219-7677
10
7500817
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers
onix@benjamins.nl
201608250432
ONIX title feed
eng
01
EUR
607011299
03
01
01
JB
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
JB code
LA 209 Eb
15
9789027270825
06
10.1075/la.209
13
2013041404
DG
002
02
01
LA
02
0166-0829
Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today
209
01
The Lexicon–Syntax Interface
The
Lexicon–Syntax Interface
Perspectives from South Asian languages
01
la.209
01
https://benjamins.com
02
https://benjamins.com/catalog/la.209
1
B01
Pritha Chandra
Chandra, Pritha
Pritha
Chandra
Indian Institute of Technology New Delhi
2
B01
Richa Srishti
Srishti, Richa
Richa
Srishti
Central Institute of Indian Languages Mysore
01
eng
282
vii
275
LAN009000
v.2006
CFK
2
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.GENER
Generative linguistics
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.SYNTAX
Syntax
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.THEOR
Theoretical linguistics
06
01
The present collection offers fresh perspectives on the lexicon-syntax interface, drawing on novel data from South Asian languages like Bangla, Hindi-Urdu, Kashmiri, Kannada, Malayalam, Manipuri, Punjabi, and Telugu. It covers different phenomena like adjectives, nominal phrases, ditransitives, light verbs, middles, passives, causatives, agreement, and pronominal clitics, while trying to settle the theoretical tensions underlying the interaction of the lexicon with the narrow syntactic component. All the chapters critically survey previous analyses in detail, suggesting how these may or may not be extended to South Asian languages. Novel explanations are proposed, which handle not only the novel data presented here, but also pave alternative ways to look at issues of minimalist architecture.
05
This volume of collected papers focuses on the lexicon-syntax interface of the languages of South Asia, which offer a relatively less explored, but rich and variegated, range of linguistic phenomena. The discussion of data ranges from the Dravidian languages of southern India to Kashmiri in the north, Kutchi Gujarati in the west and Manipuri in the east. The theoretical results that the papers come up with are very important for general linguistic theory and for our evolving understanding of the nature of Language.
K A. Jayaseelan, The English and Foreign Languages University, Hyderabad
04
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475/la.209.png
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027255921.jpg
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027255921.tif
06
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/la.209.hb.png
07
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/125/la.209.png
25
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/la.209.hb.png
27
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/la.209.hb.png
10
01
JB code
la.209.001ack
vii
viii
2
Article
1
01
Acknowledgement
10
01
JB code
la.209.01int
1
24
24
Article
2
01
The lexicon-syntax interface
The
lexicon-syntax interface
Some issues
1
A01
Pritha Chandra
Chandra, Pritha
Pritha
Chandra
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi and Central Institute of Indian Languages
2
A01
Richa Srishti
Srishti, Richa
Richa
Srishti
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi and Central Institute of Indian Languages
10
01
JB code
la.209.02men
25
52
28
Article
3
01
Property concepts and the apparent lack of adjectives in Dravidian
1
A01
Mythili Menon
Menon, Mythili
Mythili
Menon
University of Southern California
20
adjective
20
Dravidian
20
feature sharing
20
nominalization
20
relativization
01
Dravidian lacks an adjective category lexically and neither does it derive one in the syntax. The primary data comes from Malayalam where unlike what previous accounts suggest (Bhat 1994; Amritavalli & Jayaseelan 2003; Jayaseelan 2007), the lexicon comprises of uninflected primitive roots (Marantz 1997; Borer 2003). These roots are property concept roots and they combine with null verbal and nominal heads to derive structures. The syntax derives structures, which in English-type languages would be expressed with an adjective. Relativization and nominalization are the two routes to arrive at meanings expressed by adjectives in other languages.
