v ciel: workshop em linguística formal v ciel: workshop

VCIEL:WORKSHOPEMLINGUÍSTICAFORMAL
VCIEL:WORKSHOPONFORMALLINGUISTICS
August15-18,2016
Brasília
VCIEL:WORKSHOPEMLINGUÍSTICAFORMAL
VCIEL:WORKSHOPONFORMALLINGUISTICS
PALESTRANTES CONVIDADOS
Adam Albright (MIT)
Andrew Nevins (UCL/UFRJ)
David Pesetsky (MIT)
Karlos Arregi (University of Chicago)
Juliet Stanton (MIT)
COMISSÃO ORGANIZADORA
Rozana Naves (UnB)
Eloisa Pilati (UnB)
Marcus Lunguinho (UnB)
Heloisa Salles (UnB)
Paulo Medeiros Junior (UnB)
COMITÊ TÉCNICO-CIENTÍFICO
Heloisa Salles (UnB)
Eloisa Pilati (UnB)
Marcus Lunguinho (UnB)
Maria José Foltran (UFPR)
Mary Kato (Unicamp)
Marcello Modesto (USP)
Bruna Moreira (UnB)
Paulo Medeiros Junior (UnB)
Patrícia Rodrigues (UFPR)
Esmeralda Vailati Negrão (USP)
Rafael Dias Minussi (Unifesp)
Fábio Bonfim Duarte (UFMG)
REALIZAÇÃO:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS/APOIO
CONTENTS
5
10
12
27
34
GENERALPROGRAM
ABSTRACTBOOKLET
MINICOURSES
POSTERS
ORALPRESENTATIONS
CONFERENCES
GENERALPROGRAM
Monday,August15
Day1
8h30–9h
9h–10h30 REGISTRATION/OPENINGREMARKS
Minicourse:Aderivationaltheoryofclausesize
DavidPesetsky(MIT)
10h30–11h COFFEEBREAK
11h–12h30 PosterSession1
12h30–14h LUNCH
14h–15h30 Minicourse:Morphologicalsyncretismandregularization
AdamAlbright(MIT)
15h30–16h COFFEEBREAK
16h–17h30 Minicourse:Splitergativity
KarlosArregi(UniversityofChicago)
POSTERSESSION1
ApplicativesandterpassivesinPortuguese
MarcusLunguinho(UnB)
Arenarrativewhen-clausescanonicaltemporalclauses?
CristianyFernandesdaSilva(UnB)
Is"Deusjulga-nosanós"aninstanceofcliticdoublinginPortuguese?
AlineJéssikaPires(Unicamp)
Prepositionpied-pipingandBrazilianPortuguesefreerelativeclauses
PauloMedeirosJunior(UnB)
Thesemanticsofquantity:acomparativestudyofWapishana,BrazilianPortugueseand
English
HelenaGuerraVicente(UnB)
MarceloGiovannetti(UFRR)
Theacquisitionoftheclitic“se”asamarkerofsubjectindeterminationandasamarker
ofpronominalpassivevoiceinBrazilianPortuguese
LaraRibeirodaSilva(Unicamp)
5
Tuesday,August16
Day2
9h–10h30 10h30–11h
11h–12h30
12h30–14h
14h–15h30
15h30–16h 16h–17h30
Minicourse:Aderivationaltheoryofclausesize
DavidPesetsky(MIT)
COFFEEBREAK
PosterSession2
LUNCH
Minicourse:Morphologicalsyncretismandregularization
AdamAlbright(MIT)
COFFEEBREAK
Minicourse:Splitergativity
KarlosArregi(UniversityofChicago)
POSTERSESSION2
Trueandfalseexocentriccompounds:thereturnofemptycategories
VitorNóbrega(USP)
PhoevosPanagiotidis(UniversityofCyprus)
Aspectualambiguity:ananalysisofeventiveandstativepredications
GiovanaSantiago(UnB)
KillingverbsinEnglishandSpanish
JuliaMilanese(UniversidaddeBuenosAires)
MartínKondratzky(UniversidaddeBuenosAires)
PredicatesoflocativealternationinBrazilianPortuguese
LetíciaCunhaSilva(UnB)
RozanaNaves(UnB)
Teasingapart3rdpersonnullsubjectsinBrazilianPortuguese
JanaynaCarvalho(USP)
LocativesandDativesinMozambicanPortugueseand(dialectal)BrazilianPortuguese
SarahFreitasRabelo(UnB)
HeloisaSalles(UnB)
6
Wednesday,August17
Day3
9h–10h30 10h30–11h 11h–12h
12h–14h
14h–15h30 15h30–16h 16h–17h30
Minicourse:Aderivationaltheoryofclausesize
DavidPesetsky(MIT)
COFFEEBREAK Conference:ALinguísticaesuasinterfaces
AndrewNevins(UCL/UFRJ)
LUNCH
Minicourse:Morphologicalsyncretismandregularization
AdamAlbright(MIT)
COFFEEBREAK
Minicourse:Splitergativity
KarlosArregi(UniversityofChicago)
7
Thursday,August18
Day4
8h15–8h45 8h45–9h30 REGISTRATION
OPENINGREMARKS
BOOKLAUNCH:
9h30–10h30 TEMASEMTEORIAGERATIVA:HOMENAGEMALUCIALOBATO,
EloisaPilati(org.)
