219-7677
10
7500817
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers
onix@benjamins.nl
201608250413
ONIX title feed
eng
01
EUR
772007381
03
01
01
JB
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
JB code
LA 131 Eb
15
9789027290670
06
10.1075/la.131
13
2008023397
DG
002
02
01
LA
02
0166-0829
Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today
131
01
The Bantu–Romance Connection
The
Bantu–Romance Connection
A comparative investigation of verbal agreement, DPs, and information structure
01
la.131
01
https://benjamins.com
02
https://benjamins.com/catalog/la.131
1
B01
Cécile De Cat
De Cat, Cécile
Cécile
De Cat
University of Leeds
2
B01
Katherine Demuth
Demuth, Katherine
Katherine
Demuth
Brown University
01
eng
376
xix
355
LAN009000
v.2006
CFK
2
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.GENER
Generative linguistics
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.OTHAF
Other African languages
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.ROM
Romance linguistics
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.SYNTAX
Syntax
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.THEOR
Theoretical linguistics
06
01
This landmark volume is the first work specifically designed to explore the extent to which striking surface morpho-syntactic similarities between Bantu and Romance languages actually represent similar syntactic structures. In particular, it explores the timely and much debated issues of verbal morphology and agreement, the structure of DPs, and word order/information structure, with the goal of providing a better understanding of the structure of the different languages investigated, and the implications this holds for syntactic theory more generally. All of the papers draw on data from both Bantu and Romance languages, providing a framework for much-needed further comparative research on the nature of linguistic structure, its diversity and constraints, and the implications this has for learnability/acquisition. The volume also provides an important precedent for incorporating insights from Bantu linguistic structure into mainstream of syntax research.
04
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475/la.131.png
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027255143.jpg
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027255143.tif
06
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/la.131.hb.png
07
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/125/la.131.png
25
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/la.131.hb.png
27
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/la.131.hb.png
10
01
JB code
la.131.01ack
vii
1
Miscellaneous
1
01
Acknowledgments
10
01
JB code
la.131.02lis
ix
x
2
Miscellaneous
2
01
List of contributors
10
01
JB code
la.131.03int
xi
xix
9
Article
3
01
Introduction
10
01
JB code
la.131.04par
Section header
4
01
Part 1. Clitics and agreement
10
01
JB code
la.131.05mar
3
39
37
Article
5
01
Concepts of structural underspecification in Bantu and Romance
1
A01
Lutz Marten
Marten, Lutz
Lutz
Marten
Department of Africa, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London
2
A01
Ruth M. Kempson
Kempson, Ruth M.
Ruth M.
Kempson
Philosophy Department, King’s College, London
3
A01
Miriam Bouzouita
Bouzouita, Miriam
Miriam
Bouzouita
Philosophy Department, King’s College, London
01
The paper explores parallelisms between Bantu (specifically Otjiherero) and Romance (through Latin and Spanish) with respect to left and right peripheries, and subject and object clitics. The analysis is formulated in Dynamic Syntax (DS, Cann et al. 2005) and centrally involves notions of structural underspecification. Through providing detailed analyses of different word order possibilities in the Bantu and Romance languages discussed, we show how DS concepts of structural growth over initially underspecified tree relations, such as the building of linked structures and unfixed nodes, provide a uniform basis for analyses of word order variation across the two language groups. We then extend our analysis to include Bantu subject/object markers, which we analyze by employing the same formal tools as used in the analysis of Romance (object) clitics, namely unfixed nodes which have to be construed within a tightly locally restricted domain. Empirical support for our analysis comes from restrictions on the presence of object markers in passive and locative inversion constructions in Otjiherero, which we show to follow from independent constraints of the availability of unfixed nodes within a given domain. The analyses of Bantu and Romance presented show that despite differences in surface morphology between the two language groups, both exhibit a striking parallel with respect to the way lexical information and general structure building principles of DS interact. The difference between Romance clitic systems and the agglutinative morphology of Bantu subject and object makers is thus seen to be comparatively superficial, while the DS analysis brings out the strong structural parallelism between the two language groups.
