London: Routledge.
17. Bhatt, Rajesh. 2005. Long distance agreement in Hindi-Urdu. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 23: 757-807.
18. Bhatt, Rajesh, and Veneeta Dayal. 2007. Rightward scrambling as rightward remnant movement. Linguistic Inquiry 38: 287-301.
19. Bobaljik, Jonathan David. 2008. Where's phi? Agreement as a post-syntactic operation. In Phi-theory: phi features across interfaces and modules, eds. Daniel Harbour, David Adger, and Susana Béjar, 295-328. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20. Bošković, Željko. 2009. Unifying first and last conjunct agreement. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 27: 455-496.
21. Butt, Miriam. 1993. Object specificity and agreement in Hindi/Urdu. In Papers from the 29th regional meeting of the Chicago linguistics society, Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.
22. Camacho, José. 2003. The structure of coordination, conjunction and agreement phenomena in Spanish and other languages. Vol. 57 of Studies in natural language and linguistic theory. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
23. Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Vol. 28 of Current studies in linguistics. Cambridge: MIT Press.
24. Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries. In Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, eds. Roger Martin, David Michaels, and Juan Uriagereka, 89-155. Cambridge: MIT Press.
25. Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale, a life in language, ed. Michael Kenstowicz, 1-52. Cambridge: MIT Press.
26. Citko, Barbara. 2004. Agreement asymmetries in coordinate structures. In Formal approaches to Slavic linguistics #12: the Ottawa meeting, Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.
27. Citko, Barbara. 2005. On the nature of merge: external merge, internal merge, and parallel merge. Linguistic Inquiry 36: 475-496.
28. Déchaine, Rose-Marie, and Martina Wiltschko. 2002. Decomposing pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 33: 409-442.
29. Doron, Edit. 2000. VSO and left-conjunct agreement, Biblical Hebrew vs. Modern Hebrew. In The syntax of verb initial languages, eds. Andrew Carnie and Eithne Guilfoyle, 75-95. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Chap. 5.
30. Eisenberg, Peter. 1973. Identity of constituents. Linguistic Inquiry 4: 417-420.
31. Embick, David, and Rolf Noyer. 2001. Movement operations after syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 32: 555-595.
32. Embick, David, and Rolf Noyer. 2006. Distributed morphology and the syntax/morphology interface. In Oxford handbook of linguistic interfaces, eds. Gillian Ramchand and Charles Reiss, 289-324. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
33. Farkas, Donka F., and Draga Zec. 1995. Agreement and pronominal reference. In Advances in Roumanian linguistics, eds. Guliemo Cinque and Giuliana Giusti, 83-101. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
34. Findreng, Ånde. 1976. Zur Kongruenz in Person und Numerus zwischen Subjekt und finitem Verb im modernen Deutsch. Oslo: Universitetsforlage.
35. Gračanin Yuksek, Martina. 2007. About sharing. Doctoral Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
36. Groos, Anneke, and Henk van Riemsdijk. 1981. Matching effects in free relatives: a parameter of core grammar. In Theory of markedness in generative grammar: Proceedings of the IVth GLOW conference, eds. Adriana Belleti, Luciana Brandi, and Luigi Rizzi, 171-216. Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa.
37. Halle, Morris, and Alec Marantz. 1993. Distributed morphology and the pieces of Inflection. In The View from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, eds. Ken Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser, 111-176. Cambridge: MIT Press.
38. Harbert, Wayne, and Maher Bahloul. 2001. Postverbal subjects in Arabic and the theory of agreement. In Themes in Arabic and Hebrew syntax, 45-70. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
39. Harley, Heidi, and Rolf Noyer. 1999. Distributed Morphology. Glot International 4: 3-9.
40. Hartmann, Katharina. 1998. Right node raising and gapping, interface condition on prosodic deletion. Doctoral Dissertation, Johann Wolfgang Göthe-Universität, Frankfurt am Main.
41. Heycock, Caroline, and Roberto Zamparelli. 2005. Friends and colleagues: plurality, coordination and the structure of DP. Natural Language Semantics 13: 201-270.
42. Johannessen, Janne Bondi. 1996. Agreement and coordination. Linguistic Inquiry 27: 661-676.
43. Johannessen, Janne Bondi. 1998. Coordination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
44. Johnson, Kyle. 2007. LCA + alignment = RNR. Paper presented at Workshop on Coordination, Subordination and Ellipsis, University of Tübingen.
