| 1 |
On the locus and licensing of edge features
|
|
|
|
In: Glossa: a journal of general linguistics; Vol 6, No 1 (2021); 38 ; 2397-1835 (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 2 |
Anti-locality and subject extraction
|
|
|
|
In: Glossa: a journal of general linguistics; Vol 5, No 1 (2020); 84 ; 2397-1835 (2020)
|
|
Abstract:
In many languages, Ā-extraction of local subject arguments behaves differently from the extraction of other arguments, for example in triggering specialized morphosyntactic processes or being subject to additional restrictions. I argue that many such interactions are due to an anti-locality constraint on movement, which bans movement which is too short. Subject extraction is often distinguished due to the high canonical position of subjects in their clauses (e.g. Spec,TP), making their movement to the clause edge (e.g. Spec,CP) uniquely in danger of violating the Spec-to-Spec Anti-Locality constraint (Erlewine 2016). Concretely, three subject extraction asymmetry behaviors are discussed and analyzed: complementizer-trace effects, subject anti-agreement effects, and bans on subject resumption, including the so-called Highest Subject Restriction. In each case, we observe that the special behavior associated with subject extraction (a) can be obviated by increasing the distance of movement, (b) also applies to exceptionally high non-subjects, and (c) does not correlate with other subjecthood properties. These facts are straightforwardly explained by the anti-locality-based approach to these asymmetries, but are challenging for alternative accounts.
|
|
Keyword:
anti-agreement effects; anti-locality; complementizer-trace effects; Highest Subject Restriction; resumption; subject extraction; syntax
|
|
URL: https://www.glossa-journal.org/jms/article/view/1079
https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1079
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
| 3 |
Complementizer agreement is not allomorphy: A reply to Weisser (2019)
|
|
|
|
In: Glossa: a journal of general linguistics; Vol 5, No 1 (2020); 44 ; 2397-1835 (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 4 |
A special case of long distance agreement in Marathi
|
|
|
|
In: Glossa: a journal of general linguistics; Vol 5, No 1 (2020); 93 ; 2397-1835 (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 5 |
When hypotaxis looks like parataxis: embedding and complementizer agreement in Teiwa
|
|
|
|
In: Glossa: a journal of general linguistics; Vol 5, No 1 (2020); 89 ; 2397-1835 (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 6 |
The syntax of comparison constructions in diachronic and dialectal perspective
|
|
|
|
In: Glossa: a journal of general linguistics; Vol 4, No 1 (2019); 70 ; 2397-1835 (2019)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 7 |
Complementizer agreement with coordinated subjects in Polish
|
|
|
|
In: Glossa: a journal of general linguistics; Vol 3, No 1 (2018); 124 ; 2397-1835 (2018)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 8 |
Agreement at the Boundaries: Synchronic and Diachronic Approaches to [phi]-agreement in the Left Periphery
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 9 |
Delayed valuation: a reanalysis of goal features, “upwards” complementizer agreement, and the mechanics of Case
|
|
|
|
In: Articles (2016)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 11 |
The structure of complement clauses in Lunda
|
|
|
|
In: Studies in African Linguistics, Vol 35, Iss 1 (2006) (2006)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 12 |
Agreement in Comp
|
|
|
|
In: ISSN: 0167-6318 ; Linguistic Review, Vol. 11, No 3-4 (1993) pp. 351-376 (1993)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|
|
