Past participle agreement in French and Italian: A two-Agree analysis

IF 0.9 2区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Glossa-A Journal of General Linguistics Pub Date : 2022-02-07 DOI:10.16995/glossa.5830
A. Kobayashi
{"title":"Past participle agreement in French and Italian: A two-Agree analysis","authors":"A. Kobayashi","doi":"10.16995/glossa.5830","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this study, past participle agreement (PPA) patterns in French and Italian are explained based on recent minimalist notions involving minimal search and labeling. For minimal computation, Agree minimally values a participle and an in-situ object (Minimal Agree). Hence, the participle is spelled out in a default form. If an object is displaced, a participle can choose to Agree with the object’s copy in its SPEC. Since the Agree operation is coupled with labeling, it fully values the participle (Thorough Agree), resulting in morphological agreement. In many cases, the optionality of PPA results from the participle’s free selection between the two types of Agree. The proposed analysis also deals with cases where PPA is either obligatory or absent. First, a derived subject obligatorily triggers agreement since Thorough Agree applies to the subject to label the so-called TP node, which also affects the participle. Second, Italian 3rd person clitic objects control agreement obligatorily, which is attributed to their internal structure. Third, agreement with a wh-object is absent in Italian because of criterial freezing. Since Thorough Agree is part of criterial licensing, a wh-phrase cannot select this option until it reaches its final criterial position unless some form of reconstruction is available.","PeriodicalId":46319,"journal":{"name":"Glossa-A Journal of General Linguistics","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Glossa-A Journal of General Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.5830","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this study, past participle agreement (PPA) patterns in French and Italian are explained based on recent minimalist notions involving minimal search and labeling. For minimal computation, Agree minimally values a participle and an in-situ object (Minimal Agree). Hence, the participle is spelled out in a default form. If an object is displaced, a participle can choose to Agree with the object’s copy in its SPEC. Since the Agree operation is coupled with labeling, it fully values the participle (Thorough Agree), resulting in morphological agreement. In many cases, the optionality of PPA results from the participle’s free selection between the two types of Agree. The proposed analysis also deals with cases where PPA is either obligatory or absent. First, a derived subject obligatorily triggers agreement since Thorough Agree applies to the subject to label the so-called TP node, which also affects the participle. Second, Italian 3rd person clitic objects control agreement obligatorily, which is attributed to their internal structure. Third, agreement with a wh-object is absent in Italian because of criterial freezing. Since Thorough Agree is part of criterial licensing, a wh-phrase cannot select this option until it reaches its final criterial position unless some form of reconstruction is available.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
法语和意大利语的过去分词一致:两个一致分析
在这项研究中,过去分词协议(PPA)模式在法语和意大利语解释基于最近极简主义概念涉及最小搜索和标签。对于最小计算,Agree最小值一个分词和一个原位对象(最小同意)。因此,分词以默认形式拼写出来。如果一个对象被移位,分词可以选择在其SPEC中与该对象的副本一致。由于同意操作与标记相结合,它完全重视分词(彻底同意),从而导致形态一致。在许多情况下,PPA的可选性源于分词在两种类型的Agree之间的自由选择。拟议的分析还涉及PPA是强制性的或不存在的情况。首先,派生主语强制触发协议,因为Thorough Agree应用于主语来标记所谓的TP节点,这也影响分词。其次,意大利第三人称当事人有义务控制协议对象,这归因于其内部结构。第三,由于标准冻结,意大利语中缺乏与“谁”宾语的一致。由于彻底同意是标准许可的一部分,除非有某种形式的重构,否则在达到最终标准位置之前,h-短语不能选择此选项。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
10.00%
发文量
87
审稿时长
62 weeks
期刊最新文献
Title Pending 10160 Title Pending 8932 Title Pending 8653 Title Pending 10229 Title Pending 9904
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1