Omer Preminger
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- January 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780262027403
- eISBN:
- 9780262323192
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- The MIT Press
- DOI:
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262027403.003.0005
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Theoretical Linguistics
Building on the results of previous chapters, this chapter puts forth the central argument against derivational time-bombs (including, but not limited to, Chomsky's 2000, 2001 ‘uninterpretable ...
More
Building on the results of previous chapters, this chapter puts forth the central argument against derivational time-bombs (including, but not limited to, Chomsky's 2000, 2001 ‘uninterpretable features’) as a way of deriving the obligatoriness of phi-feature agreement. The argument is presented in two forms, one based on number agreement in Kichean Agent-Focus, and one based on person agreement in the same construction. The final section sketches two alternatives which, unlike the derivational time-bombs model, are able to account for the facts at hand. One is based on the notion of obligatory operations, and the other on the notion of violable constraints (as in Optimality Theory; McCarthy & Prince 1995, Prince & Smolensky 1993). The appendix to this chapter provides a brief historical survey of how syntactic theory came to regard ‘uninterpretable features’ as having anything to do with the obligatoriness of phi-feature agreement, in the first place. It also offers a roadmap for how we might selectively undo this component of contemporary syntactic theory, while retaining the other, beneficial developments that came with it.Less
Building on the results of previous chapters, this chapter puts forth the central argument against derivational time-bombs (including, but not limited to, Chomsky's 2000, 2001 ‘uninterpretable features’) as a way of deriving the obligatoriness of phi-feature agreement. The argument is presented in two forms, one based on number agreement in Kichean Agent-Focus, and one based on person agreement in the same construction. The final section sketches two alternatives which, unlike the derivational time-bombs model, are able to account for the facts at hand. One is based on the notion of obligatory operations, and the other on the notion of violable constraints (as in Optimality Theory; McCarthy & Prince 1995, Prince & Smolensky 1993). The appendix to this chapter provides a brief historical survey of how syntactic theory came to regard ‘uninterpretable features’ as having anything to do with the obligatoriness of phi-feature agreement, in the first place. It also offers a roadmap for how we might selectively undo this component of contemporary syntactic theory, while retaining the other, beneficial developments that came with it.
Omer Preminger
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- January 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780262027403
- eISBN:
- 9780262323192
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- The MIT Press
- DOI:
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262027403.001.0001
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Theoretical Linguistics
This monograph shows that the typically obligatory nature of predicate-argument agreement in phi-features (phi-agreement) cannot be captured through “derivational time-bombs” – elements of the ...
More
This monograph shows that the typically obligatory nature of predicate-argument agreement in phi-features (phi-agreement) cannot be captured through “derivational time-bombs” – elements of the initial representation that cannot be part of a well-formed, end-of-the-derivation structure, and which are eliminated by the application of phi-agreement itself. This includes, but is not limited to, the ‘uninterpretable features’ of Chomsky 2000, 2001. Instead, it requires recourse to an operation – one whose invocation is obligatory, but whose successful culmination is not enforced by the grammar. The book also discusses the implications of this conclusion for the analysis of dative intervention. This leads to a novel view of how case assignment interacts with phi-agreement, and furnishes an argument that both phi-agreement and so-called “morphological case” must be computed within the syntactic component proper. Finally, the author surveys other domains where the empirical state of affairs proves well-suited for the same operations-based logic: Object Shift, the Definiteness Effect, and long-distance wh-movement.This research is based on data from the Kichean branch of Mayan (primarily from Kaqchikel), as well as from Basque, Icelandic, French, and Zulu.Less
This monograph shows that the typically obligatory nature of predicate-argument agreement in phi-features (phi-agreement) cannot be captured through “derivational time-bombs” – elements of the initial representation that cannot be part of a well-formed, end-of-the-derivation structure, and which are eliminated by the application of phi-agreement itself. This includes, but is not limited to, the ‘uninterpretable features’ of Chomsky 2000, 2001. Instead, it requires recourse to an operation – one whose invocation is obligatory, but whose successful culmination is not enforced by the grammar. The book also discusses the implications of this conclusion for the analysis of dative intervention. This leads to a novel view of how case assignment interacts with phi-agreement, and furnishes an argument that both phi-agreement and so-called “morphological case” must be computed within the syntactic component proper. Finally, the author surveys other domains where the empirical state of affairs proves well-suited for the same operations-based logic: Object Shift, the Definiteness Effect, and long-distance wh-movement.This research is based on data from the Kichean branch of Mayan (primarily from Kaqchikel), as well as from Basque, Icelandic, French, and Zulu.
