Agreement in the context of coordination: Hindi as a case study

Agreement;Closest Conjunct Agreement (CCA);Coordination;Hindi;head final;compositional view of agreement

Bhatia, Archna

关键词: Agreement;    Closest Conjunct Agreement (CCA);    Coordination;    Hindi;    head final;    compositional view of agreement;   

Others  :  https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/26100/Bhatia_Archna.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

美国|英语

来源: The Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship

【 摘 要 】

Agreement is a prevalent phenomenon observed across languages. It helps us identify whichelements in the sentence are linked or should be interpreted together (Bock et al 1999). Thisproperty of agreement may imply that the PF would always be faithful to syntax/ LF, i.e. itwould always show features of the element with which syntax establishes agreementrelationship. However, when we look at agreement in the context of coordination, we find thatthis is not the case. We can get Closest Conjunct Agreement in addition to the Full Agreementwith the whole coordinated phrase. One way to account for the Closest Conjunct Agreement is toassume an underlying clausal coordination with conjunction reduction. I show that theconstructions involving Closest Conjunct Agreement should not be analyzed as involving clausalcoordination based on various theoretical as well as empirical factors. Another way to accountfor Closest Conjunct Agreement, especially looking at head initial languages, may be to assumethat the structure of coordination plays a role in Closest Conjunct Agreement. Using the datafrom head final languages (mainly Hindi), I have shown that the structure of coordination is notinvolved in the Closest Conjunct Agreement constructions always. Based on various empiricalfacts, such as CCA asymmetry based on the word order as in Arabic, CCA asymmetry based onthe verb types as in Hindi, the presence of both First Conjunct Agreement and the Last ConjunctAgreement within the same language, the requirement in some languages for strict adjacency forClosest Conjunct Agreement, mixed agreement facts, etc., I present an alternative analysis ofClosest Conjunct Agreement which assumes the role of syntactic agreement relations as well asPF relations of linear proximity/ adjacency. I show that this analysis is generalizable acrossiilanguages with different word orders. Also I show how this analysis is applicable to differenttypes of constructions, such as local Closest Conjunct Agreement as well as Long DistanceClosest Conjunct Agreement. The proposed analysis represents a compositional view ofagreement, i.e. it assumes that agreement takes place in two stages: first the agreementrelationship is established in syntax, and then the agreement features are spelled out in the PFcomponent. Hence it suggests that, in an agreement relation, not only syntax but also the PFcomponent of grammar plays a role.