An agreement-based analysis of extraction from nominals

Article
  • 3 Downloads

Abstract

In this paper, I argue that the extended projection of N (xNP) is a phase that does not permit successive-cyclic movement via an edge position (cf. Bach and Horn 1976; Bosque and Gallego 2014). As has been observed previously, languages in which AP and xNP can be extracted from xNP typically involve an overt agreement relation between the extractee and the ‘host.’ I argue that the agreeing morpheme is itself theta-marked by the host N, and that this morpheme also establishes an interpretable Agree relation with the extractee. Given well-motivated assumptions about adjunction and Agree, this enables the extractee to be base-generated outside the host’s extended projection, and hence to be extracted without violating the Phase Impenetrability Condition. As well as accounting for the robust cross-linguistic correlation between overt agreement and extraction, not accounted for under successive-cyclic analyses, the proposed analysis accounts for the peripherality restriction on extraction, the possibility of deep extraction, and exceptions to these. Finally, I examine an apparent exception to the agreement/extraction generalisation, the mobility of PP and inherent-case dependents of N, arguing that this can be captured in terms of an Agree relation between the preposition and the head N.

Keywords

Agreement Case Extraction Phases Successive-cyclicity 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the following people for judgements and related discussion: Klaus Abels, Priyanka Biswas, Margarita Dimitrovna, Ion Giurgea, Güliz Güneş, Atakan İnce, Dalina Kallulli, Gergely Kantor, Yadgar Karimi, Rajvir Kaur, Anikó Lipták, Anoop Mahajan, Mihaela Marchis Moreno, Radovan Miletić, Otto Nuoranne, Kriszta Szendrői, Elena Titov and Jana Willer-Gold. I am especially grateful to Ludovico Franco and Mihaela Marchis Moreno, who read and commented on a previous draft of the paper, and to the three anonymous reviewers of this paper, for extremely helpful comments. The usual disclaimers apply. This work was largely carried out while I was a postdoctoral researcher on Ludovico Franco’s project ‘The Case of Agreement’ at the Centro de Linguística, Universidade Nova de Lisboa (CLUNL), and I am grateful to the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), who funded the project.

References

  1. Abels, Klaus. 2012. Phases: An essay on cyclicity in syntax. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  2. Abney, Steven. 1987. The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect. PhD diss., MIT. Google Scholar
  3. Ackema, Peter, and Ad Neeleman. 2004. Beyond morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  4. Ackema, Peter, and Ad Neeleman. 2017. Features of person. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  5. Adger, David, Daniel Harbour, and Laurel Watkins. 2009. Mirrors and microparameters: Phrase structure beyond free word order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  6. Aissen, Judith. 1979. Possessor ascension in Tzotzil. In Papers in Mayan linguistics, ed. Laura Martin. Columbia: Lucas Brothers. Google Scholar
  7. Aissen, Judith. 1996. Pied-piping, abstract agreement, and functional projections in Tzotzil. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 14: 447–491. Google Scholar
  8. Aissen, Judith. 1999. External possessor and logical subject in Tz’utujil. In External possession, eds. Doris L. Payne and Immanuel Barshi, 167–193. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  9. Alexiadou, Artemis, Liliane Haegeman, and Melita Stavrou. 2007. Noun phrase in the generative perspective. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  10. Anagnostopoulou, Elena. 2003. The syntax of ditransitives: Evidence from clitics. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  11. Aoun, Joseph, and Yen-hui Audrey Li. 2003. Essays on the representational and derivational nature of grammar: The diversity of wh-constructions. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  12. Artiagoitia, Xabier. 2012. The DP hypothesis in the grammar of Basque. In Noun phrases and nominalization in Basque: Syntax and semantics, eds. Urtzi Etxeberria, Ricardo Etxepare, and Myriam Uribe-Etxebarria, 21–77. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  13. Asbury, Anna. 2008. The morphosyntax of case and adpositions. PhD diss., Utrecht University. Google Scholar
