Universität Wien FIND

160141 PS Proseminar aus Grammatiktheorie (2017W)

Prüfungsimmanente Lehrveranstaltung

Details

max. 40 Teilnehmer*innen
Sprache: Deutsch

Lehrende

Termine (iCal) - nächster Termin ist mit N markiert

Freitag 06.10. 10:30 - 12:00 Seminarraum 2 Sensengasse 3a 1.OG
Freitag 13.10. 10:30 - 12:00 Seminarraum 2 Sensengasse 3a 1.OG
Freitag 20.10. 10:30 - 12:00 Seminarraum 2 Sensengasse 3a 1.OG
Freitag 27.10. 10:30 - 12:00 Seminarraum 2 Sensengasse 3a 1.OG
Freitag 03.11. 10:30 - 12:00 Seminarraum 2 Sensengasse 3a 1.OG
Freitag 10.11. 10:30 - 12:00 Seminarraum 2 Sensengasse 3a 1.OG
Freitag 17.11. 10:30 - 12:00 Seminarraum 2 Sensengasse 3a 1.OG
Freitag 24.11. 10:30 - 12:00 Seminarraum 2 Sensengasse 3a 1.OG
Freitag 01.12. 10:30 - 12:00 Seminarraum 2 Sensengasse 3a 1.OG
Freitag 15.12. 10:30 - 12:00 Seminarraum 2 Sensengasse 3a 1.OG
Freitag 12.01. 10:30 - 12:00 Seminarraum 2 Sensengasse 3a 1.OG
Samstag 20.01. 10:00 - 13:00 Seminarraum 2 Sensengasse 3a 1.OG

Information

Ziele, Inhalte und Methode der Lehrveranstaltung

The focus of this proseminar is intended to be on agreement and formal features. The overall goal is to explore the formal mechanisms by which agreement relations involving phi-features (person, number, gender) are derived. The empirical heart of the course will consist in discussing (partial) agreement phenomena (e.g. 'quirky' agreement in Icelandic), PH (person hierarchy) driven agreement displacement phenomena (e.g. in languages like Basque or Georgian), and PCC (person case constraint) phenomena (cf. Bonet 1991), as well as the issue of variation concerning all these phenomena. Naturally a concomitant complexity of problems that will need to be addressed in some detail bears on issues relating to formal features in syntax, such as what the relationships between them are (cf. Bejar 2003), what governs their grouping into larger structures, how the inventory of features in a given language is determined, etc.

Art der Leistungskontrolle und erlaubte Hilfsmittel

Students are expected to do the readings before coming to class, come to class, participate actively, take turns in protocoling the sessions, make a presentation with a handout, and write a squib analysing something having to do with the topic of the proseminar, or giving arguments for preferring a proposed analysis to alternatives from the literature. Details will be discussed in class.

Mindestanforderungen und Beurteilungsmaßstab

Students have a command of the literature on (the typology of) agreement phenomena and (main) analyses of those discussed in class, and a deepened knowledge of the formal mechanisms by which agreement relations involving formal features are derived.

Prüfungsstoff

The content discussed in class.

Literatur

(Selected)
Adger, David, and Daniel Harbour. 2007. Syntax and syncretisms of the Person Case Constraint. Syntax 10:2-37.
Bejar, Susana. 2003. Phi-syntax: A theory of agreement. Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto.
Bejar, Susana and Milan Rezac. 2009. Cyclic Agree. Linguistic Inquiry 40 (1):35-73.
Bhatt, Rajesh. 2006. Long-distance agreement in Hindi-Urdu. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 23: 757-807.
Bobaljik, Jonathan D. and Susi Wurmbrand. 2002. Notes on agreement in Itelmen. Linguistic Discovery 1 (1). Available at http://linguistic-discovery.dartmouth.edu .
Boeckx, Cedric. 2000. Quirky agreement. Studia Linguistica 54:354-380.
Bonet, Eulalia. 1991. Morphology after syntax: Pronominal Clitics in Romance. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Collins, Christopher and Paul Postal. 2012. Imposters: A Study of Pronominal Agreement. Cambridge, MIT Press.
Delancey, Scott. 1981. An interpretation of split ergativity and related patterns. Language 57:626-657.
Daniel Harbour, David Adger and Susana Bejar (eds). 2008. Phi theory: Phi-features across modules and interfaces. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Harley, Heidi and Elizabeth Ritter. 2002. Person and number in pronouns: A feature-geometric analysis. Language 78:482-526.
Koppen, Marjo van. 2005. One probe-Two goals: Aspects of agreement in Dutch dialects. Doctoral dissertation, Leiden University.
Nevins, Andrew. 2007. The representation of third-person and its consequences for person-case effects. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 25:273-313.
Nichols, Lynn. 2001. The syntactic basis of referential hierarchy phenomena: Clues from languages with and without morphological case. Lingua 111:515-537.
Ormazabal, Javier and Juan Romero. 2007. Agreement restrictions. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 25:315-347.
Polinsky, Maria and Eric Potsdam. 2001. Long-distance agreement and topic in Tsez. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19:583-646.
Preminger, Omer. 2014. Agreement and its failures. Linguistic Inquiry Monograph 68. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Preminger, Omer. 2009. Breaking Agreements: distinguishing agreement and clitic-doubling by their failures. Linguistic Inquiry 40(4): 619-666.
Rezac, Milan. 2003. The fine structure of cyclic Agree. Syntax 6:156-182.
Wiltschko, Martina. 2008. Person hierarchy effects without a person hierarchy. In G. Hrafn Hrafnbjargarson, R. d'Alessandro, & S. Fischer (eds.) Agreement restrictions. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter: 281-314.

Zuordnung im Vorlesungsverzeichnis

MA1-M3

Letzte Änderung: Mo 19.02.2018 11:34