10
01
JB code
la.209.03sye
53
70
18
Article
4
01
Adjective-fronting as evidence for Focus and Topic within the Bangla nominal domain
1
A01
Saurov Syed
Syed, Saurov
Saurov
Syed
University of Southern California
20
adjective-fronting
20
Bangla
20
focus
20
syntax
20
topic
01
The goal of this paper is twofold. First it talks about the syntax of adjectives in Bangla, and argues in favor of the idea that there is a fixed hierarchy of functional projections where Adjective phrases are manifest as specifiers. It takes the stance that the adjectives are part of the lexicon; they are taken from the lexicon during a computation, and mapped into the syntax, forming an AdjectivePhrase (AdjP). Secondly, the paper argues for Focus and Topic phrases within the nominal domain, thus extending Rizzi’s original proposal of a split CP to DPs (cf. Rizzi 1997). Specifically the paper uses evidence from adjective fronting to claim that there is a fixed FocP immediately above the DP in Bangla, and at least one TopP above the FocP. The constituent bearing such a topic/focus feature needs to move up in a local checking configuration with the relevant functional head that has the matching feature, thus explaining the attested adjective-fronting.
10
01
JB code
la.209.04amr
71
100
30
Article
5
01
Rich results
1
A01
R. Amritavalli
Amritavalli, R.
R.
Amritavalli
The English & Foreign Languages University
20
dative of possession
20
event structure
20
experiencer
20
stativity
20
telicity
01
The first-phase event structure of two verbs typical of the Kannada dative experiencer construction, <i>bar</i>- ‘come’ and <i>aag</i>- ‘happen, become,’ suggests (differently from Ramchand 2008) that stative verbs may project “rich” results and “poor” processes. The properties of <i>bar</i>- are explored vis-à-vis English ‘come.’ <i>Bar</i>- and <i>aag</i>- allow telicity by “classifying events that are themselves already results” (Higginbotham 1999). The result event is a small clause with experiencer and experience in a possession relation, as in the English double object construction; with the difference that Kannada encodes possession with dative case, whereas possessional <i>to</i> in English incorporates into <i>be</i> to yield <i>have</i> (Kayne 1993 [2000]). The dative argument occupies the resultee position; arguments in higher event structure positions (<sc>undergoer or initiator</sc>) are nominative in Kannada.
10
01
JB code
la.209.05bal
101
126
26
Article
6
01
Lexical semantics of transitivizer light verbs in Telugu
1
A01
Rahul Balusu
Balusu, Rahul
Rahul
Balusu
EFL University, Hyderabad
20
argument structure
20
complex predicates
20
Dravidian
20
first phase syntax
20
inceptual meaning
01
This chapter examines the kind of meanings that are uniformly present in constructions involving a certain variety of light verbs in Telugu – transitivizer light verbs. The meanings that are inalienably constant in both the verbal and the nominal complex predicates that these light verbs form are the inceptual meanings- emphasizing inception or beginning, continuation or progression, and completion or end-point. These meanings can be directly linked, and are further evidence for the structural decomposition of the verbal domain into 3 subparts or projections (First Phase Syntax, Ramchand 2008) – <i>initP</i> (introduces causation), <i>procP</i> (specifies the process), and <i>resP</i> (gives the result state). The semantics of this structure is what I claim gives rise to the inceptual meanings.
10
01
JB code
la.209.06mal
127
148
22
Article
7
01
Ditransitive structures in Hindi/Urdu
1
A01
Shiti Malhotra
Malhotra, Shiti
Shiti
Malhotra
Northeastern University
20
ditransitives
20
hierarchical relation
20
Hindi/Urdu
20
thematic structure
20
VP-structure
01
This chapter makes the following two language specific claims; (a) Hindi/Urdu involves two types of ditransitive constructions, corresponding to the prepositional dative constructions and the double object constructions as in languages like English, and (b) the two constructions are not derivationally connected, and are a result of two distinct ditransitive verbs in Hindi/Urdu, namely the “send” type verbs and the “show” type verbs. The two types of verbs have different argument structures and as a consequence two different verb phrase structures. The difference between the two types of verbs however doesn’t get reflected in the word – order in Hindi/Urdu because of the feature-driven movement of the objects to the edge of the vP.
10
01
JB code
la.209.07sri
149
170
22
Article
8
01
Is Kashmiri passive really a passive?