  14. Assmann, Anke. 2014. Case stacking in nanosyntax. In Topics at infl, eds. Anke Assmann et al., 153–196. Leipzig: Institut für Linguistik, Universität Leipzig. Google Scholar
  15. Assmann, Anke, Svetlana Edygarova, Doreen Georgi, Timo Klein, and Philipp Weisser. 2014. Case stacking below the surface: On the possessor case alternation in Udmurt. The Linguistic Review 31: 447–485. Google Scholar
  16. Bach, Emmon, and George M. Horn. 1976. Remarks on ‘Conditions on transformations’. Linguistic Inquiry 7: 265–361. Google Scholar
  17. Baker, Mark. 1991. On some subject/object non-asymmetries in Mohawk. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9: 537–576. Google Scholar
  18. Baker, Mark. 1996. The polysynthesis parameter. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  19. Baker, Mark. 2008. The syntax of agreement and concord. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  20. Baker, Mark. 2015. Case: Its principles and its parameters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  21. Bartos, Huba. 2000. Az inflexiós jelenségek szintaktikai háttere. In Strukturalis magyar nyelvtan 3: Morfologia, ed. Ferenc Kiefer, 653–762. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. Google Scholar
  22. Bhattacharya, Tanmoy. 1998. Specificity in the Bangla DP. In Yearbook of South Asian languages and linguistics, ed. Rajendra Singh. Vol. 2, 71–99. New Delhi: Sage Publications. Google Scholar
  23. Bittner, Maria, and Ken Hale. 1996. The structural determination of case and agreement. Linguistic Inquiry 27: 1–68. Google Scholar
  24. Boeckx, Cedric. 2003. Islands and chains: Resumption as stranding. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  25. Borer, Hagit. 1984. Parametric syntax: Case studies in Semitic and Romance languages. Dordrecht: Foris. Google Scholar
  26. Borer, Hagit. 1988. On the morphological parallelism between compounds and constructs. In Yearbook of morphology, eds. Geert Booij and Jaap van Marle, 45–65. Dordrecht: Foris. Google Scholar
  27. Borsley, Robert D., and Ewa Jaworska. 1988. A note on prepositions and case marking in Polish. Linguistic Inquiry 19: 685–691. Google Scholar
  28. Borsley, Robert D., Maggie Tallerman, and David Willis. 2007. The syntax of Welsh. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  29. Bošković, Željko. 2005. On the locality of left branch extraction and the structure of NP. Studia Linguistica 59: 1–45. Google Scholar
  30. Bošković, Željko. 2007. On the locality and motivation of move and agree: An even more minimal theory. Linguistic Inquiry 38: 589–644. Google Scholar
  31. Bošković, Željko. 2008. What will you have, DP or NP? In North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 37, eds. Emily Elfner and Martin Walkow, 101–114. Amherst: GLSA. Google Scholar
  32. Bošković, Željko. 2009. More on the no-DP analysis of article-less languages. Studia Linguistica 63: 187–203. Google Scholar
  33. Bošković, Željko. 2012. On NPs and clauses. In Discourse and grammar: From sentence types to lexical categories, eds. Günther Grewendorf and Thomas Ede Zimmermann, 179–242. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  34. Bošković, Željko. 2013a. Adjectival escapades. In Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics (FASL) 21, eds. Steven Franks et al., 1–25. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications. Google Scholar
  35. Bošković, Željko. 2013b. Traces do not head islands: What can PF deletion rescue? In Deep insights, broad perspectives: Essays in honor of Mamoru Saito, eds. Yoichi Miyamoto, Daiko Takahashi, Hideki Maki, Masao Ochi, Koji Sugisaki, and Asako Uchibori, 56–93. Tokyo: Kaitakusha. Google Scholar
  36. Bošković, Željko. 2014a. Now I’m a phase, now I’m not a phase: On the variability of phases with extraction and ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 45: 27–89. Google Scholar