10
01
JB code
la.131.06car
41
82
42
Article
6
01
On different types of clitic clusters
1
A01
Anna Cardinaletti
Cardinaletti, Anna
Anna
Cardinaletti
Ca’ Foscari University of Venice
01
In this paper, Italian and Bantu clitic clusters are analyzed and compared. I claim that in both language families, pronouns check case in a low clitic position, and in so doing they reverse the order of arguments. In Italian, clitics move to a high clitic position where they check person and number features. Different types of Italian clusters are individuated: they differ syntactically, phonologically, and morphologically. As in Kayne’s (1994) proposal, clusters can be formed either on one single functional head or on adjacent heads; the former type can appear both in enclisis and proclisis, the latter only in proclisis. Clitic pronouns can end with an epenthetic vowel or a class marker/ inflectional morpheme; the former (consonantal clitics) can appear in clitic clusters in any position, the latter (morphologically complex clitics) cannot be the first element in clitic clusters dominated by one single head. Finally, some clusters are inserted as lexical units, others are two independent words: only the former display the linking vowel [e]. The intricate interplay of these (partially) independent properties explains a number of restrictions on clusters found in Italian (and other Romance languages). The hierarchy of person and number features in the high clitic position is also discussed, which explains other restrictions on clusters.
10
01
JB code
la.131.07lab
83
109
27
Article
7
01
Pronominal object markers in Romance and Bantu
1
A01
Marie Labelle
Labelle, Marie
Marie
Labelle
Université du Québec à Montréal
01
Romance pronominal clitics and Bantu object markers vary in gender and number, replace arguments, and surface to the left of the verbal root in declarative clauses. Both types of morphemes are regularly analyzed as affixes on the verb. It is argued that both have syntactic properties that justify treating them differently from lexical affixes. The argument is first made for French unstressed pronominal objects like <i>me, le, en, </i>drawing from their distribution in contemporary French as well as from their historical behavior. It is shown that they are syntactic objects, and that their morphophonological affix-like properties should be treated independently of their syntactic behavior. Then evidence is presented pointing to the fact that Bantu object markers are also syntactic objects of some sort. The last section asks whether one can arrive at a unified treatment of both elements. The conclusion is that by focusing on the morphophonological properties of these pronominal elements, one runs the risk of overlooking their syntactic properties.
10
01
JB code
la.131.08har
111
128
18
Article
8
01
The Bantu-Romance connection in verb movement and verbal inflectional morphology
The
Bantu-Romance connection in verb movement and verbal inflectional morphology
1
A01
Carolyn Harford
Harford, Carolyn
Carolyn
Harford
Department of English and Communication, Midlands State University
01
Romance and Bantu languages show a range of contrasting morphological and syntactic properties, ranging from WH extraction strategies and the existence of V2 to directionality of affixation and degree of fusion and agglutination in verbal inflectional morphology. Using Isizulu and Chishona (Bantu) and standard French and Italian (Romance) as examples, this paper correlates these contrasts in terms of a common right-branching Split-INFL structure, and contrasting preferences for movement (STAY, in Optimality Theoretic terms). It is proposed that the same preference which motivates WH extraction strategies in the four languages also motivates the contrast between the relatively prefixal and agglutinative verbal inflectional morphology of Isizulu and Chishona and the suffixal and more fusional verbal inflectional morphology of French and Italian. The conclusions reinforce intuitions that languages belonging to the Romance and Bantu language families are typologically similar.
10
01
JB code
la.131.09par
Section header
9
01
Part 2. The structure of DPs
10
01
JB code
la.131.10car
131
165
35
Article
10
01
DP in Bantu and Romance
1
A01
Vicki Carstens
Carstens, Vicki
Vicki
Carstens
University of Missouri-Columbia
01
The paper considers several aspects of Bantu and Romance DPs, including: (i) Noun Class and grammatical gender; (ii) apparently derivational properties of the two; (iii) ordering among nouns and their modifiers; and (iv) concord in DPs. Several conclusions are argued for. Firstly, Bantu Class is a gender system like that of Romance, with gender-specific Spell-Out of number features. Secondly, despite some surface evidence to the contrary, gender/Class is an uninterpretable feature, without derivational functions. Thirdly, DPs of the two languages share a common architecture; and fourth, in both families concord is the result of the Agree relation. Thus many properties of nouns and DPs are common to both language groups, as the hypothesis of UG leads us to expect.
