Extending defective intervention effects

Karimi, Yadgar

doi:10.1515/tlr-2013-0003

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 17 publications

(24 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As is evident, in the presence of an oblique/dative subject DP, agreement of the nominative object with the verb is in 3 rd person, whereas full agreement (in person and number) gives rise to ungrammaticality. Thus construed, the PCC effect lends itself to an analysis in terms of the defective intervention induced by the oblique subject (Chomsky , Karimi ).…”

Section: Case/agreement In Kurdishmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since the object DP ends up in nominative case at the end of the derivation, it is deduced that the transitive v° fails to check and value the case feature on the object as accusative. Not endowed with the option of accusative‐case licensing, the head v° is concluded to be dissociated with a full complement of uninterpretable φ‐features, hence φ‐defective or unaccusative (Karimi 2010, , Holmberg & Odden ). Accordingly, within vP, the case feature on the object DP remains unchecked and concomitantly unvalued.…”

Section: Ergativity and The V*p Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The following data from Kurdish suggest that in the presence of an intervening oblique/dative subject, agreement with the object DP is always 3 rd person, though agreement for number is not affected: As is evident, in the presence of an oblique/dative subject DP, agreement of the nominative object with the verb is in 3 rd person, whereas full agreement (in person and number) gives rise to ungrammaticality. Thus construed, the PCC effect lends itself to an analysis in terms of the defective intervention induced by the oblique subject (Chomsky 2000, Karimi 2013).…”

Section: Ergative-absolutive Case/agreementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Remarks on Ergativity and Phase Theory

Karimi

2015

Studia Linguistica

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses one empirical domain where a transitive vP, though being a full propositional construction, does not form a phase. Drawing data from the past transitive structures, aka ergative constructions, in Kurdish, I will demonstrate that the interface-oriented arguments underlying the determination of the first phase (v*P vs. vP) fall short of accounting for the emergent case/agreement pattern in these structures. Instead, a la Chomsky (2008), a view will be endorsed of the first phase in which a vP constitutes a strong phase only if its head is associated with a full complement of φ-features, regardless of whether an external h-role is projected in [spec,vP]. Thus construed, the identification of a strong phase need not be procrastinated until the whole vP is formed, rather the status of a phase will be decided once a φ-complete/-defective v°enters into the derivation.

show abstract

Section: Case/agreement In Kurdishmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Ergativity and The V*p Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Ergative-absolutive Case/agreementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Remarks on Ergativity and Phase Theory

Karimi

2015

Studia Linguistica

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Possessor raising and the structure of impersonal complex predicates in Persian

Karimi¹

2013

Lingua

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ergative case, aspect and person splits: Two case studies

Manzini¹,

Savoia²,

Franco³

2015

Acta Linguistica Hungarica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ergativity splits between perfect and imperfective/progressive predicates are observed in languages with a specialized ergative case (Punjabi) and without it (Kurdish). Perfect predicates correspond to a VP projection; external arguments are introduced by means of an oblique case, namely an elementary part-whole predicate saying that the event is 'included by', 'located at' the argument. A more complex organization is found with imperfective/progressive predicates, where a head Asp projects a functional layer and introduces the external argument. Our proposal further yields the 1/2P vs. 3P Person split as a result of the intrinsic ability of 1/2P to serve as 'location-of-event'.Keywords: ergative case; oblique case; aspect; person split; Indo-Iranian OutlineErgative alignments in case and agreement observed in Indo-Iranian languages are generally subject to an aspectual split; in Punjabi a person split is also observed. We argue that in Punjabi and Kurdish 1 the transitivizing 1 We use primary data, allowing us to base the analysis directly on the intuitions of our native informants. The choice of Punjabi depends on its emblematic case organization (Bailey 1904;Bhatia 1993). Data are transcribed in a broad IPA from the (Doabi) variety spoken in the Indian town of Hoshiarpur; in the transcription we leave out in particular tonal properties (Bhatia 1993). Some variability in the examples reflects the native speakers varying output (for instance as to whether the auxiliary is or is not realized Punjabi) or an allpurpose oblique (Kurdish). There are two major streams in our discussion, one relating to the aspectual split, and the other relating to the nature of ergative case -which converge in the proposal we put forward. The fact that the two proposals converge in the picture we provide for Indo-Aryan and Iranian languages does not imply that they are logically dependent from one another. In any event, we argue that they both hold in the languages at hand. As for the aspectual split, there appears to be a fair consensus in recent generative literature that perfect predicates or perfect sentences lack structure present in their imperfective counterparts ( As we already mentioned, we take the view that ergative case is an oblique. The morphological evidence favours this conclusion, to the extent that subjects in ergativity splits bear the same case as genitive complements of nouns, dative arguments of verbs, instrumental adjuncts (see section 3.2). Note that although the genitive has sometimes been taken to be a structural case (especially Alexiadou 2001), datives and instrumentals are normally taken to be inherent cases; in the languages we consider, the morphological evidence supports the conclusion that all three are oblique cases (unlike, say, absolutive/nominative). If so, the dependent case algorithm cannot be involved in any general way in ergative alignments, since the algorithm only works by excluding inherent cases (datives, instrumentals, etc.) to begin with. We detail our proposal in section ...

show abstract

Extending defective intervention effects

Cited by 3 publications

References 17 publications

Remarks on Ergativity and Phase Theory

Remarks on Ergativity and Phase Theory

Possessor raising and the structure of impersonal complex predicates in Persian

Ergative case, aspect and person splits: Two case studies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About