Case and number suppletion in pronouns

Smith, Pete; Moskal, Beata; Xu, Ting; Kang, Jungmin; Bobaljik, Jonathan David

doi:10.1007/s11049-018-9425-0

Cited by 47 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There is some evidence that VI is sensitive to such things, particularly within the realm of case. Smith et al (2015;2019) argue that case features are internally complex and recursive, and that VI can distinguish between [K], which is the unmarked case of a language, say, nominative, and [KK], which would be the dependent case, say, accusative. 24 In light of this structure, one naturally wonders whether multiple foci are possible in Dagbani, and whether they give evidence for the two positions.…”

Section: The Difference Between N and Kamentioning

confidence: 99%

Subject and non-subject <i>ex-situ</i> focus in Dagbani

Issah¹,

Smith

2020

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper offers a description and account of the patterns of ex-situ focus in Dagbani. We show that there are two syntactic strategies for creating ex-situ focus in the language, one involving A'-movement to the left periphery, and the second involving base generation in the left periphery combined with coreference to a resumptive pronoun. Furthermore, we argue that subjects are difficult to move from Spec,TP to Spec,CP in the left-periphery because of anti-locality, which creates a tension when trying to focus subjects, which are required to derivationally fill the specifier of both positions. We further show that what looks to be a two-way distinction between the behaviour of subjects and non-subjects in the language is in fact a three-way distinction between subjects that are focussed to a local left-periphery, subjects that are focussed to a non-local left-periphery, and non-subjects. These distinctions arise due to there being two methods for Dagbani to resolve the antilocality problem of subject movement, and so local subjects solve the problem differently to non-local subjects.

show abstract

Section: The Difference Between N and Kamentioning

confidence: 99%

Subject and non-subject <i>ex-situ</i> focus in Dagbani

Issah¹,

Smith

2020

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Looking beyond adjectival suppletion triples, AAB patterns are not universally unattested, however. Taking triples to represent markedness relations of increasing complexity (to be made more precise below), AAB patterns have been found in other suppletive contexts, such as case and number (see Smith et al 2018) as well as clusivity (see Moskal 2014). In contrast, a remarkably Glossa general linguistics a journal of Moskal, Beata.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 3(1): 130. 1-34, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.362 strong result is that ABA patterns are almost universally unattested: in addition to the lack of ABA patterns in adjectival suppletion in Bobaljik (2012), they also do not seem to be attested in case or number (Smith et al 2018) or in syncretism in pronouns (Vanden Wyngaerd 2018). In this paper, I add another set of data that supports the observation that ABA patterns do not arise, namely in clusivity-driven suppletion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Excluding exclusively the exclusive: Suppletion patterns in clusivity

Moskal

2018

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, I investigate the suppletion patterns that are found in languages that make a clusivity distinction. I will show that in the triple 1sg-1excl-1incl, ABA patterns do not arise, consonant with other work on suppletion patterns (Bobaljik 2012; Smith et al. 2018). That is, it is not possible for the exclusive pronoun to supplete on its own whilst the singular and inclusive share a common base. All other patterns are attested. I will argue that the lack of ABA patterns supports the view that the inclusive is the most marked category in this set (Noyer 1992; Cysouw 2003; Siewierska 2004, a.o.), and propose that there is a containment relation such that the feature set that makes up the inclusive properly contains the features that form the exclusive, following the reasoning laid out in Bobaljik (2012). I further consider the makeup of person features, and argue that the lack of ABA patterns in clusivity suggest that clusivity features are privative, rather than binary (cf. Harbour 2016).

show abstract

“…Introduction. Recent work on morphology has investigated the absence of so-called ABA patterns of syncretism for various feature classes, including case, number, adjectival grade, and clusivity (Caha 2009(Caha , 2017Bobaljik 2012;McFadden 2018;Smith et al 2018;Moskal 2018, among others). In a hypothetical ABA pattern, a three-member 'paradigm' ordered by markedness sees the first and third share a form to the exclusion of the middle member.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

On containment and syncretism in English preterites and participles

Adamson

2019

Proc Ling Soc Amer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explores Bobaljik's (2012) suggestion that in English, the feature representation of the preterite contains the representation of the past participle. While containment analyses in both Distributed Morphology (DM) and Nanosyntax capture the virtual absence of ABA patterns of syncretism for the order BASE-PARTICIPLE-PRETERITE, I demonstrate that they face empirical challenges when the exponence of the suffixes is considered. After evaluating an alternative feature decomposition, I show how a DM containment approach can derive the facts for both base and suffix alternations with the aid of impoverishment, which also helps to explain counterexamples to *ABA in this domain. Lastly, I offer cautionary discussion about the relationship between containment structures and deriving *ABA.

show abstract

Case and number suppletion in pronouns

Cited by 47 publications

References 72 publications

Subject and non-subject <i>ex-situ</i> focus in Dagbani

Subject and non-subject <i>ex-situ</i> focus in Dagbani

Excluding exclusively the exclusive: Suppletion patterns in clusivity

On containment and syncretism in English preterites and participles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About