1
A01
Richa Srishti
Srishti, Richa
Richa
Srishti
Central Institute of Indian Languages Mysore
2
A01
Shahid Bhat
Bhat, Shahid
Shahid
Bhat
Central Institute of Indian Languages Mysore
20
demotion
20
detransitivization
20
passivization
20
promotion
20
underlying subject
01
The present paper explores passives in Kashmiri, a Northwestern Dardic language of the Indo-Aryan family. Though Kashmiri has some special features like V-2 phenomenon, pronominal clitics etc. it has an analytic passive construction like its Indo-Aryan counterparts. The internal argument surfaces as the subject of the passive, where the participial/infinitival verbal form -<i>nI</i> is added to the verb root followed by a periphrastic auxiliary <i>yun</i> ‘to come’ in perfective form. The agent of the action is in the form of <i>athi</i> or <i>zaryi</i> (<i>by</i>/<i>through</i>) and is preferably omitted. This optionality casts a doubt on its status – whether it is an adjunct or an argument. The promotion of the internal argument to the subject position is another key issue. The present paper investigates the above issues and claims that the Kashmiri passive construction is also a kind of ACTIVE-Passive and not really passive as in English. It is argued that in Kashmiri passives, the underlying subject remains an active subject and the underlying object does not become the surface subject. To prove this claim, some tests based on anaphora binding, pronominal co-reference, control, etc. are applied.
10
01
JB code
la.209.08cha
171
196
26
Article
9
01
Middles in the syntax
1
A01
Pritha Chandra
Chandra, Pritha
Pritha
Chandra
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi
20
Aspect
20
Middles
20
Passives
20
Two-modular Approach
20
Voice
01
It is well-known that while some languages mark middles and passives similarly, some others mark them differently. Researchers opine that this difference may ensue from the loci of middle generation; they can be generated either in the lexicon or in the syntax. I present some problems with the two-modular approach and propose a syntactic analysis for all middles, with the differences emanating from the choice of the non-active voice head. Languages like Hindi-Urdu which choose a middle non-active voice head fail to project a higher aspectual head hosting an external argument. The truncated structure makes the middles different from passives, in both morphological form and syntactic behavior.
10
01
JB code
la.209.09sri
197
216
20
Article
10
01
Not so high
The case of causee in South Asian Languages (Hindi, Kashmiri, Punjabi & Manipuri)
1
A01
Richa Srishti
Srishti, Richa
Richa
Srishti
Central Institute of Indian Languages Mysore
20
?P-external
20
Argument/Adjunct
20
Causative alternation
20
Voice
01
The status of the causee argument in Hindi and other South Asian Languages has been contentious in recent literature as it takes instrumental/ablatice Case marker and hence, seems comparable to an instrumental/ablative adjunct (-<i>se</i> in Hindi, <i>athi </i>in Kashmiri, <i>tõ: </i>in Punjabi, and -<i>n∂</i> in Manipuri). The question is whether the instrumental/ablative Case marker appearing on the causee and on an instrumental adjunct should only receive an analysis of accidental homophony or a more principled analysis between the two is possible? The paper here argues that such an analysis is certainly possible. The instrumental/ablative is an adjunct and in causatives, the causee argument is merged to the Voice head as its specifier (the position involving <i>-se/athi/tõ:/n∂</i> being valued as a <i>structural,</i> rather than a lexical, Case). It is further argued that though, this position is υP-external, i.e. ‘high’ but not ‘high’ enough to count as the subject.
10
01
JB code
la.209.10gro
217
244
28
Article
11
01
Agreement and verb types in Kutchi Gujarati
1
A01
Patrick G. Grosz
Grosz, Patrick G.
Patrick G.
Grosz
Universität Tübingen
2
A01
Pritty Patel-Grosz
Patel-Grosz, Pritty
Pritty
Patel-Grosz
Universität Tübingen
20
future perfect
20
Gujarati
20
Marwari
20
modals
20
psych predicates
20
split-ergativity
01
This paper explores the φ-agreement system in Kutchi Gujarati, focusing on canonical transitive cases and on non-canonical cases involving psych predicates and modal auxiliaries. Based on the agreement pattern in the future perfect, we argue that φ-agreement in Kutchi Gujarati involves two agreement probes, a higher (number/person) probe in <i>T</i>, and a lower (gender/number) probe in the <i>v/Asp</i> area. After showing how such a system derives the split-ergative agreement pattern in canonical transitive constructions (Section 2), we extend our analysis to other types of verbs, specifically to psych predicates (such as <i>gam </i>‘like’) and to constructions that involve modal auxiliaries (such as <i>par </i>‘have to’), both of which require a dative-marked subject (Section 3).