10
01
JB code
la.131.11zam
167
199
33
Article
11
01
On the interpretability of φ-features
1
A01
Roberto Zamparelli
Zamparelli, Roberto
Roberto
Zamparelli
01
The paper reconsiders the evidence for the interpretable status of φ-features within DP in Romance languages, focusing on Italian. The conclusions are that, given a reasonably local interpretation of what counts as interpretable, gender is not an interpretable feature, and number (or plur, in the sense of Heycock & Zamparelli 2005) is interpretable, but is not sufficient to drive the process of verbal and predicative agreement. The notion of “default”, particularly with respect to the Person feature, is discussed and various alternatives are explored.
10
01
JB code
la.131.12giu
201
237
37
Article
12
01
Agreement and concord in nominal expressions
1
A01
Giuliana Giusti
Giusti, Giuliana
Giuliana
Giusti
Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia
01
This paper claims that feature sharing should be analyzed as the result of at least two different processes, which are named here <i>Agreement </i>and <i>Concord, </i>and inquires how these two processes are manifested inside nominal expressions (NEs). Agreement is the transfer of the Person features of the possessor (the “subject” of the NE) onto some functional head (parallel to subject Agreement in the clause) with the effect that (Genitive) Case is assigned. On the contrary, Concord is the transfer of Number, Word Class, and Case specifications from a functional head onto a modifier, which is first-merged as a Specifier of that functional head. The claim is that, quite differently from Agreement, Concord arises from the merger of a modifier, underspecified for uninterpretable features, in the specifier of a functional head, carrying a copy of those features. In other words, Concord is directly enhanced by the Spec-Head configuration; it does not involve merger of a probe which targets a goal and, as a consequence, never triggers (overt or covert) movement. This proposal can dispense with a number of otherwise unmotivated movements and can derive the different properties of these two kinds of feature sharing phenomena. The argument is supported by observing macro-parallelisms across Bantu and Romance languages, in particular Swahili and Xhosa on the one hand and Romanian and Italian on the other hand.
10
01
JB code
la.131.13fer
239
258
20
Article
13
01
A unified syntactic analysis of Italian and Luganda nouns
A
unified syntactic analysis of Italian and Luganda nouns
1
A01
Franca Ferrari-Bridgers
Ferrari-Bridgers, Franca
Franca
Ferrari-Bridgers
Department of Speech and Communication Studies, IONA College
01
In this paper, I propose a unified syntactic analysis of Luganda and Italian simple nouns. I argue that Italian and Luganda nouns are formed in the syntax via merge and move operations. More specifically, I show that in both languages all nouns are formed via the merger of the nominalizer head [n] with a nominal stem [LP] yielding the nominal structure [nP [n [LP]]] and that syntactic movement is necessary in the noun formation process of Italian nouns to derive the correct morpheme order.<br />In order to prove that the structure [nP [n [LP]]] is representative for both languages, I demonstrate that the nominalizer head [n] corresponds to both the Italian gender feature and the Luganda class feature and that, therefore, gender and class are the same feature. The data analysis in sections (2) and (3) of this paper supports the claim that gender and class are the same feature because of their identical inflectional and derivational functions. At the inflectional level, gender and class trigger VP and DP agreement and at the derivational level gender and class function as n-marked heads whose merger with an XP yields a noun.