45. Kayne, Richard S. 1994. The antisymmetry of syntax. Vol. 25 of Linguistic inquiry monographs. Cambridge: MIT Press.
46. Kiss, Katalin É. 2010. Pattern of agreement with coordinate phrases. Presentation at SinFonIjA 3. October, 2010.
47. Mahajan, Anoop Kumar. 1997a. Against a rightward movement analysis of extraposition and rightward scrambling. In Scrambling, ed. Shigeo Tonoike, 93-124. Tokyo: Kurosio Publishers.
48. Mahajan, Anoop Kumar. 1997b. Rightward scrambling. In Rightward movement, eds. Dorothee Beerman, David LeBlanc, and Henk C. van Riemsdijk, 185-213. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
49. Marantz, Alec. 1991. Case and licensing. In Proceedings of ESCOL '91, eds. German Westphal, Benjamin Ao, and Hee-Rahk Chae, 234-253. Cornell Linguistics Club.
50. Marušič, Franc, and Andrew Nevins. 2009. Two types of neuter: second-conjunct agreement in the presence of '5 and ups'. Paper presented at FASL 18. May, 2009.
51. Marušič, Franc, Andrew Nevins, and Amanda Saksida. 2007. Last-conjunct agreement in Slovenian. In Annual workshop on formal approaches to Slavic linguistics: the Toronto meeting 2006, FASL 15, eds. Richard Compton, Magdalena Goledzinowska, and Ulyana Savchenko, 210-227. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.
52. McFadden, Thomas. 2004. The position of morphological case in the derivation: a study on the syntax-morphology interface. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
53. Munn, Alan. 1993. Topics in the syntax and semantics of coordinate structures. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.
54. Munn, Alan. 1999. First conjunct agreement: against a clausal analysis. Linguistic Inquiry 30: 643-668.
55. Noyer, Rolf. 1997. Features, positions and affixes in autonomous morphological structure. New York: Garland Publishing.
56. Pesetsky, David, and Esther Torrego. 2001. T-to-C movement: causes and consequences. In Ken Hale, a life in language, ed. Michael Kenstowicz, 355-426. Cambridge: MIT Press.
57. Preminger, Omer. 2010. Failure to agree is not a failure: φ{symbol}-agreement with post-verbal subjects in Hebrew. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 9: 241-278.
58. Preminger, Omer. 2011. Agreement as a fallible operation. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
59. Progovac, Ljiljana. 2003. Structure for coordination. In The second GLOT international state-of-the-article book, eds. Lisa Cheng and Rint Sybesma, 241-287. Berlin: de Gruyter.
60. Ritter, Elizabeth. 1991. Two functional categories in noun phrases: evidence from Modern Hebrew. In Perspectives on phrase structure, ed. Susan Rothstein. Vol. 25 of Syntax and semantics, 37-62. New York: Academic Press.
61. Ritter, Elizabeth. 1995. On the syntactic category of pronouns and agreement. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 13: 405-443.
62. Sauerland, Uli. 2008. On the semantics markedness of phi-features. In Phi theory: phi features across interfaces and modules, eds. Daniel Harbour, David Adger, and Susana Béjar, 57-83. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
63. Steiner, Ilona. 2009. Partial agreement in German: a processing issue? In The fruits of empirical linguistics: product, eds. Susanne Winkler and Sam Featherston, 239-260. Berlin: de Gruyter.
64. Ussery, Cherlon. 2009. Optionality and variability: Syntactic licensing meets morphological spell-out. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
65. Řezáč, Milan. 2008. Phi-agree and theta-related case. In Phi-theory: phi features across interfaces and modules, eds. Daniel Harbour, David Adger, and Susana Béjar, 83-129. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
66. van Koppen, Marjo. 2005. One probe-two goals: Aspects of agreement in Dutch dialects. Doctoral Dissertation, Leiden University, Utrecht.
67. van Koppen, Marjo. 2007. Agreement with coordinated subjects. a comparative perspective. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 7: 121-161.
68. Walkow, Martin. 2010. Locality of agreement in syntax and pf: subject verb agreement asymmetries in Modern Standard Arabic. Handout from presentation at Sound, Structure, Meaning: Explorations at the Interface (GLS 2010), February 12-14, 2010.
69. Wechsler, Stephen, and Larisa Zlatić. 2003. The many faces of agreement. Stanford monographs in linguistics. Stanford: CSLI.