10
01
JB code
la.209.11man
245
270
26
Article
12
01
Markedness and syncretism in Kashmiri differential argument encoding
1
A01
Emily Manetta
Manetta, Emily
Emily
Manetta
University of Vermont
20
clitics
20
Differential Argument encoding
20
Distributed Morphology
20
Kashmiri
20
syncretisms
01
The pronominal clitic system in Kashmiri takes the form of set of verbal suffixes conditioned by the case of the coreferent DP. This system interacts in unexpected ways with differential argument encoding (DAE) in Kashmiri, in which the case-marking of objects in non-perfective aspects is dependent on a person hierarchy. I will follow in spirit Aissen’s (2003) approach to DAE as adapted to Kashmiri in Sharma (2001), however I will argue that the particulars of the Kashmiri clitic system force us to adopt an account couched not in the syntax, but in the post-syntactic component of the grammar. Keine and Müller (2008) propose that DAE is a phenomenon of the morphology-syntax interface, employing harmonic alignment of scales within framework of Distributed Morphology (Halle & Marantz 1993, 1994). I argue here that an otherwise mysterious set of clitic syncretisms in Kashmiri, including the overlap in the marking of ergative subjects and accusative objects, find explanation if we consider Kashmiri DAE not as an instance of differential marking in the narrow syntax, but instead as a as a non-zero/non-zero alternation resulting from the interaction of morphological processes and a system of optimization at the morphology-syntax interface.
10
01
JB code
la.209.12aut
271
274
4
Article
13
01
Author index
10
01
JB code
la.209.13sub
275
276
2
Article
14
01
Subject index
02
JBENJAMINS
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Amsterdam/Philadelphia
NL
04
20140325
2014
John Benjamins B.V.
02
WORLD
13
15
9789027255921
01
JB
3
John Benjamins e-Platform
03
jbe-platform.com
09
WORLD
21
01
00
95.00
EUR
R
01
00
80.00
GBP
Z
01
gen
00
143.00
USD
S
42011298
03
01
01
JB
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
JB code
LA 209 Hb
15
9789027255921
13
2013041404
BB
01
LA
02
0166-0829
Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today
209
01
The Lexicon–Syntax Interface
The
Lexicon–Syntax Interface
Perspectives from South Asian languages
01
la.209
01
https://benjamins.com
02
https://benjamins.com/catalog/la.209
1
B01
Pritha Chandra
Chandra, Pritha
Pritha
Chandra
Indian Institute of Technology New Delhi
2
B01
Richa Srishti
Srishti, Richa
Richa
Srishti
Central Institute of Indian Languages Mysore
01
eng
282
vii
275
LAN009000
v.2006
CFK
2
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.GENER
Generative linguistics
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.SYNTAX
Syntax
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.THEOR
Theoretical linguistics
06
01
The present collection offers fresh perspectives on the lexicon-syntax interface, drawing on novel data from South Asian languages like Bangla, Hindi-Urdu, Kashmiri, Kannada, Malayalam, Manipuri, Punjabi, and Telugu. It covers different phenomena like adjectives, nominal phrases, ditransitives, light verbs, middles, passives, causatives, agreement, and pronominal clitics, while trying to settle the theoretical tensions underlying the interaction of the lexicon with the narrow syntactic component. All the chapters critically survey previous analyses in detail, suggesting how these may or may not be extended to South Asian languages. Novel explanations are proposed, which handle not only the novel data presented here, but also pave alternative ways to look at issues of minimalist architecture.
05
This volume of collected papers focuses on the lexicon-syntax interface of the languages of South Asia, which offer a relatively less explored, but rich and variegated, range of linguistic phenomena. The discussion of data ranges from the Dravidian languages of southern India to Kashmiri in the north, Kutchi Gujarati in the west and Manipuri in the east. The theoretical results that the papers come up with are very important for general linguistic theory and for our evolving understanding of the nature of Language.
