Topics in Syntax: Agree(-ment) and the nature of syntactic features
Thursdays 15.15-17.45, Seminarraum H1 5.16, GWZ
In this course, we will investigate the structure of syntactic features (e.g. phi-/Case/Tense features) and the nature of featural agreement. Some of the questions we will focus on with respect to features, are:
-
How are features organized? I.e. do they involve flat, set-like structures, or can they be ordered or have hierarchical structure? (Pollard/Sag 1994, Harley/Ritter 2002)
-
How complex are individual features? I.e. are features privative, binary, or attribute-value pairs? (Noyer 1992, Harbour 2011)
-
Do we need featural diacritics/second-order features, and if so, what are the empirical limits (if any) on featural complexity? (Starke 2010, Adger 2010, Adger/Svenonius 2011)
-
What sorts of featural distinctions are empirically motivated? E.g. valued/unvalued vs. interpretable/uninterpretable vs. something else. (Pesetsky/Torrego 2007).
-
Are the answers to these questions the same for all features, or can different features have different properties? E.g. some features are privative, others are binary, and yet others involve hierarchical structure?
-
Are there any purely formal features, or are all features ultimately relevant for the (LF/PF) interfaces? (Chomsky 2001)
We will test our theoretical predictions on the empirical domain of agreement (formalized as a dependency between features), paying particular attention to "unorthodox" agreement phenomena (conjunct agreement, the Anaphor Agreement Effect, long-distance agreement, anti- agreement, split agreement, "failed" agreement (in the sense of Preminger 2011), etc), in the hopes that these can help distinguish among different theoretical approaches to feature-structures and the grammatical operations that manipulate them.
Course Syllabus
REquired Readings
-
Ackema, Peter, and Ad Neeleman. Subset controllers in agreement relations. Morphology 23.2: 291-323.
-
Adger, David. 2010. A Minimalist theory of feature structure. Features: Perspectives on a key notion in linguistics. Eds. Kibort and Corbett, 185-220. OUP.
-
Baker, Mark C. and Nadya Vinokurova. Two modalities of case assignment: case in Sakha. NLLT 28: 593-642.
-
Baker, Mark C. 2008. The syntax of agreement and concord. Cambridge University Press.
-
Bhatt, Rajesh. 2005. Long-distance agreement in Hindi-Urdu. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 23.4: 757-807.
-
Bobaljik, Jonathan. 2008, Where's phi? Agreement as a post-syntactic operation. Phi-theory: phi-features across modules and interfaces, eds. Daniel Harbour, David Adger, and Susana Béjar, 295-328. OUP.
-
Corbett, Greville G. 2006. Agreement. Cambridge University Press.
-
Georgi, Doreen. 2013. A relativized probing approach to person encoding in local scenarios. Linguistic Variation 12 (2): 153-210.
-
Harbour, Daniel, David Adger, and Susana Béjar, eds. 2008. Phi theory: phi-features across modules and interfaces. OUP.
-
Harbour, Daniel. 2011. Valence and atomic number. Linguistic inquiry 42.4: 561-594.
-
Harley, Heidi and Elisabeth Ritter. 2002. Person and Number in Pronouns: A Feature-Geometric Analysis. Language 78.3: 482-526.
-
Hicks, Glyn. 2009. The derivation of anaphoric relations. John Benjamins.
-
Nevins, Andrew. 2014. Agree Link and Agree Copy: two separate steps. Talk given at agreement workshop, Recife, Brazil.
-
Pesetsky, David and Esther Torrego. 2007. The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features. Phrasal and clausal architecture: Syntactic derivation and interpretation: 262-294.
-
Preminger, Omer. 2013. That's not how you agree: a reply to Zeijlstra. The Linguistic Review 30 (3): 491-500.
-
Preminger, Omer. 2014. Agreement and its failures. Vol. 68. Linguistic Inquiry Monographs. MIT Press.
-
Starke, Michal. 2010. Nanosyntax: A short primer to a new approach to language. Nordlyd 36.1: 1-6. University of Tromsø.
-
Sundaresan, Sandhya. 2015. Revisiting the Anaphor Agreement Effect: a new pattern from Tamil. Linguistische Arbeitsberichte 92: 499-526.
-
Zeijlstra, Hedde. 2012. There is only one way to agree. The Linguistic Review 30 (3). de Gruyter. 491-539
REcommended readings
-
Adger, David, and Peter Svenonius. 2011. Features in Minimalist syntax. The Oxford handbook of linguistic Minimalism: 27-51.
-
Béjar, Susanna. Conditions on Phi Agree. Phi-theory: phi-features across modules and interfaces, eds. Daniel Harbour, David Adger, and Susana Béjar, 130-154.
-
Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Vol. 11. MIT Press.
-
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A life in language. Ed. Michael Kenstowicz, 1-52.
-
Noyer, Robert Rolf. 1992. Features, positions, and affixes in autonomous morphological structure. MIT dissertation.
-
Pollard, Carl and Ivan Sag. 1994. Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. University of Chicago Press.