10
01
JB code
la.131.14par
Section header
14
01
Part 3. Information structure
10
01
JB code
la.131.15fra
261
292
32
Article
15
01
The fine structure of the Topic field
The
fine structure of the Topic field
1
A01
Mara Frascarelli
Frascarelli, Mara
Mara
Frascarelli
Università degli Studi di Roma Tre
01
Based on interface evidence, this paper shows that the interpretation of discourse categories relies on syntactic conditions. Specifically, the existence of a systematic connection between formal properties and discourse functions shows that Topics are licensed in dedicated positions in the C-domain, which correspond to specific realizations at the PF-interface. Different types of Topics thus correspond to specific tonal events and show A’-properties which discard a movement approach. Finally, the interface properties of postverbal subjects are examined, showing that their position does not depend on the argument structure of the verb and is not <i>necessarily </i>different from the position of (referential) preverbal subjects. Though the present analysis is mainly concerned with Italian, a comparison with Bantu data is also proposed in order to show similarities, discuss (apparent) discrepancies and highlight implications for future research.
10
01
JB code
la.131.16cos
293
322
30
Article
16
01
Focus at the interface: Evidence from Romance and Bantu
1
A01
João Costa
Costa, João
João
Costa
Universidade Nova de Lisboa
2
A01
Nancy C. Kula
Kula, Nancy C.
Nancy C.
Kula
University of Essex
01
Word order variation in Romance and Bantu has been related to information structure portrayed in the different discourse functions of the sentential elements involved. Based on the distribution of new information focus in Romance and Bantu, this paper argues that discourse functions need not be directly encoded in syntax. The position defended here is that syntax generates all possible structures which are filtered out at the interface with the phonological component. The prosodic phrasing of these structures is what indicates focused constituents occurring in positions of prominence. The paramount significance of prosody for the determination of focus is particularly illustrated in those cases both in Romance and Bantu where, for syntactic reasons, change in word order is restricted but prosodic effects still accompany focus. The proposed interface approach to focus accounts for the variation in focus strategies and the intimate relation of focus to prosody which is attested in Romance and Bantu. Crucially, the evidence from Romance and Bantu is complementary. The Romance data provide the necessary syntactic evidence for not positing a designated focus position in the syntactic hierarchy for focus, whereas the Bantu data show that prosodic effects may emerge in varying ways, providing evidence for not linking a single syntactic position to a given prosodic effect. The paper in this respect highlights the similarities and differences of the role of prosody in indicating focus in stress versus tone languages.
10
01
JB code
la.131.17wal
323
350
28
Article
17
01
Agreement in thetic VS sentences in Bantu and Romance
1
A01
Jenneke van der Wal
Wal, Jenneke van der
Jenneke
van der
Wal
Leiden University Centre for Linguistics
01
Both Bantu and Romance languages use a V(erb) S(ubject) construction to express thetic (“out-of-the-blue”) sentences. Two types of languages can be distinguished within these language families, with respect to the verbal agreement in a thetic VS sentence: in type 1 the verb has default agreement, whereas in type 2 the verb agrees with the postverbal subject. In the Bantu languages these two types also display a difference in the use of conjoint and disjoint verb forms. Collins (2004), Carstens (2005), and Baker (2008) have previously analyzed such agreement and word order phenomena. These accounts, attributing the differences between types 1 and 2 to parameter settings of the Agree system, do not offer a satisfactory explanation. This paper proposes that the difference is due to the status of the agreement of the verb, which is pronominal in type 1 languages and purely grammatical in type 2. Arguments for this analysis are found in Case, Binding Theory and information structure. The focus in this paper is on the Romance languages French and Italian, and on the Bantu languages Sesotho and Makhuwa.
