Part of
Passivization and Typology: Form and functionEdited by Werner Abraham and Larisa Leisiö
[Typological Studies in Language 68] 2006
► pp. 383–402
Edited by Werner Abraham and Larisa Leisiö
[Typological Studies in Language 68] 2006
► pp. 383–402
Case-driven agree, EPP, and passive in Turkish
This study argues for a movement-free account of passivization in Turkish. It shows that unlike what is observed in English passives, neither case nor EPP can motivate movement in Turkish passives, since, first, TP and vP do not play a role in syntactic case-checking; and second, EPP feature is not checked by Move XP in Turkish. It proposes that derivation of Turkish passives is an in situ phenomenon, dependent on morphological case realization, rather than on syntactic case-/EPP-checking via movement, which is also absent in the derivation of transitive, unaccusative and raising constructions in Turkish. Lack of such movement further accounts for the exceptional behavior of Turkish double-object constructions in terms of locality under passivization.
Cited by
Cited by 1 other publications
An-Nashef, Fawwaz & Jeroen van de Weijer
2020. Minimalist approach to symmetric and asymmetric double object constructions: Across-linguistic analysis. Cogent Arts & Humanities 7:1 ► pp. 1846261 ff. 
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 november 2023. 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.