K A. Jayaseelan, The English and Foreign Languages University, Hyderabad
04
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475/la.209.png
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027255921.jpg
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027255921.tif
06
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/la.209.hb.png
07
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/125/la.209.png
25
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/la.209.hb.png
27
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/la.209.hb.png
10
01
JB code
la.209.001ack
vii
viii
2
Article
1
01
Acknowledgement
10
01
JB code
la.209.01int
1
24
24
Article
2
01
The lexicon-syntax interface
The
lexicon-syntax interface
Some issues
1
A01
Pritha Chandra
Chandra, Pritha
Pritha
Chandra
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi and Central Institute of Indian Languages
2
A01
Richa Srishti
Srishti, Richa
Richa
Srishti
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi and Central Institute of Indian Languages
10
01
JB code
la.209.02men
25
52
28
Article
3
01
Property concepts and the apparent lack of adjectives in Dravidian
1
A01
Mythili Menon
Menon, Mythili
Mythili
Menon
University of Southern California
20
adjective
20
Dravidian
20
feature sharing
20
nominalization
20
relativization
01
Dravidian lacks an adjective category lexically and neither does it derive one in the syntax. The primary data comes from Malayalam where unlike what previous accounts suggest (Bhat 1994; Amritavalli & Jayaseelan 2003; Jayaseelan 2007), the lexicon comprises of uninflected primitive roots (Marantz 1997; Borer 2003). These roots are property concept roots and they combine with null verbal and nominal heads to derive structures. The syntax derives structures, which in English-type languages would be expressed with an adjective. Relativization and nominalization are the two routes to arrive at meanings expressed by adjectives in other languages.
10
01
JB code
la.209.03sye
53
70
18
Article
4
01
Adjective-fronting as evidence for Focus and Topic within the Bangla nominal domain
1
A01
Saurov Syed
Syed, Saurov
Saurov
Syed
University of Southern California
20
adjective-fronting
20
Bangla
20
focus
20
syntax
20
topic
01
The goal of this paper is twofold. First it talks about the syntax of adjectives in Bangla, and argues in favor of the idea that there is a fixed hierarchy of functional projections where Adjective phrases are manifest as specifiers. It takes the stance that the adjectives are part of the lexicon; they are taken from the lexicon during a computation, and mapped into the syntax, forming an AdjectivePhrase (AdjP). Secondly, the paper argues for Focus and Topic phrases within the nominal domain, thus extending Rizzi’s original proposal of a split CP to DPs (cf. Rizzi 1997). Specifically the paper uses evidence from adjective fronting to claim that there is a fixed FocP immediately above the DP in Bangla, and at least one TopP above the FocP. The constituent bearing such a topic/focus feature needs to move up in a local checking configuration with the relevant functional head that has the matching feature, thus explaining the attested adjective-fronting.
10
01
JB code
la.209.04amr
71
100
30
Article
5
01
Rich results
1
A01
R. Amritavalli
Amritavalli, R.
R.
Amritavalli
The English & Foreign Languages University
20
dative of possession
20
event structure
20
experiencer
20
stativity
20
telicity
01
The first-phase event structure of two verbs typical of the Kannada dative experiencer construction, <i>bar</i>- ‘come’ and <i>aag</i>- ‘happen, become,’ suggests (differently from Ramchand 2008) that stative verbs may project “rich” results and “poor” processes. The properties of <i>bar</i>- are explored vis-à-vis English ‘come.’ <i>Bar</i>- and <i>aag</i>- allow telicity by “classifying events that are themselves already results” (Higginbotham 1999). The result event is a small clause with experiencer and experience in a possession relation, as in the English double object construction; with the difference that Kannada encodes possession with dative case, whereas possessional <i>to</i> in English incorporates into <i>be</i> to yield <i>have</i> (Kayne 1993 [2000]). The dative argument occupies the resultee position; arguments in higher event structure positions (<sc>undergoer or initiator</sc>) are nominative in Kannada.