Omer Preminger
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- January 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780262027403
- eISBN:
- 9780262323192
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- The MIT Press
- DOI:
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262027403.003.0002
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Theoretical Linguistics
This chapter introduces the central explanandum of the monograph: the obligatory nature of predicate-argument agreement in phi-features (person, number, gender/noun-class). The chapter begins by ...
More
This chapter introduces the central explanandum of the monograph: the obligatory nature of predicate-argument agreement in phi-features (person, number, gender/noun-class). The chapter begins by providing a working definition of the term agreement. It then proceeds to present three different models to capture its obligatoriness: derivational time-bombs, violable constraints, and obligatory operations. Finally, the notion of “failed agreement” is introduced, and its significance in teasing apart these different models is highlighted.Less
This chapter introduces the central explanandum of the monograph: the obligatory nature of predicate-argument agreement in phi-features (person, number, gender/noun-class). The chapter begins by providing a working definition of the term agreement. It then proceeds to present three different models to capture its obligatoriness: derivational time-bombs, violable constraints, and obligatory operations. Finally, the notion of “failed agreement” is introduced, and its significance in teasing apart these different models is highlighted.
Omer Preminger
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- January 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780262027403
- eISBN:
- 9780262323192
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- The MIT Press
- DOI:
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262027403.003.0001
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Theoretical Linguistics
This chapter is the introduction to the monograph. It outlines the basic research question, and presents a short synopsis of each of the subsequent chapters.
This chapter is the introduction to the monograph. It outlines the basic research question, and presents a short synopsis of each of the subsequent chapters.
Omer Preminger
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- January 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780262027403
- eISBN:
- 9780262323192
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- The MIT Press
- DOI:
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262027403.003.0010
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Theoretical Linguistics
This chapter discusses the implications of the results of previous chapters for topics beyond agreement and case. The first section explores the question of whether phi-feature agreement, shown to ...
More
This chapter discusses the implications of the results of previous chapters for topics beyond agreement and case. The first section explores the question of whether phi-feature agreement, shown to inescapably adhere to an obligatory-operations logic, is an outlier in the landscape of syntactic operations. The author surveys several other empirical domains that suggest the contrary, finding the same obligatory-operations logic at work. The domains surveyed are: Object Shift, and its relation to specificity; the Definiteness Effect, and its relation to syntactic subjecthood; and the featural underpinnings of long-distance wh-movement. The second section addresses the question of syntactic uniformity. If it is correct that an obligatory-operations logic is indispensible, we might wonder about the prospects for a syntax that completely eschews derivational time-bombs (e.g. Chomsky's 2000, 2001 'uninterpretable features'), and makes use only of obligatory operations. The author surveys some of the central challenges that such a move would face, and suggest some possible directions for how these challenges might be met.Less
This chapter discusses the implications of the results of previous chapters for topics beyond agreement and case. The first section explores the question of whether phi-feature agreement, shown to inescapably adhere to an obligatory-operations logic, is an outlier in the landscape of syntactic operations. The author surveys several other empirical domains that suggest the contrary, finding the same obligatory-operations logic at work. The domains surveyed are: Object Shift, and its relation to specificity; the Definiteness Effect, and its relation to syntactic subjecthood; and the featural underpinnings of long-distance wh-movement. The second section addresses the question of syntactic uniformity. If it is correct that an obligatory-operations logic is indispensible, we might wonder about the prospects for a syntax that completely eschews derivational time-bombs (e.g. Chomsky's 2000, 2001 'uninterpretable features'), and makes use only of obligatory operations. The author surveys some of the central challenges that such a move would face, and suggest some possible directions for how these challenges might be met.
