Chapter published in:
Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 16: Selected papers from the 47th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Newark, Delaware
Edited by Irene Vogel
[Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 16] 2020
► pp. 20–35

Agreement and pronouns

Implications for partial control

| The Pennsylvania State University
| The Pennsylvania State University
This chapter compares the workings of agreement mismatches involving the French pronoun on with those involving PRO in partial control (PC) environments in order to advance our understanding of the type of plurality that has been assumed to be associated with the latter. The theoretical framework used to effect this comparison is the two-step theory of Agree argued for by Arregi and Nevins (2012) and Smith (2017). The evidence uncovered suggests that whatever is assumed to induce the plurality of PC PRO (e.g. Landau’s (2016b) associative morpheme) leaves neither morphological nor semantic agreement footprints. We also show that, on the LF side, the type of plural set denoted by PC PRO appears to be immune to any sort of quantificational manipulation. We are thus left with an inference of plurality with no tangible grammatical correlates, which points in the direction of a process of pragmatic associative reference along the lines of Haug (2014).
Keywords: agree, partial control, plurality, secondary predicates, semantic agreement
Published online: 21 August 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/rllt.16.02aut
References

References

Ardid-Gumiel, Ana
2001 “The Syntax of Depictives. Subjects, Modes of Judgement and I-L/S-L Properties.” In Proceedings of the Workshop on the Syntax of Predication, ed. by N. Zhang, 1–26. Berlin: Zentrum Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft (ZAS).Google Scholar
Arregi, Karlos, and Andrew Nevins
2012 Morphotactics: Basque Auxiliaries and the Structure of Spellout. Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Authier, J.-Marc, and Lisa Reed
2018 “Symmetric Reciprocal Semantics as a Predictor of Partial Control.” Linguistic Inquiry 49: 379–393. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Benmamoun, Elabbas, Archna Bhatia, and Maria Polinsky
2009 “Closest Conjunct Agreement in Head Final Languages.” Linguistic Variation Yearbook 9: 67–88. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bowers, John
2008 “On Reducing Control to Movement.” Syntax 11: 125–143. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bruening, Benjamin
2018 “Depictive Secondary Predicates and Small Clause Approaches to Argument Structure.” Linguistic Inquiry 49: 537–559. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert, and Catherine Marshall
1981 “Definite Reference and Mutual Knowledge.” In Elements of Discourse Understanding, ed. by A. Joshi, B. Webber, and I. Sag, 10–63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Corbett, Greville
1983 Hierarchies, Targets and Controllers: Agreement Patterns in Slavic. London: Croon Helm.Google Scholar
Creissels, Denis
2011 “Impersonal Pronouns and Coreference: Two Case Studies.” Unpublished ms., University of Lyon, France.Google Scholar
Duffey, Patrick
2014 Reclaiming Control as a Semantic and Pragmatic Phenomenon. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Haug, Dag Trygve Truslew
2014 “The Anaphoric Semantics of Partial Control.” In Proceedings of SALT 24, ed. by T. Snider, S. D’Antonio, and M. Weigand, 213–233. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Linguistics Circle.Google Scholar
Hornstein, Norbert
2001 Move! A Minimalist Theory of Construal. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Irimia, Monica-Alexandrina
2005 “Types of Secondary Predication.” Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 25: 20–29.Google Scholar
Kathol, Andreas
2000 “Agreement and the Syntax-Morphology Interface in HPSG.” In Studies in Contemporary Phrase Structure Grammar, ed. by R. Levine, and G. Green, 223–274. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Landau, Idan
2000 Elements of Control: Structure and Meaning in Infinitival Constructions. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016a “Against the Null Comitative Analysis of Partial Control.” Linguistic Inquiry 47: 572–580. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016b “Agreement at PF: An Argument from Partial Control.” Syntax 19: 79–109. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lawler, John
1972 A Problem in Participatory Democracy. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Marušič, Franc, Tatjana Marvin, and Rok Žaucer
2003 “Depictive Secondary Predication with No PRO.” Paper presented at the 5th European Conference on Formal Description of Slavic Languages, Leipzig University. sabotin​.ung​.si​/~rzaucer​_2008​_Depictives​-with​-no​-PRO​.pdf
Morgan, Jerry
1984 “Some Problems of Determination in English Number Agreement.” In Proceedings of the 1st Eastern States Conference in Linguistics, ed. by G. Alvarez, B. Brodie, and T. McCoy, 69–78. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Nunes, Jairo
2001 “Sideward Movement.” Linguistic Inquiry 32: 303–344. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004 Linearization of Chains and Sideward Movement. Cambridge: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pearson, Hazel
2013 The Sense of Self: Topics in the Semantics of de se expressions. Boston, MA: Harvard University dissertation.Google Scholar
Pylkkänen, Liina
2008 Introducing Arguments. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ritchie, Katherine
2014 “Collective Nouns: Polysemy and Predication.” Paper presented at the 2014 Meeting of the Philosophical Linguistics and Linguistical Philosophy Conference in Tarrytown, NY.
Roberts, Ian
1988 “Predicative APs.” Linguistic Inquiry 19: 703–710.Google Scholar
Smith, Peter
2015 “Feature Mismatches: Consequences for Syntax, Morphology and Semantics.” University of Connecticut dissertation, Storrs, CT.
2017 “The Syntax of Semantic Agreement in English.” Journal of Linguistics 53: 823–863. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stowell, Tim
1981 Origins of Phrase Structure. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA dissertation.Google Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susi
2017 “Formal and Semantic Agreement in Syntax: A Dual Feature Approach.” In Language Use and Linguistic Structure, ed. by J. Emonds, and M. Janebová, 19–36. Olomouc: Palacky University.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Reed, Lisa A.
2020. On Single and Two-Tiered Approaches to Control. Languages 5:4 ► pp. 71 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 december 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.