10
01
JB code
la.131.18ind
351
1
Miscellaneous
18
01
Index of languages
10
01
JB code
la.131.19gen
353
355
3
Miscellaneous
19
01
General index
02
JBENJAMINS
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Amsterdam/Philadelphia
NL
04
20080926
2008
John Benjamins
02
WORLD
13
15
9789027255143
01
JB
3
John Benjamins e-Platform
03
jbe-platform.com
09
WORLD
21
01
00
115.00
EUR
R
01
00
97.00
GBP
Z
01
gen
00
173.00
USD
S
479007126
03
01
01
JB
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
JB code
LA 131 Hb
15
9789027255143
13
2008023397
BB
01
LA
02
0166-0829
Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today
131
01
The Bantu–Romance Connection
The
Bantu–Romance Connection
A comparative investigation of verbal agreement, DPs, and information structure
01
la.131
01
https://benjamins.com
02
https://benjamins.com/catalog/la.131
1
B01
Cécile De Cat
De Cat, Cécile
Cécile
De Cat
University of Leeds
2
B01
Katherine Demuth
Demuth, Katherine
Katherine
Demuth
Brown University
01
eng
376
xix
355
LAN009000
v.2006
CFK
2
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.GENER
Generative linguistics
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.OTHAF
Other African languages
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.ROM
Romance linguistics
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.SYNTAX
Syntax
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.THEOR
Theoretical linguistics
06
01
This landmark volume is the first work specifically designed to explore the extent to which striking surface morpho-syntactic similarities between Bantu and Romance languages actually represent similar syntactic structures. In particular, it explores the timely and much debated issues of verbal morphology and agreement, the structure of DPs, and word order/information structure, with the goal of providing a better understanding of the structure of the different languages investigated, and the implications this holds for syntactic theory more generally. All of the papers draw on data from both Bantu and Romance languages, providing a framework for much-needed further comparative research on the nature of linguistic structure, its diversity and constraints, and the implications this has for learnability/acquisition. The volume also provides an important precedent for incorporating insights from Bantu linguistic structure into mainstream of syntax research.
04
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475/la.131.png
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027255143.jpg
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027255143.tif
06
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/la.131.hb.png
07
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/125/la.131.png
25
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/la.131.hb.png
27
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/la.131.hb.png
10
01
JB code
la.131.01ack
vii
1
Miscellaneous
1
01
Acknowledgments
10
01
JB code
la.131.02lis
ix
x
2
Miscellaneous
2
01
List of contributors
10
01
JB code
la.131.03int
xi
xix
9
Article
3
01
Introduction
10
01
JB code
la.131.04par
Section header
4
01
Part 1. Clitics and agreement
10
01
JB code
la.131.05mar
3
39
37
Article
5
01
Concepts of structural underspecification in Bantu and Romance
1
A01
Lutz Marten
Marten, Lutz
Lutz
Marten
Department of Africa, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London
2
A01
Ruth M. Kempson
Kempson, Ruth M.
Ruth M.
Kempson
Philosophy Department, King’s College, London
3
A01
Miriam Bouzouita
Bouzouita, Miriam
Miriam
Bouzouita
Philosophy Department, King’s College, London
01
The paper explores parallelisms between Bantu (specifically Otjiherero) and Romance (through Latin and Spanish) with respect to left and right peripheries, and subject and object clitics. The analysis is formulated in Dynamic Syntax (DS, Cann et al. 2005) and centrally involves notions of structural underspecification. Through providing detailed analyses of different word order possibilities in the Bantu and Romance languages discussed, we show how DS concepts of structural growth over initially underspecified tree relations, such as the building of linked structures and unfixed nodes, provide a uniform basis for analyses of word order variation across the two language groups. We then extend our analysis to include Bantu subject/object markers, which we analyze by employing the same formal tools as used in the analysis of Romance (object) clitics, namely unfixed nodes which have to be construed within a tightly locally restricted domain. Empirical support for our analysis comes from restrictions on the presence of object markers in passive and locative inversion constructions in Otjiherero, which we show to follow from independent constraints of the availability of unfixed nodes within a given domain. The analyses of Bantu and Romance presented show that despite differences in surface morphology between the two language groups, both exhibit a striking parallel with respect to the way lexical information and general structure building principles of DS interact. The difference between Romance clitic systems and the agglutinative morphology of Bantu subject and object makers is thus seen to be comparatively superficial, while the DS analysis brings out the strong structural parallelism between the two language groups.