  37. Bošković, Željko. 2014b. Phases beyond clauses. In The nominal structure in Slavic and beyond, eds. Lilia Schürcks, Anastasia Giannakidou, and Urtzi Etxeberria, 75–127. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  38. Bošković, Željko, and Serkan Şener. 2014. The Turkish NP. In Crosslinguistic studies on nominal reference: With and without articles, eds. Patricia Cabredo Hofherr and Anne Zribi-Hertz, 102–140. Leiden: Brill. Google Scholar
  39. Bošković, Željko, and Daiko Takahashi. 1998. Scrambling and last resort. Linguistic Inquiry 29: 347–366. Google Scholar
  40. Bosque, Ignacio, and Ángel J. Gallego. 2014. Reconsidering subextraction: Evidence from Spanish. Borealis 3(2): 223–258. Google Scholar
  41. Bowers, John. 1987. Extended X-bar theory, the ECP, and the Left Branch Condition. West Coast Conference on Linguistics (WCCFL) 6: 47–62. Google Scholar
  42. Brattico, Pauli, and Alina Leinonen. 2009. Case distribution and nominalization: Evidence from Finnish. Syntax 12: 1–31. Google Scholar
  43. Brody, Michael. 1993. Θ-theory and arguments. Linguistic Inquiry 24: 1–23. Google Scholar
  44. Brody, Michael. 1997. Perfect chains. In Elements of grammar: Handbook of generative syntax, ed. Liliane Haegeman, 139–167. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar
  45. Browning, Marguerite. 1987. Null operator constructions. PhD diss., MIT Press. Google Scholar
  46. Campos, Héctor. 2009. Some notes on adjectival articles in Albanian. Lingua 119: 1009–1034. Google Scholar
  47. Chierchia, Gennaro. 1998. Reference to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics 6: 339–405. Google Scholar
  48. Chisarik, Erika, and John Payne. 2003. Modelling possessor constructions in LFG: English and Hungarian. In Studies in constraint-based lexicalism, eds. Miriam Butt and Tracy Holloway King, 181–199. Stanford: CSLI Publications. Google Scholar
  49. Chomsky, Noam. 1970. Remarks on nominalization. In Readings in transformational grammar, eds. Roderick Jacobs and Peter Rosenbaum, 184–221. Waltham: Ginn. Google Scholar
  50. Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Barriers. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  51. Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  52. Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, eds. Roger Martin, David Michaels, and Juan Uriagereka, 89–155. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  53. Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. Michael Kenstowicz, 1–52. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  54. Chomsky, Noam. 2008. On phases. In Foundational issues in linguistic theory: Essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud, eds. Robert Freidin, Carlos P. Otero, and Maria-Luisa Zubizarreta, 133–166. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  55. Chomsky, Noam. 2013. Problems of projection. Lingua 130: 33–49. Google Scholar
  56. Chung, Sandra. 1991. Functional heads and proper government in Chamorro. Lingua 85: 85–134. Google Scholar
  57. Cinque, Guglielmo. 1980. On extraction from NP in Italian. Journal of Italian Linguistics 5: 47–99. Google Scholar
  58. Cinque, Guglielmo. 2014. Extraction from DP in Italian revisited. In Locality, eds. Enoch Oladé Aboh, Maria Teresa Guasti, and Ian Roberts, 86–103. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  59. Cole, Peter. 1985. Imbabura Quechua. London: Croom Helm. Google Scholar
  60. Collins, Chris. 2002. Eliminating labels. In Derivation and explanation in the minimalist program, eds. Samuel David Epstein and T. Daniel Seely, 42–64. Oxford: Blackwell. Google Scholar
  61. Corbett, Greville G. 1993. The head of Russian numeral expressions. In Heads in grammatical theory, eds. Greville G. Corbett, Norman M. Fraser, and Scott McGlashan, 11–35. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  62. Corver, Norbert. 1990. The syntax of left branch extractions. PhD diss., Tilburg University. Google Scholar
  63. Culicover, Peter W., and Michael S. Rochemont. 1992. Adjunct extraction from NP and the ECP. Linguistic Inquiry 23: 496–501. Google Scholar
