The morphosyntax of Lubukusu locative inversion and the parameterization of Agree

Diercks, Michael

doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2010.11.003

Cited by 29 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One of the questions is whether subject agreement is structurally determined and whether subject agreement in Bantu is always with a structurally higherand possibly preverbal -element or not (Baker 2003, Collins 2004, Carstens 2005, Van der Wal 2008, Diercks 2011, Henderson 2011, Halpert 2012. The widespread existence of agreeing inversion seems to argue against a parameter setting 'upwards agreement' for the whole language family, although detailed study of individual systems is needed to confirm whether the postverbal subject is in a lower position in agreeing inversion.…”

Section: Agreement Parameter and Pronominal Status Of Subject Markermentioning

confidence: 99%

A typology of Bantu subject inversion

Marten¹,

Wal²

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study charts variation in subject inversion constructions in Bantu languages. It distinguishes between seven types of inversion constructions: formal locative inversion, semantic locative inversion, instrument inversion, patient inversion, (clausal) complement inversion, default agreement inversion and agreeing inversion. Based on a set of nine surface variables, a matrix of inversion constructions is developed which identifies characteristics of the set of constructions overall as well as of each individual construction type. The distribution of the different inversion constructions is documented with reference to a sample of 46 Bantu languages, from which geographical and typological generalisations are drawn. For example, languages with instrument inversion or with patient inversion always have locative inversion (but not vice versa), or if a language has at least one inversion construction, it always has at least either default agreement inversion or agreeing inversion. Finally, underlying parameters potentially accounting for the variation are discussed, such as the status of preverbal locatives as DP or PP, the agreement parameter and the syntactic and thematic restrictions on the preverbal element.

show abstract

Section: Agreement Parameter and Pronominal Status Of Subject Markermentioning

confidence: 99%

A typology of Bantu subject inversion

Marten¹,

Wal²

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most generative accounts of locative inversion analyze the construction in terms of A-movement (see e.g., Baker 2003b;Carstens 2011;Collins 1997;den Dikken 2006;Diercks 2010Diercks , 2011Henderson 2006). The basic assumption adopted in these accounts is that both the logical subject and the locative originate inside the νP/VP.…”

Section: Problems and Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Locative inversion in Bantu and predication

Zeller

2013

Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In generative grammar, locative inversion in Bantu languages is typically analyzed in terms of A-movement of the locative from a VP-internal position to the subject position. I present an alternative analysis, according to which the locative subject-DP is introduced above the νP/VP, in the specifier of a functional category whose head selects the νP/VP as its complement. I suggest that this category is Pr (for "predication"), i.e., the same category that also introduces the subject argument of adjectival or nominal predicates in non-verbal predication constructions (see Bowers 1993, and especially Baker 2003a for Bantu). In locative inversion, Pr establishes a non-canonical predication relation between a νP/ VP that expresses a state or event, and a DP that denotes the location of which this state/event is predicated as a property. My analysis is developed on the basis of a detailed discussion of "semantic" locative inversion in the Bantu language Zulu (Buell 2007), a construction in which the inverted subject-DP is not formally marked as a locative, but receives its interpretation solely by virtue of the locative semantics of its head noun.

show abstract

“…However, these studies are mainly based on European languages like Italian, Spanish, German e. t. c. Likewise; there are studies that have been done on the null subject in some Bantu languages like Zulu, Kinyarwanda, Sotho, Sesotho and Agham, (See Kimenyi 1980, Demuth 1990, Marten 2000, Buell 2005, Zerbian 2005and Hyman 2000. On the other hand, Diercks (2010Diercks ( & 2011 has done quite some tremendous work on agreement in Lubukusu, which the current study builds on. In Diercks' (2010) PhD Dissertation, the author investigates 'Agreement with subject in Lubukusu', examining locative inversion, complementizer agreement and alternative agreement in subject extraction constructions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Likewise, Diercks (2011) focuses on the locative in Lubukusu. In this work, the author argues that repeated agreement locative inversion has two distinct verbal affixes which, i) agrees with the fronted locative phrase and ii) the verb agrees with both the fronted and the post-verbal subject in disjoint agreement locative inversion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Null Subject in Lubukusu and the Extended Projection Principle

Mary

2016

IJL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper analyses the null subject phenomenon in Lubukusu with special reference to the extended projection principle (EPP). The paper looks at conditions under which null subjects are allowed in this language. Lubukusu data is self-generated and the analysis is based on the principles and parameters approach (P&P) and the Minimalist program (MP). From the analysis of the data generated, it is shown that null subjects in Lubukusu are syntactically active categories. Though covert, they are Arguments that carry semantic content, hence satisfying the EPP requirements. Null subjects occur in this language because of its rich morphology; that is, whenever the subject agreement features are marked on the verb or any of the determiners, then the overt subject can be dropped without any negative implication on the grammaticality of the structure. Being an Argument position, it is theta-marked and as such the unpronounced null subject is pro (a pronoun). This being the case, it is argued that Lubukusu is a consistent null subject language and that in null subject constructions, the EPP is observed.

show abstract

The morphosyntax of Lubukusu locative inversion and the parameterization of Agree

Cited by 29 publications

References 11 publications

A typology of Bantu subject inversion

A typology of Bantu subject inversion

Locative inversion in Bantu and predication

Null Subject in Lubukusu and the Extended Projection Principle

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About