Part of
Pseudo-Coordination and Multiple Agreement ConstructionsEdited by Giuliana Giusti, Vincenzo Nicolò Di Caro and Daniel Ross
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 274] 2022
► pp. 271–286
Edited by Giuliana Giusti, Vincenzo Nicolò Di Caro and Daniel Ross
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 274] 2022
► pp. 271–286
Chapter 12Partial versus full agreement in Turkish possessive and clausal DP-Coordination
In Turkish nominal phrases and clauses where a coordinated possessor or subject is related to agreement morphology on the possessee or the nominalized predicate, respectively, agreement is realized either in full or in partial expression. The choice between the two is determined in certain cases by syntactic phenomena, suggesting that agreement must figure in syntax. However, partial possessor agreement appears to result from a relationship between the possessee or nominalized predicate, and the last conjunct only, hinting that it is also subject to linear locality conditions. We conclude that the agreement phenomenon in languages results from conditions that apply in syntax proper and from conditions that apply in a post-syntactic component separately, which can alter the output of syntax proper where applicable.
Keywords: Partial agreement, Turkish, narrow syntax, linear locality conditions, post-syntactic morphology
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Background
- 3.Turkish partial agreement in the nominal domain
- 4.Nominal agreement within a binding domain
- 5.Nominal agreement within control constructions
- 6.Nominal agreement within pro-dropped conjuncts
- 7.Proposal
- 8.Conclusion
-
Acknowledgements -
Notes -
List of abbreviations -
References
References (18)
Aoun, J., E. Benmamoun and D. Sportiche. 1994. “Agreement, word order, and conjunction in some varieties of Arabic.” Linguistic Inquiry 25, 195–220.
Chomsky, N. 2000. “Minimalist Inquiries: The Framework,” in R. Martin, D. Michaels and J. Uriagereka (eds.), Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 89–155.
Embick, D. 2010. Localism versus globalism in morphology and phonology (Vol. 60). MIT Press. 
Erguvanlı, E. E. 1984. The function of word order in Turkish grammar (Vol. 106). Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press.
Esen. (2018, May 2). Evrimimiz üzerine [On our evolution]. 7/23. [URL]
Göksel, A. and Özsoy, A. S. 2000. “Is there a focus position in Turkish?” In A. Göksel and C. Kerslake (eds.) Studies on Turkish and Turkic Languages; Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Turkish Linguistics. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 219–228.
Halle, M. and A. Marantz. 1993. “Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection,” in K. Hale and S. Keyser, (eds.), The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 111–176.
. 1994. “Some key features of Distributed Morphology,” in A. Carnie, H. Harley, and T. Bures, eds., The Morphology-Syntax Connection, MITWPL 21, Cambridge, MA, 275–288.
Hardie, A. 2012. “CQPweb – combining power, flexibility and usability in a corpus analysis tool.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 17 (3), 380–409.
Harley, H. and Noyer, R. 1999. Distributed morphology. Glot International, 4(4), 3–9.
Harley, H. and Ritter, E. 2002. Person and number in pronouns: A feature-geometric analysis. Language, 78(3), 482–526.
Ince, A. 2009. Dimensions of ellipsis: Investigations in Turkish. Unpublished Dissertation. University of Maryland, College Park.
Kornfilt, J. and J. Whitman. 2011. “Afterword: Nominalizations in linguistic theory.” Lingua 121(7). 1297–1313.
Köylü, Y. 2018. A compositional approach to conjunct agreement in Turkish. Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of America, 3(1), 17:1–12.
Lees, R. B. 1961. The Phonology of Modern Standard Turkish. Indiana University Publications, Uralic and Altaic Series, vol. 6; The Hague: Mouton. Reprinted in 1997, London: Routledge.
Marušič, F., A. Nevins and A. Saksida. 2007. “Last-conjunct agreement in Slovenian,” in R. Compton, M. Goledzinowska and U. Savchenko (eds), Proceedings of Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Toronto Meeting 2006. Michigan Slavic Publications, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 210–227.
Nichols, J. and B. Bickel. 2013. “Locus of Marking in Possessive Noun Phrases,” in Dryer, M. S. and Haspelmath, M. (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. (Available online at [URL], Accessed on 2017-03-14.)
Serova, K. 2019. “Head Movement, Suspended Affixation, and the Turkish Clausal Spine.” Proceedings of the Workshop on Turkic and Languages in Contact with Turkic, 4(1), 89–103.