By Cedric Boeckx
This quantity brings jointly a variety of strands of analysis concentrating on facets of the syntax of contract, and the position that contract performs in linguistic conception. The essays accrued the following convey how and why contract has emerged in recent times because the imperative theoretical build in minimalism. even though the theoretical context of the quantity is minimalist in personality, Boeckx formulates formal and significant universals within the area of agreement.
Read or Download Aspects of the Syntax of Agreement PDF
Similar grammar books
An advent to English Syntax discusses the vital techniques of syntax that are utilized in quite a lot of collage classes, in enterprise, in instructing and in speech remedy. The ebook offers with conventional recommendations which were enormously subtle and prolonged during the last thirty years: what nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs are and the way they are often famous; what a subordinate clause is and the way types of subordinate clauses could be well-known; what matters and items are.
This quantity provides essays by means of a number of the best figures within the forefront of theoretical linguistics in the framework of common grammar. one of many first books to undertake the "minimialist" framework to syntactic research, it encompasses a primary essay by way of Noam Chomsky at the minimialist application and covers more than a few subject matters in syntax and morphology.
The articles during this quantity learn a few severe matters in grammaticalization stories, together with the connection among grammaticalization and pragmaticalization, subjectification and intersubjectification, and grammaticalization and language touch. The contributions think of info from a huge variety of spoken and signed languages, together with Greek, jap, Nigerian Pidgin, Swedish, and Turkish signal Language.
It is a textbook of a primary style, designed to introduce scholars to the fundamental suggestions of syntax. Professor Matthews doesn't expound the version of anybody theoretical university; nor does he try a simple synthesis of already released paintings. He believes that scholars have a lot to realize from the descriptive traditions of person languages in addition to from theorists.
- Top 10: Great Grammar for Great Writing
- Adjectives and Adverbs: Syntax, Semantics, and Discourse
- Compliments and Compliment Responses: Grammatical Structure and Sequential Organization (Studies in Discourse and Grammar)
- A Grammar of Saramaccan Creole
- Lederer on Language: A Celebration of English, Good Grammar, and Wordplay
- Dialectology Meets Typology: Dialect Grammar from a Cross-Linguistic Perspective
Additional resources for Aspects of the Syntax of Agreement
9) Mig vantar peninga. ’ ZMT (1985: 454, (29a); 459, (42b)) (10) Henni voru gefnar bækurnar. ’ (Sigurðsson (1992: 5, (5f)) However, this is not the whole story. As the careful studies of Sigurðsson (1996) and Taraldsen (1995) have revealed, agreement with nominative objects is only partial. e. *Henni leiddust við. *leiddist þeir. ’ Taraldsen (1995: 307, (1)) Those facts are puzzling, and have given rise to an explosion of possible analyses, which I won’t attempt to review here. Suffice it to say that two main approaches can be envisaged: One is to rely on Agreement projections (for example, on split AGRPs like AGRnumber and AGRperson) (see Quirky Agreement 25 Taraldsen 1995 for an approach along these lines), and the other is to adopt Chomsky’s (1995) Attract-F hypothesis and stipulate that only certain features can raise to check agreement without triggering pied-piping.
It is interesting to note that no matter which agreement pattern is chosen, sentences involving a Quirky 3rd person element and a 1st or 2nd person nominative ‘object’ are hopelessly bad. *leiddist við. ’ Sigurðsson (1996: 28) (43) *Henni voruð sýndir/sýndar þið. ’ (44) *Henni vorum sýndir/sýndar við. ’ Sigurðsson (1996: 32) I take this as a confirmation of the view just expressed: such sentences yield a “Point-of-View” clash. The 1st and 2nd person features (borne by a nominative element) express point-of-view, which is also associated with dative (‘Quirky’) elements; if a dative nominal prevents raising of a 1st or 2nd person nominative element to the projection encoding Point-of-View, the sentence crashes.
Leiddist þeir. ’ Taraldsen (1995: 307, (1)) Those facts are puzzling, and have given rise to an explosion of possible analyses, which I won’t attempt to review here. Suffice it to say that two main approaches can be envisaged: One is to rely on Agreement projections (for example, on split AGRPs like AGRnumber and AGRperson) (see Quirky Agreement 25 Taraldsen 1995 for an approach along these lines), and the other is to adopt Chomsky’s (1995) Attract-F hypothesis and stipulate that only certain features can raise to check agreement without triggering pied-piping.
Aspects of the Syntax of Agreement by Cedric Boeckx