Conference:JulietStanton(MIT)
Segmental blocking in dissimilation: an argument for cooccurrenceofconstraints SESSION1(chair:EzekielPanitz)
10h30-10h55AnaMuller(USP)
Aktionsartenandtheinterpretationoftenseinfuture/non-futurelanguages
10h25-10h50CileneRodrigues(PUC-Rio)&LenaDalPozzo(Puc-Rio)
PronominalpossessivesinPro-Droplanguages:anexperimentalstudy
10h50-11h COFFEEBREAK SESSION2(chair:HelenaGuerraVicente)
11h-11h25BrunaKarlaPereira(UFVJM)
CardinalsandsilentnounsinBrazilianPortuguesenominalconcord
11h25-11h50EzekielPanitz(UCL)
NullObjectsinBrazilianPortugueseasArgumentEllipsis
12h-14h
LUNCH
14h–15h
Conference:AdamAlbright(MIT)
Investigatingphonologicalbiaswithartificialgrammar
experiments
SESSION3(chair:VitorNóbrega)
15h–15h30DalvaDelVigna(UnB)&ThiagoChacon(UnB)
NasalityandvowelharmonyinYuhup
15h30–16h PaulaRobertaGabbaiArmelin(UFJF)
Derivingnon-compositionalinterpretationindiminutivesandaugmentatives:
alocalistapproach
16h–16h30 COFFEEBREAK
16h30–17h30
17h30–18h Conference:KarlosArregi(UniversityofChicago)
Splitergativityandembedding:EvidencefromBasque
CLOSINGREMARKS
8
ABSTRACTBOOKLET
MINICOURSES
Morphologicalsyncretismandregularization
AdamAlbright(MIT)
Inflectionalsystemsareoftenpresentedintabularfashion,withparadigmsofdistinctcellsfor
eachcombinationoffeatures(person,number,tense,etc.).Thisconventioncorrespondstoan
assumption that the 'ideal' design for a morphological system would be one in which each
featurecombinationhasauniqueandunambiguousrealization.Inactuality,thisidealisrarely
met.Ontheonehand,morphologicalsystemsinvolveahighdegreeofreuse,inwhichasingle
marker fills multiple cells or serves multiple purposes (syncretism). On the other hand,
morphologyisofteninefficient,withmultiplemarkersforthesamefeatures(inflectionclasses
andirregularity),ormultiplerealizationsofastemacrossdifferentmorphologicalcontexts.In
this course, we will review a variety of approaches to analyze syncretism, as well as the
competitionbetweendifferentstemsandinflectionclasses.Unfortunately,itisoftendifficultto
determine which of these theoretical options is correct, becauseinflectional systems are
relativelysmalland'fixed':thereisalimitednumberoffeatures,withnopossibilityoftesting
new features or feature combinations. Where available, we will consider how data from
acquisition errors, language change, and psycholinguistic experiments bear on the choice of
analysis.
Aderivationaltheoryofclausesize
DavidPesetsky(MIT)
Wetooeasilybecomeusedtofactsaboutlanguagethatshouldstrikeusasstrange.Oneofthese
isthemenagerieofclause-typesandclause-sizesintheworld'slanguagescategorizedwithillunderstoodlabelssuchasfinite,non-finite,full,reduced,defective,andworse.
For almost a half-century, the standard approach to these distinctions has treated them as a
consequence of lexical choice - a legacy of arguments by Kiparsky & Kiparsky (1970) and
Bresnan (1972), who showed (1) that verbs that select a clausal complement select for the
complementizerandfinitenessofthatcomplement,and(2)thatfinitenessandcomplementizer
choicehavesemanticimplications.Inanearly-1970smodelofgrammarinwhichselectionand
semantic interpretation were properties of Deep Structure, these discoveries directly entailed
the lexicalist view of clause type that is still the standard view today. So compelling was this
argumentatthetime,thatits1960spredecessor(Rosenbaum1967)wasallbutforgotten-the
idea that distinctions are derivationally derived as the by-product of derivational processes
suchasRaising.Asaconsequence,ithasgoneunnoticedthatinamodernmodelofgrammar,
where structure is built by Merge (and both selection and semantic interpretation are
interspersed with syntactic operations), the arguments against the derivational theory no
longergothrough.
Inthisclass,Iwillpresentaseriesofargumentsfromanumberoflanguagesandmanydifferent
empiricaldomainsforamodernizedreturntoaderivationaltheory.Wewillexamineanumber
of puzzles that have been described as conundrums for case theory, complementizer-trace
phenomena,anti-Agreementeffects,gerunds,pseudo-relatives,andmore.Iwillargueforashift
of perspective that views these puzzles as questions about the circumstances under which a
clausemustbereducedinthecourseofthederivation-ratherthanasanissueofthelicensing
ofelementswithintheclause(whiletakingforgrantedthefactthatitisreduced).