10
01
JB code
la.131.06car
41
82
42
Article
6
01
On different types of clitic clusters
1
A01
Anna Cardinaletti
Cardinaletti, Anna
Anna
Cardinaletti
Ca’ Foscari University of Venice
01
In this paper, Italian and Bantu clitic clusters are analyzed and compared. I claim that in both language families, pronouns check case in a low clitic position, and in so doing they reverse the order of arguments. In Italian, clitics move to a high clitic position where they check person and number features. Different types of Italian clusters are individuated: they differ syntactically, phonologically, and morphologically. As in Kayne’s (1994) proposal, clusters can be formed either on one single functional head or on adjacent heads; the former type can appear both in enclisis and proclisis, the latter only in proclisis. Clitic pronouns can end with an epenthetic vowel or a class marker/ inflectional morpheme; the former (consonantal clitics) can appear in clitic clusters in any position, the latter (morphologically complex clitics) cannot be the first element in clitic clusters dominated by one single head. Finally, some clusters are inserted as lexical units, others are two independent words: only the former display the linking vowel [e]. The intricate interplay of these (partially) independent properties explains a number of restrictions on clusters found in Italian (and other Romance languages). The hierarchy of person and number features in the high clitic position is also discussed, which explains other restrictions on clusters.
10
01
JB code
la.131.07lab
83
109
27
Article
7
01
Pronominal object markers in Romance and Bantu
1
A01
Marie Labelle
Labelle, Marie
Marie
Labelle
Université du Québec à Montréal
01
Romance pronominal clitics and Bantu object markers vary in gender and number, replace arguments, and surface to the left of the verbal root in declarative clauses. Both types of morphemes are regularly analyzed as affixes on the verb. It is argued that both have syntactic properties that justify treating them differently from lexical affixes. The argument is first made for French unstressed pronominal objects like <i>me, le, en, </i>drawing from their distribution in contemporary French as well as from their historical behavior. It is shown that they are syntactic objects, and that their morphophonological affix-like properties should be treated independently of their syntactic behavior. Then evidence is presented pointing to the fact that Bantu object markers are also syntactic objects of some sort. The last section asks whether one can arrive at a unified treatment of both elements. The conclusion is that by focusing on the morphophonological properties of these pronominal elements, one runs the risk of overlooking their syntactic properties.
10
01
JB code
la.131.08har
111
128
18
Article
8
01
The Bantu-Romance connection in verb movement and verbal inflectional morphology
The
Bantu-Romance connection in verb movement and verbal inflectional morphology
1
A01
Carolyn Harford
Harford, Carolyn
Carolyn
Harford
Department of English and Communication, Midlands State University
01
Romance and Bantu languages show a range of contrasting morphological and syntactic properties, ranging from WH extraction strategies and the existence of V2 to directionality of affixation and degree of fusion and agglutination in verbal inflectional morphology. Using Isizulu and Chishona (Bantu) and standard French and Italian (Romance) as examples, this paper correlates these contrasts in terms of a common right-branching Split-INFL structure, and contrasting preferences for movement (STAY, in Optimality Theoretic terms). It is proposed that the same preference which motivates WH extraction strategies in the four languages also motivates the contrast between the relatively prefixal and agglutinative verbal inflectional morphology of Isizulu and Chishona and the suffixal and more fusional verbal inflectional morphology of French and Italian. The conclusions reinforce intuitions that languages belonging to the Romance and Bantu language families are typologically similar.
10
01
JB code
la.131.09par
Section header
9
01
Part 2. The structure of DPs
10
01
JB code
la.131.10car
131
165
35
Article
10
01
DP in Bantu and Romance
1
A01
Vicki Carstens
Carstens, Vicki
Vicki
Carstens
University of Missouri-Columbia
01
The paper considers several aspects of Bantu and Romance DPs, including: (i) Noun Class and grammatical gender; (ii) apparently derivational properties of the two; (iii) ordering among nouns and their modifiers; and (iv) concord in DPs. Several conclusions are argued for. Firstly, Bantu Class is a gender system like that of Romance, with gender-specific Spell-Out of number features. Secondly, despite some surface evidence to the contrary, gender/Class is an uninterpretable feature, without derivational functions. Thirdly, DPs of the two languages share a common architecture; and fourth, in both families concord is the result of the Agree relation. Thus many properties of nouns and DPs are common to both language groups, as the hypothesis of UG leads us to expect.