  64. Davies, William D. 1986. Choctaw verb agreement and Universal Grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel. Google Scholar
  65. Deal, Amy Rose. 2013. Possessor raising. Linguistic Inquiry 44: 391–432. Google Scholar
  66. Deal, Amy Rose. 2017. External possession and possessor raising. In The Wiley Blackwell companion to syntax, 2nd edn., eds. Martin Everaert, and Henk van Riemsdijk. Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.  https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118358733.wbsyncom047. Google Scholar
  67. Dékány, Éva. 2011. A profile of the Hungarian DP: The interaction of lexicalization, agreement and linearization with the functional sequence. PhD diss., University of Tromsø. Google Scholar
  68. Despić, Miloje. 2013. Binding and the structure of NP in Serbo-Croatian. Linguistic Inquiry 44: 239–270. Google Scholar
  69. den Dikken, Marcel. 1999. On the structural representation of possession and agreement: The case of (anti)-agreement in Hungarian possessed nominal phrases. In Crossing boundaries: Advances in the theory of Central and Eastern European languages, ed. István Kenesei, 137–178. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  70. Dimitrova-Vulchanova, Mila, and Giuliana Giusti. 1998. Fragments of Balkan nominal structure. In Studies on the determiner phrase, eds. Artemis Alexiadou and Chris Wilder, 333–360. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  71. Dixon, R. M. W. 1988. A grammar of Boumaa Fijian. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
  72. Duffield, Nigel. 1995. Particles and projections in Irish syntax. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar
  73. Duguine, Maia. 2008. Structural case and the typology of possessive constructions. In Annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (BLS) 34, eds. Sarah Berson et al., 97–108. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society. Google Scholar
  74. É. Kiss, Katalin. 2014. Ways of licensing Hungarian external possessors. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 61: 45–68. Google Scholar
  75. Emonds, Joseph P. 1987. The invisible category principle. Linguistic Inquiry 18: 613–632. Google Scholar
  76. Fanselow, Gisbert, and Damir Ćavar. 2002. Distributed deletion. In Theoretical approaches to universals, ed. Arrtemis Alexiadou, 65–107. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  77. Fanselow, Gisbert, and Caroline Féry. 2013. A comparative perspective on intervention effects on left branch extractions in Slavic. In Non progredi est regredi: Festschrift für Alla Paslawska, eds. Wolodymyr Sulym, Mychajlo Smolij, and Chrystyna Djakiw, 266–295. Lviv: Pais. Google Scholar
  78. Franco, Ludovico, M. Rita Manzini, and Leonardo M. Savoia. 2015. Linkers and agreement. The Linguistic Review 32: 277–332. Google Scholar
  79. Franks, Steven. 1994. Parametric properties of numeral phrases in Slavic. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 12: 597–674. Google Scholar
  80. Franks, Steven. 2007. Deriving discontinuity. In Studies in formal Slavic linguistics, eds. Franc Marušič and Rok Žaucer, 103–120. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Google Scholar
  81. Franks, Steven, and Ljiljana Progovac. 1994. On the placement of Serbo-Croatian clitics. Indiana Linguistic Studies 7: 69–78. Google Scholar
  82. Gavruseva, Elena. 2000. On the syntax of possessor-extraction. Lingua 110: 743–772. Google Scholar
  83. Georgopoulos, Carol. 1991. Syntactic variables: Resumptive pronouns and Abinding in Palauan. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar
  84. Giorgi, Alessandra, and Giuseppe Longobardi. 1991. The syntax of noun phrases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  85. Giurgea, Ion, and Carmen Dobrovie-Sorin. 2013. Nominal and pronominal possessors in Romanian. In The genitive, eds. Anne Carlier and Jean-Christophe Verstraete, 105–139. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  86. Grimshaw, Jane. 1990. Argument structure. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  87. Grosu, Alexander. 1974. On the nature of the Left Branch Condition. Linguistic Inquiry 5: 308–319. Google Scholar
