160248 PS Grammatiktheoretisches PS (2011S)
Phi-Syntax: Issues in the Theory of Agreement
Prüfungsimmanente Lehrveranstaltung
Labels
Details
Sprache: Deutsch
Lehrende
Termine (iCal) - nächster Termin ist mit N markiert
- Mittwoch 09.03. 11:45 - 13:15 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Mittwoch 16.03. 11:45 - 13:15 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Mittwoch 23.03. 11:45 - 13:15 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Mittwoch 30.03. 11:45 - 13:15 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Mittwoch 06.04. 11:45 - 13:15 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Mittwoch 13.04. 11:45 - 13:15 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Mittwoch 04.05. 11:45 - 13:15 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Mittwoch 11.05. 11:45 - 13:15 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Mittwoch 18.05. 11:45 - 13:15 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Mittwoch 25.05. 11:45 - 13:15 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Mittwoch 01.06. 11:45 - 13:15 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Mittwoch 08.06. 11:45 - 13:15 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Mittwoch 15.06. 11:45 - 13:15 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Mittwoch 22.06. 11:45 - 13:15 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Mittwoch 29.06. 11:45 - 13:15 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
Information
Ziele, Inhalte und Methode der Lehrveranstaltung
The overall goal of this course is to explore the formal mechanisms by which agreement relations involving phi-features (person, number, gender) are derived in syntax. 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 also need to be addressed in some detail bears on issues relating to formal features in syntax, such as what the relationships between them are if such indeed exist (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 will have to make a presentation with a handout on material provided with the literature list, or to write a (review) paper of their own.
Mindestanforderungen und Beurteilungsmaßstab
To deepen, consolidate and advance students' knowledge on foundational matters in syntactic theory (specifically formal features and the theory of agreement), as well as to encourage students to engage in and carry out independent research.
Prüfungsstoff
Literatur
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. 2011/forthcoming. 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.
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.
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. 2011/forthcoming. 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.
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
Letzte Änderung: Mo 07.09.2020 15:36