The sign language phenomenon that some scholars refer to as "agreement" has triggered controversial discussions among sign language linguists. Crucially, it has been argued to display properties that are at odds with the notion of agreement in spoken languages. A thorough theoretical investigation of the phenomenon may thus add to our understanding of the nature and limits of agreement in natural language. Previous analyses of the phenomenon can be divided into three groups: (i) gesture-based non-syntactic analyses, (ii) hybrid solutions combining syntactic and semantic agreement, and (iii) syntactic accounts under which agreement markers are reanalyzed as clitics. As opposed to these accounts, we argue in this paper that sign language agreement does represent an instance of agreement proper, as familiar from spoken language, that is fully governed by syntactic principles. We propose an explicit formal analysis couched within the Minimalist Program that is modality-independent and only involves mechanisms that have been independently proposed for the analysis of agreement in spoken language. Our proposal is able to capture the (apparent) peculiarities of sign language agreement such as the distinction of verb types (only some verbs show agreement), the behavior of backwards verbs (verbs displaying agreement reversal), and the distribution of the agreement auxiliary. However, we suggest that the combination of mechanisms is modality-specific, that is, agreement in sign language, and in German Sign Language in particular, involves modality-independent ingredients, but uses a modality-specific recipe which calls for a (somewhat) unusual combination of independently motivated mechanisms.

In the Dutch cadastral registration a cadastral object (real-estate object) is by definition 2D (a parcel). In intensively used areas there is a tendency to use space above and under the surface, e.g. constructions on top of each other, infrastructure above/under the ground, increasing number of cables and pipes, apartments above shops/offices/other apartments. These factual 3D objects cannot be defined as cadastral objects in the cadastral map, which is based on 2D parcels, and cannot be used as a base for registration. From a juridical point of view the current registration has proved to be still sufficient in those situations. However, the Netherlands' Kadaster wants to assure a sustainable, uniform and efficient registration in the future. Therefore, a research is carried out at the Department of Geodesy in collaboration with the Netherlands' Kadaster to develop a prototype of a land information system that can take the relevant 3D information into account. This paper is written as part of our joint research. Starting points are the needs of the Netherlands' Kadaster on the one hand and the technological possibilities on the other hand. We are looking for a concept in which cadastral needs and technical possibilities meet.The most feasible solution for this is to start with the current 2D cadastral registration and to extend this with a 3D implementation for the registration of 3D situations.

No abstract

The DP-hypothesis as proposed in Abney (1987) is nowadays generally taken for granted in formal syntactic work. In this paper I will show that a surprising number of arguments that have been provided in the literature are not conclusive. Many rest on purely theory-internal premises and thus lose their force given the developments within syntactic theory over the last decades. Others are largely based on presumed parallelisms between the noun phrase and the clause. In practically all cases a reasonable reanalysis within the NP-hypothesis is possible. Similarly, I will show that the few arguments in favor of the NP-hypothesis that there can be found are also inconclusive. Instead I will establish solid criteria for headedness and explore their implications for the NP vs. DP debate. I will show that the fact that the features of the head are present on the maximal projection makes testable predictions when the noun interacts with noun phrase external heads. I will first show that data from selection favor the DP-hypothesis (contrary to previous claims) since one needs to be able to syntactically select both DPs and bare nouns/NPs. Second, I will present a new argument in favor of the DP-hypothesis based on data from hybrid agreement in Bosnian-Croatian-Serbian. The phenomenon crucially requires D-elements to be closer to agreement targets outside the noun phrase than the noun itself. This follows if DP dominates NP but not vice versa.

No abstract