  88. Guéron, Jacqueline. 1985. Inalienable possession, PRO-inclusion and lexical chains. In Grammatical representation, eds. Jacqueline Guéron, Hans-Georg Obenauer, and Jean-Yves Pollock, 43–86. Dordrecht: Foris. Google Scholar
  89. Haegeman, Liliane. 2004. DP-periphery and clausal periphery: Possessor doubling in West Flemish. In Peripheries, eds. David Adger, Cécile de Cat, and George Tsoulas, 211–240. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  90. Hale, Ken. 1981. On the position of Warlbiri in a typology of the base. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club. Google Scholar
  91. Haspelmath, Martin. 1999. External possession in a European areal perspective. In External possession, eds. Doris L. Payne and Immanuel Barshi, 109–135. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  92. Heck, Fabian. 2009. On certain properties of pied-piping. Linguistic Inquiry 40: 75–111. Google Scholar
  93. Hicks, Glyn. 2009. Tough-constructions and their derivation. Linguistic Inquiry 40: 535–566. Google Scholar
  94. Higginbotham, James. 1985. On semantics. Linguistic Inquiry 16: 547–593. Google Scholar
  95. Hiraiwa, Ken. 2005. Dimensions of symmetry in syntax: Agreement and clausal architecture. PhD diss., MIT. Google Scholar
  96. Hole, Daniel. 2005. Reconciling ‘possessor’ datives and ‘beneficiary’ datives: Towards a unified voice account of dative binding in German. In Event arguments: Foundations and applications, eds. Claudia Maienborn and Angelika Wöllstein, 213–242. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar
  97. Holmberg, Anders, and Christer Platzack. 1995. The role of inflection in Scandinavian syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  98. Horn, George M. 1983. Lexical-functional grammar. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  99. Hornstein, Norbert. 2001. Move! A minimalist theory of construal. Malden: Blackwell. Google Scholar
  100. Hornstein, Norbert, and Jairo Nunes. 2008. Adjunction, labeling, and bare phrase structure. Biolinguistics 2: 57–86. Google Scholar
  101. Horrocks, Geoffrey, and Melita Stavrou. 1987. Bounding theory and Greek syntax: Evidence for wh-movement in NP. Journal of Linguistics 23: 79–108. Google Scholar
  102. Hoyt, Frederick M. 2010. Negative concord in Levantine Arabic. PhD diss., University of Texas at Austin. Google Scholar
  103. Hsu, Yu-Yin. 2009. Possessor extraction in Mandarin Chinese. In University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 15: 95–104. Google Scholar
  104. Huang, C.-T. James. 1982. Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. PhD diss., MIT. Google Scholar
  105. Huang, C.-T. James. 1989. Pro-drop in Chinese: A generalized control theory. In The null subject parameter, eds. Osvaldo Jaeggli and Ken Safir, 185–214. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar
  106. Huang C.-T. James, Yen-hui Audrey Li, and Yafei Li. 2009. The syntax of Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  107. Jelinek, Eloise. 1984. Empty categories, case, and configurationality. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 2: 39–76. Google Scholar
  108. Jelinek, Eloise. 2006. The pronominal argument parameter. In Arguments and agreement, eds. Peter Ackema, Patrick Brandt, Maaike Schoorlemmer, and Fred Weerman, 261–288. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  109. Kachru, Yamuna. 2006. Hindi. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  110. Kariaeva, Natalia. 2009. Radical discontinuity: Syntax at the interface. PhD diss., Rutgers University. Google Scholar
  111. Kayne, Richard S. 1984. Connectedness and binary branching. Dordrecht: Foris. Google Scholar
  112. Kayne, Richard S. 1994. The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  113. Keach, Camillia N., and Michael Rochemont. 1994. On the syntax of possessor raising in Swahili. Studies in African Linguistics 23: 81–106. Google Scholar
  114. Keenan, Edward L., and Baholisoa Ralalaoherivony. 2001. Raising from NP in Malagasy. Lingvisticae Investigationes 23: 1–44. Google Scholar
