Number is Different in Nominal and Pronominal Phrases

Abstract

Current research on the nominal spine (1a) supports the idea that number can be associated with different positions. Much of the work on nominal number contrasts a "high" position in Num that hosts grammatical number and a "low" position in n that hosts idiosyncratic, adjunct, or lexical number. 1 Comparatively little research has examined where number is located in pronouns. While it is clear that pronouns involve -features that typically include person () and number (#) as a bundle, it is not clear where these features occur in relation to other nominal projections, 2 nor whether pronouns have the full complement of nominal projections that nominals have. 3 A possible This squib was first presented at the Workshop on Contrast in Syntax in honor of Elizabeth Cowper at the University of Toronto in April 2015 and then at the Gender, Class, and Determination conference in Ottawa in September 2015. We thank the audiences at both events, as well as the reviewers and editors who provided us with invaluable feedback. Grateful thanks also go to Malotele Kumitau Polata and Lynsey Talagi for generously sharing their expertise in Vagahau Niue (Niuean).1 On the view that number in common noun phrases (henceforth nominals)

On the structure of (personal) pronouns in Inuktut

“…I propose here that the exceptionality of Inuktut pronouns with respect to the generalizations proposed by Ghomeshi and Massam (2020) is due to the fact that they exhibit a structure more similar to common nouns: they contain a root and the sequence of functional projections typically found with nouns, including an independent # projection.…”

“…In addition, pronouns in Inuktut appear to constitute a counter-example to the generalization made by Ghomeshi and Massam (2020) that pronominal number is dependent on person. 3 Instead, number-marking on Inuktut pronouns largely patterns as on common nouns.…”

“…Abstract This article examines the internal structure of personal pronouns in Inuktut. Building on previous work on syntactic variation and universals in personal pronoun systems (Harley and Ritter 2002, Ghomeshi and Massam 2020) and drawing on arguments that these and demonstrative pronouns are structurally complex (Déchaine and Wiltschko 2002, Leu 2015), it is argued that Inuktut pronouns are morphosyntactically complex, with exponents realizing multiple functional heads as well as an overt root. In particular, it is claimed that (local) person is represented twice, both as a root and in a higher functional projection.…”

“…(2) Inuktut pronouns: a. are full DPs, with an articulated structure realizing multiple functional projections, b. realize person features twice: on both a dedicated root and a higher π (or f) projection (which interacts with number and case, suggesting it is part of the same functional sequence), c. contain an overt root, instead of an elided expression, as typically found in languages with pro-DPs and pro-fPs, d. are noun-like insofar as their number marking patterns with common nouns. (Ghomeshi and Massam 2020) In the next section, I begin by presenting some background on Inuktut pronouns. Then I present arguments that these pronouns instantiate multiple syntactic projections and include a root, drawing on evidence regarding Inuit word structure, the ability of pronouns to undergo noun incorporation, and additional aspects of the behaviour of demonstrative and wh-pronouns.…”

“…Résumé Cet article examine la structure interne des pronoms personnels en inuktut. En s'appuyant sur des travaux antérieurs sur la variation syntaxique et les universaux dans les systèmes de pronoms personnels (Harley et Ritter 2002, Ghomeshi et Massam 2020) ainsi que sur des arguments selon lesquels ces pronoms ainsi que les pronoms démonstratifs sont structurellement complexes (Déchaine et Wiltschko 2002, Leu 2015), il est proposé que les pronoms en inuktut sont morphosyntaxiquement complexes, avec des exposants réalisant plusieurs têtes fonctionnelles ainsi qu'une racine prononcée. En particulier, on soutient que la personne (locale) est représentée deux fois, à la fois en tant que racine et dans une projection fonctionnelle supérieure.…”