10
01
JB code
la.209.05bal
101
126
26
Article
6
01
Lexical semantics of transitivizer light verbs in Telugu
1
A01
Rahul Balusu
Balusu, Rahul
Rahul
Balusu
EFL University, Hyderabad
20
argument structure
20
complex predicates
20
Dravidian
20
first phase syntax
20
inceptual meaning
01
This chapter examines the kind of meanings that are uniformly present in constructions involving a certain variety of light verbs in Telugu – transitivizer light verbs. The meanings that are inalienably constant in both the verbal and the nominal complex predicates that these light verbs form are the inceptual meanings- emphasizing inception or beginning, continuation or progression, and completion or end-point. These meanings can be directly linked, and are further evidence for the structural decomposition of the verbal domain into 3 subparts or projections (First Phase Syntax, Ramchand 2008) – <i>initP</i> (introduces causation), <i>procP</i> (specifies the process), and <i>resP</i> (gives the result state). The semantics of this structure is what I claim gives rise to the inceptual meanings.
10
01
JB code
la.209.06mal
127
148
22
Article
7
01
Ditransitive structures in Hindi/Urdu
1
A01
Shiti Malhotra
Malhotra, Shiti
Shiti
Malhotra
Northeastern University
20
ditransitives
20
hierarchical relation
20
Hindi/Urdu
20
thematic structure
20
VP-structure
01
This chapter makes the following two language specific claims; (a) Hindi/Urdu involves two types of ditransitive constructions, corresponding to the prepositional dative constructions and the double object constructions as in languages like English, and (b) the two constructions are not derivationally connected, and are a result of two distinct ditransitive verbs in Hindi/Urdu, namely the “send” type verbs and the “show” type verbs. The two types of verbs have different argument structures and as a consequence two different verb phrase structures. The difference between the two types of verbs however doesn’t get reflected in the word – order in Hindi/Urdu because of the feature-driven movement of the objects to the edge of the vP.
10
01
JB code
la.209.07sri
149
170
22
Article
8
01
Is Kashmiri passive really a passive?
1
A01
Richa Srishti
Srishti, Richa
Richa
Srishti
Central Institute of Indian Languages Mysore
2
A01
Shahid Bhat
Bhat, Shahid
Shahid
Bhat
Central Institute of Indian Languages Mysore
20
demotion
20
detransitivization
20
passivization
20
promotion
20
underlying subject
01
The present paper explores passives in Kashmiri, a Northwestern Dardic language of the Indo-Aryan family. Though Kashmiri has some special features like V-2 phenomenon, pronominal clitics etc. it has an analytic passive construction like its Indo-Aryan counterparts. The internal argument surfaces as the subject of the passive, where the participial/infinitival verbal form -<i>nI</i> is added to the verb root followed by a periphrastic auxiliary <i>yun</i> ‘to come’ in perfective form. The agent of the action is in the form of <i>athi</i> or <i>zaryi</i> (<i>by</i>/<i>through</i>) and is preferably omitted. This optionality casts a doubt on its status – whether it is an adjunct or an argument. The promotion of the internal argument to the subject position is another key issue. The present paper investigates the above issues and claims that the Kashmiri passive construction is also a kind of ACTIVE-Passive and not really passive as in English. It is argued that in Kashmiri passives, the underlying subject remains an active subject and the underlying object does not become the surface subject. To prove this claim, some tests based on anaphora binding, pronominal co-reference, control, etc. are applied.
10
01
JB code
la.209.08cha
171
196
26
Article
9
01
Middles in the syntax
1
A01
Pritha Chandra
Chandra, Pritha
Pritha
Chandra
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi
20
Aspect
20
Middles
20
Passives
20
Two-modular Approach
20
Voice
01
It is well-known that while some languages mark middles and passives similarly, some others mark them differently. Researchers opine that this difference may ensue from the loci of middle generation; they can be generated either in the lexicon or in the syntax. I present some problems with the two-modular approach and propose a syntactic analysis for all middles, with the differences emanating from the choice of the non-active voice head. Languages like Hindi-Urdu which choose a middle non-active voice head fail to project a higher aspectual head hosting an external argument. The truncated structure makes the middles different from passives, in both morphological form and syntactic behavior.