  115. Koster Jan. 1987. Domains and dynasties: The radical autonomy of syntax. Dordrecht: Foris. Google Scholar
  116. Landau, Idan. 1999. Possessor raising and the structure of VP. Lingua 107: 1–37. Google Scholar
  117. Lee-Schoenfeld, Vera. 2006. German possessors: Raised and affected. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 9: 101–142. Google Scholar
  118. Li Yen-Hui Audrey. 2014. Born empty. Lingua 151: 43–68. Google Scholar
  119. Mahajan, Anoop. 1992. The specificity condition and the CED. Linguistic Inquiry 23: 510–516. Google Scholar
  120. Marlett, Stephen A. 1986. Syntactic levels and multiattachment in Sierra Popoluca. International Journal of American Linguistics 52: 359–387. Google Scholar
  121. Mathieu, Eric, and Ioanna Sitaridou. 2002. Split wh-constructions in Classical and Modern Greek. In Linguistics in Potsdam 19, eds. Artemis Alexiadou, Susann Fischer, and Melita Stavrou, 143–182. Google Scholar
  122. May, Robert. 1985. Logical form: Its structure and derivation. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  123. McCloskey, James. 1990. Resumptive pronouns, A′-binding and levels of representation in Irish. In Syntax and semantics 23: The syntax of the modern Celtic languages, ed. Randall Hendrick, 199–256. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar
  124. Mchombo, Sam. 2004. The syntax of Chichewa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  125. Morimoto, Yukiko, and Sam Mchombo. 2004. Configuring topic in the left periphery: A case of Chichewa split-NPs. ZAS Papers in Linguistics 35: 347–373. Google Scholar
  126. Munro, Pamela. 1984. The syntactic status of object possessor raising in Western Muskogean. In Annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (BLS), Vol. 10. Google Scholar
  127. Munro, Pamela. 1999. Chickasaw subjecthood. In External possession, eds. Doris L. Payne and Immanuel Barshi, 251–289. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  128. Nash, David G. 1986. Topics in Warlpiri grammar. New York: Garland. Google Scholar
  129. Neeleman, Ad, and Hans van de Koot. 2002. The configurational matrix. Linguistic Inquiry 33: 529–574. Google Scholar
  130. Neeleman, Ad, and Hans van de Koot. 2010. A local encoding of syntactic dependencies and its consequences for the theory of movement. Syntax 13: 331–372. Google Scholar
  131. Nichols, Johanna. 1986. Head-marking and dependent-marking grammar. Language 62: 56–119. Google Scholar
  132. Nikolaeva, Irina. 2002. The Hungarian external possessor in European perspective. In Finno-Ugrians and Indo-Europeans: Linguistic and literary contacts, eds. Cornelius Hasselblatt and Rogier Blokland, 272–285. Maastricht: Shaker. Google Scholar
  133. Nissenbaum, Jon. 2000. Explorations in covert phrase movement. PhD diss., MIT Press. Google Scholar
  134. Nunes, Jairo. 2004. Linearization of chains and sideward movement. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  135. Partee, Barbara H., and Vladimir Borschev. 2003. Genitives, relational nouns, and argument-modifier ambiguity. In Modifying adjuncts, eds. Ewald Lang, Claudia Maienborn, and Cathrine Fabricius Hansen, 67–112. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  136. Paul, Waltraud. 2015. New perspectives on Chinese syntax. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  137. Payne, Doris L., and Immanuel Barshi. 1999. External possession: What, where, how, and why. In External possession, eds. Doris L. Payne and Immanuel Barshi, 3–29. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  138. Pereltsvaig, Asya. 2007. The universality of DP: A view from Russian. Studia Linguistica 61: 59–94. Google Scholar
  139. Pereltsvaig, Asya. 2008a. Copular sentences in Russian. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
  140. Pereltsvaig, Asya. 2008b. Split phrases in Colloquial Russian. Studia Linguistica 62: 5–38. Google Scholar