10
01
JB code
la.131.11zam
167
199
33
Article
11
01
On the interpretability of φ-features
1
A01
Roberto Zamparelli
Zamparelli, Roberto
Roberto
Zamparelli
01
The paper reconsiders the evidence for the interpretable status of φ-features within DP in Romance languages, focusing on Italian. The conclusions are that, given a reasonably local interpretation of what counts as interpretable, gender is not an interpretable feature, and number (or plur, in the sense of Heycock & Zamparelli 2005) is interpretable, but is not sufficient to drive the process of verbal and predicative agreement. The notion of “default”, particularly with respect to the Person feature, is discussed and various alternatives are explored.
10
01
JB code
la.131.12giu
201
237
37
Article
12
01
Agreement and concord in nominal expressions
1
A01
Giuliana Giusti
Giusti, Giuliana
Giuliana
Giusti
Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia
01
This paper claims that feature sharing should be analyzed as the result of at least two different processes, which are named here <i>Agreement </i>and <i>Concord, </i>and inquires how these two processes are manifested inside nominal expressions (NEs). Agreement is the transfer of the Person features of the possessor (the “subject” of the NE) onto some functional head (parallel to subject Agreement in the clause) with the effect that (Genitive) Case is assigned. On the contrary, Concord is the transfer of Number, Word Class, and Case specifications from a functional head onto a modifier, which is first-merged as a Specifier of that functional head. The claim is that, quite differently from Agreement, Concord arises from the merger of a modifier, underspecified for uninterpretable features, in the specifier of a functional head, carrying a copy of those features. In other words, Concord is directly enhanced by the Spec-Head configuration; it does not involve merger of a probe which targets a goal and, as a consequence, never triggers (overt or covert) movement. This proposal can dispense with a number of otherwise unmotivated movements and can derive the different properties of these two kinds of feature sharing phenomena. The argument is supported by observing macro-parallelisms across Bantu and Romance languages, in particular Swahili and Xhosa on the one hand and Romanian and Italian on the other hand.
10
01
JB code
la.131.13fer
239
258
20
Article
13
01
A unified syntactic analysis of Italian and Luganda nouns
A
unified syntactic analysis of Italian and Luganda nouns
1
A01
Franca Ferrari-Bridgers
Ferrari-Bridgers, Franca
Franca
Ferrari-Bridgers
Department of Speech and Communication Studies, IONA College
01
In this paper, I propose a unified syntactic analysis of Luganda and Italian simple nouns. I argue that Italian and Luganda nouns are formed in the syntax via merge and move operations. More specifically, I show that in both languages all nouns are formed via the merger of the nominalizer head [n] with a nominal stem [LP] yielding the nominal structure [nP [n [LP]]] and that syntactic movement is necessary in the noun formation process of Italian nouns to derive the correct morpheme order.<br />In order to prove that the structure [nP [n [LP]]] is representative for both languages, I demonstrate that the nominalizer head [n] corresponds to both the Italian gender feature and the Luganda class feature and that, therefore, gender and class are the same feature. The data analysis in sections (2) and (3) of this paper supports the claim that gender and class are the same feature because of their identical inflectional and derivational functions. At the inflectional level, gender and class trigger VP and DP agreement and at the derivational level gender and class function as n-marked heads whose merger with an XP yields a noun.
10
01
JB code
la.131.14par
Section header
14
01
Part 3. Information structure
10
01
JB code
la.131.15fra
261
292
32
Article
15
01
The fine structure of the Topic field
The
fine structure of the Topic field
1
A01
Mara Frascarelli
Frascarelli, Mara
Mara
Frascarelli
Università degli Studi di Roma Tre
01
Based on interface evidence, this paper shows that the interpretation of discourse categories relies on syntactic conditions. Specifically, the existence of a systematic connection between formal properties and discourse functions shows that Topics are licensed in dedicated positions in the C-domain, which correspond to specific realizations at the PF-interface. Different types of Topics thus correspond to specific tonal events and show A’-properties which discard a movement approach. Finally, the interface properties of postverbal subjects are examined, showing that their position does not depend on the argument structure of the verb and is not <i>necessarily </i>different from the position of (referential) preverbal subjects. Though the present analysis is mainly concerned with Italian, a comparison with Bantu data is also proposed in order to show similarities, discuss (apparent) discrepancies and highlight implications for future research.