10
01
JB code
la.209.09sri
197
216
20
Article
10
01
Not so high
The case of causee in South Asian Languages (Hindi, Kashmiri, Punjabi & Manipuri)
1
A01
Richa Srishti
Srishti, Richa
Richa
Srishti
Central Institute of Indian Languages Mysore
20
?P-external
20
Argument/Adjunct
20
Causative alternation
20
Voice
01
The status of the causee argument in Hindi and other South Asian Languages has been contentious in recent literature as it takes instrumental/ablatice Case marker and hence, seems comparable to an instrumental/ablative adjunct (-<i>se</i> in Hindi, <i>athi </i>in Kashmiri, <i>tõ: </i>in Punjabi, and -<i>n∂</i> in Manipuri). The question is whether the instrumental/ablative Case marker appearing on the causee and on an instrumental adjunct should only receive an analysis of accidental homophony or a more principled analysis between the two is possible? The paper here argues that such an analysis is certainly possible. The instrumental/ablative is an adjunct and in causatives, the causee argument is merged to the Voice head as its specifier (the position involving <i>-se/athi/tõ:/n∂</i> being valued as a <i>structural,</i> rather than a lexical, Case). It is further argued that though, this position is υP-external, i.e. ‘high’ but not ‘high’ enough to count as the subject.
10
01
JB code
la.209.10gro
217
244
28
Article
11
01
Agreement and verb types in Kutchi Gujarati
1
A01
Patrick G. Grosz
Grosz, Patrick G.
Patrick G.
Grosz
Universität Tübingen
2
A01
Pritty Patel-Grosz
Patel-Grosz, Pritty
Pritty
Patel-Grosz
Universität Tübingen
20
future perfect
20
Gujarati
20
Marwari
20
modals
20
psych predicates
20
split-ergativity
01
This paper explores the φ-agreement system in Kutchi Gujarati, focusing on canonical transitive cases and on non-canonical cases involving psych predicates and modal auxiliaries. Based on the agreement pattern in the future perfect, we argue that φ-agreement in Kutchi Gujarati involves two agreement probes, a higher (number/person) probe in <i>T</i>, and a lower (gender/number) probe in the <i>v/Asp</i> area. After showing how such a system derives the split-ergative agreement pattern in canonical transitive constructions (Section 2), we extend our analysis to other types of verbs, specifically to psych predicates (such as <i>gam </i>‘like’) and to constructions that involve modal auxiliaries (such as <i>par </i>‘have to’), both of which require a dative-marked subject (Section 3).
10
01
JB code
la.209.11man
245
270
26
Article
12
01
Markedness and syncretism in Kashmiri differential argument encoding
1
A01
Emily Manetta
Manetta, Emily
Emily
Manetta
University of Vermont
20
clitics
20
Differential Argument encoding
20
Distributed Morphology
20
Kashmiri
20
syncretisms
01
The pronominal clitic system in Kashmiri takes the form of set of verbal suffixes conditioned by the case of the coreferent DP. This system interacts in unexpected ways with differential argument encoding (DAE) in Kashmiri, in which the case-marking of objects in non-perfective aspects is dependent on a person hierarchy. I will follow in spirit Aissen’s (2003) approach to DAE as adapted to Kashmiri in Sharma (2001), however I will argue that the particulars of the Kashmiri clitic system force us to adopt an account couched not in the syntax, but in the post-syntactic component of the grammar. Keine and Müller (2008) propose that DAE is a phenomenon of the morphology-syntax interface, employing harmonic alignment of scales within framework of Distributed Morphology (Halle & Marantz 1993, 1994). I argue here that an otherwise mysterious set of clitic syncretisms in Kashmiri, including the overlap in the marking of ergative subjects and accusative objects, find explanation if we consider Kashmiri DAE not as an instance of differential marking in the narrow syntax, but instead as a as a non-zero/non-zero alternation resulting from the interaction of morphological processes and a system of optimization at the morphology-syntax interface.
10
01
JB code
la.209.12aut
271
274
4
Article
13
01
Author index
10
01
JB code
la.209.13sub
275
276
2
Article
14
01
Subject index
02
JBENJAMINS
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Amsterdam/Philadelphia
NL
04
20140325
2014
John Benjamins B.V.
02
WORLD
08
655
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
34
20
01
02
JB
1
00
95.00
EUR
R
02
02
JB
1
00
100.70
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
80.00
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
143.00
USD