  141. Pesetsky, David. 2013. Russian case morphology and the syntactic categories. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  142. Pesetsky, David, and Esther Torrego. 2001. T-to-C movement: Causes and consequences. In Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. Michael Kenstowicz, 355–426. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  143. Pesetsky, David, and Esther Torrego. 2007. The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features. In Phrasal and clausal architecture, eds. Simin Karimi, Vida Samiian, and Wendy K. Wilkins, 262–294. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  144. Philip Joy Naomi. 2012. Subordinating and coordinating linkers. PhD diss., UCL. Google Scholar
  145. Preminger, Omer. 2009. Breaking agreements: Distinguishing agreement and clitic-doubling by their failures. Linguistic Inquiry 40: 619–666. Google Scholar
  146. Preminger, Omer. 2017. What the PCC tells us about ‘abstract’ agreement, head movement, and locality. Ms., University of Maryland. Google Scholar
  147. Pylkkänen, Liina. 2008. Introducing arguments. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  148. Rackowski, Andrea, and Norvin Richards. 2005. Phase edge and extraction: A Tagalog case study. Linguistic Inquiry 36: 565–599. Google Scholar
  149. Radford, Andrew. 2000. NP-shells. Essex Research Reports in Linguistics 33: 2–20. Google Scholar
  150. Rákosi, György. 2006. Dative experiencer predicates in Hungarian. PhD diss., Utrecht University. Google Scholar
  151. Rappaport, Gilbert C. 2000. Extraction from nominal phrases in Polish and the theory of determiners. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 8: 159–198. Google Scholar
  152. Rappaport, Gilbert C. 2002. Numeral phrases in Russian: A minimalist approach. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 10: 329–342. Google Scholar
  153. Reeve, Matthew. 2011. The syntactic structure of English clefts. Lingua 131: 142–171. Google Scholar
  154. Reeve, Matthew. 2012. Clefts and their relatives. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  155. van Riemsdijk, Henk. 1978. A case study in syntactic markedness: The binding nature of prepositional phrases. Lisse: Peter de Ridder. Google Scholar
  156. Rizzi, Luigi. 2015. Notes on labeling and subject positions. In Structures, strategies and beyond: Studies in honour of Adriana Belletti, eds. Elisa Di Domenico, Cornelia Hamann, and Simona Matteini, 17–46. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  157. Roberts, Taylor. 2000. Clitics and agreement. PhD diss., MIT Press. Google Scholar
  158. Rodrigues, Cilene. 2010. Possessor raising through thematic positions. In Movement theory of control, eds. Norbert Hornstein and Maria Polinsky, 119–142. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  159. Rosenbaum, Peter S. 1967. The grammar of English predicate complement constructions. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  160. Ross, John R. 1967. Constraints on variables in syntax. PhD diss., MIT. Google Scholar
  161. Saito, Mamoru, and Keiko Murasugi. 1999. Subject predication within IP and DP. In Beyond principles and parameters: Essays in memory of Osvaldo Jaeggli, eds. Kyle Johnson and Ian Roberts, 167–188. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar
  162. Samek-Lodovici, Vieri. 2003. The internal structure of arguments and its role in complex predicate formation. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21: 835–881. Google Scholar
  163. Samvelian, Pollet. 2006. When morphology does better than syntax: The ezafe construction in Persian. Ms., Université de Paris 3. Google Scholar
  164. Sánchez, Liliana. 1996. Why does Southern Quechua agree in person nominally? Ms., Carnegie Mellon University. Google Scholar
  165. Sekerina, Irina. 1997. The syntax and processing of scrambling constructions in Russian. PhD diss., CUNY. Google Scholar
  166. Shackle, Christopher. 2003. Panjabi. In The Indo-Aryan languages, eds. George Cardona and Dhanesh Jain, 581–621. London: Routledge. Google Scholar
  167. Shklovsky, Kirill. 2012. Tseltal clause structure. PhD diss., MIT. Google Scholar
  168. Speas, Margaret. 1990. Phrase structure in natural language. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar
  169. Starke, Michal. 2001. Move dissolves into Merge: A theory of locality. PhD diss., University of Geneva. Google Scholar