10
01
JB code
la.131.16cos
293
322
30
Article
16
01
Focus at the interface: Evidence from Romance and Bantu
1
A01
João Costa
Costa, João
João
Costa
Universidade Nova de Lisboa
2
A01
Nancy C. Kula
Kula, Nancy C.
Nancy C.
Kula
University of Essex
01
Word order variation in Romance and Bantu has been related to information structure portrayed in the different discourse functions of the sentential elements involved. Based on the distribution of new information focus in Romance and Bantu, this paper argues that discourse functions need not be directly encoded in syntax. The position defended here is that syntax generates all possible structures which are filtered out at the interface with the phonological component. The prosodic phrasing of these structures is what indicates focused constituents occurring in positions of prominence. The paramount significance of prosody for the determination of focus is particularly illustrated in those cases both in Romance and Bantu where, for syntactic reasons, change in word order is restricted but prosodic effects still accompany focus. The proposed interface approach to focus accounts for the variation in focus strategies and the intimate relation of focus to prosody which is attested in Romance and Bantu. Crucially, the evidence from Romance and Bantu is complementary. The Romance data provide the necessary syntactic evidence for not positing a designated focus position in the syntactic hierarchy for focus, whereas the Bantu data show that prosodic effects may emerge in varying ways, providing evidence for not linking a single syntactic position to a given prosodic effect. The paper in this respect highlights the similarities and differences of the role of prosody in indicating focus in stress versus tone languages.
10
01
JB code
la.131.17wal
323
350
28
Article
17
01
Agreement in thetic VS sentences in Bantu and Romance
1
A01
Jenneke van der Wal
Wal, Jenneke van der
Jenneke
van der
Wal
Leiden University Centre for Linguistics
01
Both Bantu and Romance languages use a V(erb) S(ubject) construction to express thetic (“out-of-the-blue”) sentences. Two types of languages can be distinguished within these language families, with respect to the verbal agreement in a thetic VS sentence: in type 1 the verb has default agreement, whereas in type 2 the verb agrees with the postverbal subject. In the Bantu languages these two types also display a difference in the use of conjoint and disjoint verb forms. Collins (2004), Carstens (2005), and Baker (2008) have previously analyzed such agreement and word order phenomena. These accounts, attributing the differences between types 1 and 2 to parameter settings of the Agree system, do not offer a satisfactory explanation. This paper proposes that the difference is due to the status of the agreement of the verb, which is pronominal in type 1 languages and purely grammatical in type 2. Arguments for this analysis are found in Case, Binding Theory and information structure. The focus in this paper is on the Romance languages French and Italian, and on the Bantu languages Sesotho and Makhuwa.
10
01
JB code
la.131.18ind
351
1
Miscellaneous
18
01
Index of languages
10
01
JB code
la.131.19gen
353
355
3
Miscellaneous
19
01
General index
02
JBENJAMINS
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Amsterdam/Philadelphia
NL
04
20080926
2008
John Benjamins
02
WORLD
01
245
mm
02
164
mm
08
820
gr
01
JB
1
John Benjamins Publishing Company
+31 20 6304747
+31 20 6739773
bookorder@benjamins.nl
01
https://benjamins.com
01
WORLD
US CA MX
21
22
20
01
02
JB
1
00
115.00
EUR
R
02
02
JB
1
00
121.90
EUR
R
01
JB
10
bebc
+44 1202 712 934
+44 1202 712 913
sales@bebc.co.uk
03
GB
21
20
02
02
JB
1
00
97.00
GBP
Z
01
JB
2
John Benjamins North America
+1 800 562-5666
+1 703 661-1501
benjamins@presswarehouse.com
01
https://benjamins.com
01
US CA MX
21
20
01
gen
02
JB
1
00
173.00
USD