  170. Stjepanović, Sandra. 2010. Left branch extraction in multiple wh-questions: A surprise for question interpretation. Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics (FASL) 18: 502–517. Google Scholar
  171. Stjepanović, Sandra. 2012. Differential object marking in Serbo-Croatian: Evidence from left branch extraction in negative concord constructions. Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics (FASL) 19: 99–115. Google Scholar
  172. Svenonius, Peter. 2004. On the edge. In Peripheries: Syntactic edges and their effects, eds. David Adger, Cécile de Cat, and George Tsoulas, 259–287. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar
  173. Szabolcsi, Anna. 1983/1984. The possessor that ran away from home. The Linguistic Review 3: 89–102. Google Scholar
  174. Szabolcsi, Anna. 1992. Subject suppression or lexical PRO? The case of derived nominals in Hungarian. Lingua 86: 149–176. Google Scholar
  175. Szabolcsi, Anna. 1994. The noun phrase. In Syntax and semantics, vol. 27: The syntactic structure of Hungarian, eds. Ferenc Kiefer and Katalin É. Kiss, 179–274. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar
  176. Talić, Aida. 2013. Extraordinary complement extraction: PP-complements and inherently case-marked nominal complements. Studies in Polish Linguistics 8: 127–150. Google Scholar
  177. Tappe, Hans-Thilo. 1989. A note on split topicalization in German. In Syntactic phrase structure phenomena in noun phrases and sentences, eds. Christa Bhatt, Elisabeth Löbel, and Claudia Schmidt, 159–179. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  178. Ticio, Emma. 2005. Locality and anti-locality in Spanish DPs. Syntax 8: 229–286. Google Scholar
  179. Toivonen, Ida. 2000. The morphosyntax of Finnish possessives. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18: 579–609. Google Scholar
  180. Toosarvandani, Maziar. 2014. Two types of deverbal nominalization in Northern Paiute. Language 90: 786–833. Google Scholar
  181. Uriagereka, Juan. 1988. On government. PhD diss., University of Connecticut, Storrs. Google Scholar
  182. Ürögdi, Barbara. 2006. Predicate fronting and dative case in Hungarian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 53, 291–332. Google Scholar
  183. Vainikka, Anne. 1989. Deriving syntactic representations in Finnish. PhD diss., University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Google Scholar
  184. Vainikka, Anne. 1993. Three structural cases in Finnish. In Case and other topics in Finnish syntax, eds. Anders Holmberg, and Urpo Nikanne, 129–159. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar
  185. Vermeulen, Reiko. 2005. External possession: Its basis in theta-theory. PhD diss., University College London. Google Scholar
  186. Webelhuth, Gert. 1992. Principles and parameters of syntactic saturation. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  187. Wei, Ting-Chi. 2011. Island repair effects of the Left Branch Condition in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 20: 255–289. Google Scholar
  188. Williams, Edwin. 1981. Argument structure and morphology. The Linguistic Review 1: 81–114. Google Scholar
  189. Zeijlstra, Hedde. 2008. On the syntactic flexibility of formal features. In The limits of syntactic variation, ed. Theresa Biberauer, 143–174. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  190. Zeijlstra, Hedde. 2012. There is only one way to agree. The Linguistic Review 29: 491–539. Google Scholar
  191. Zlatić, Larisa. 1994. An asymmetry in extraction from noun phrases in Serbian. In 9th Biennial Conference on Balkan and South Slavic Linguistics, Literature, and Folklore, 207–216. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistic Club. Google Scholar
  192. Zlatić, Larisa. 1997. The structure of the Serbian Noun Phrase. PhD diss., University of Texas at Austin. Google Scholar
  193. Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa. 1985. The relation between morphophonology and morphosyntax: The case of Romance causatives. Linguistic Inquiry 16: 247–289. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsZhejiang UniversityHangzhouP.R. China

Personalised recommendations