10
Thekey,Iwillargue,isanoperationcalledExfoliationthatremovesouterlayersofofaphaseas
alastresorttoestablishlocalitybetweenaclause-externalprobeandaclause-internalgoalthat
cannotbeestablishedinanyotherway.
Splitergativity
KarlosArregi(UniversityofChicago)
In so-called ergative languages (e.g. Basque, Hindi, Warlpiri, Dyirbal), direct objects and
intransitive subjects pattern alike with respect to case and/or agreement, to the exclusion of
transitive subjects. For instance, in ergative languages with overt case inflection, transitive
subjectshaveergativecase,whiledirectobjectsandintransitivesubjectshaveabsolutivecase
(sometimes also referred to as nominative). This contrasts with accusative languages (e.g.
English,Korean),inwhichintransitiveandtransitivesubjectspatternalikeandhavenominative
case,totheexclusionofdirectobjects,whichbearaccusativecase.
A well-known feature of ergative languages is that their ergativity is typically not pervasive
throughoutthelanguage,aphenomenonoftenreferredtoassplitergativity.Forinstance,while
Warlpiriisergativewithrespecttocasemarking,itisnotwithrespecttoverbalagreement,in
whichallsubjectspatternalike,totheexclusionofdirectobjects.Similarly,Dyirbalappearsto
beathoroughlyergativelanguage,exceptforthefactthatitsfirstandsecondpersonnominals
followanominative-accusativepatternofcase-marking.Inlanguageswithanaspect-basedsplit
(e.g. Hindi) ergative patterning is found in clauses with perfective aspect, but not in
nonperfectives.Insomeoftheselanguages,nonergativityislimitedtoprogressiveclauses,asin
Basque, in which all subjects (transitive or intransitive) are absolutive in the progressive. The
descriptiveandtypologicalliteraturehasuncoveredanimportantgeneralizationaboutaspectbased splits: the latter are always found in nonperfective aspects. That is, in an ergative
languagewiththistypeofsplit,perfectiveclausesarealwaysergative.
This course provides an overview of ergativity, with special focus on aspect-based splits and
their theoretical consequences. We will concentrate on a particularly influential theory of this
typeofsplit,firstproposedbyLaka(2006)forBasque.Lakamaintainsthat,inessence,thesplit
isanillusion:Basqueisthoroughlyergative,andtheapparentnonergativityofprogressivesis
due to their special syntax. In particular, the progressive auxiliary is treated as a main verb,
while the main semantic predicate heads a nominalized embedded clause marked for inessive
(locative)case.Thesubjectoftheentireclauseisthusanalyzedasthesubjectofanintransitive
verb (the progressive “auxiliary”), which, as expected, bears absolutive case, regardless of the
transitivityofthemainsemanticpredicate.ThisanalysisisfurtherexpandedoninCoon2010,
2013tocoverawiderangeorlanguagesandaspect-basedsplitconstructions.
11
POSTERS
Applicativesandter-passivesinPortuguese
MarcusLunguinho(UnB)
Theobjectofthisstudy:Beyondthebasicpassivepatternin(1),Portuguesealsoshowsother
typesofpassivesentences,asillustratedin(2):
(1) OsartigosdoPedroforampublicadospelaeditoradarevista
‘Pedro’sarticleswerepublishedbytheeditorofthejournal’
(2) OPedroteveosartigospublicadospelaeditoradarevista.
Literally:ThePedrohadthearticlespublishedbytheeditorofthejournal
‘Pedro’sarticleswerepublishedbytheeditorofthejournal’
Pattern(2)constituteswhatIwillcallnon-canonicalpassives.Thistypeofsentenceshasbeen
completelyunnoticedintheliteratureonPortuguesesyntax.Becauseofthis,theyaretheobject
of this study whose main aim is to describe the properties of these sentences and provide a
syntacticanalysisforthem.
Properties of non-canonical passives: The sentences studied here share with canonical
passivesfourproperties:a)demotionoftheexternalargument(4),b)promotionoftheinternal
argument (4), c) participle agreement (5) and d) sensitivity of the past participle to the
argumentstructureofthepredicate(6-8):
(4) a.[externalargumentAeditoradarevista]publicou[internalargumentosartigosdoPedro].
b. [internalargumentOsartigosdoPedro]forampublicados[externalargumentpelaeditoradarevista].
c. OPedroteve[internalargumentosartigos]publicados[externalargumentpelaeditoradarevista].
(5) a.[Osartigos[doPedro]]forampublicadospelaeditoradarevista
GEN:MASC/NUM:PLGEN:MASC/NUM:SG
b. [OPedro
GEN:MASC/NUM:PL
]teve[osartigos]publicadospelaeditoradarevista.
GEN:MASC/NUM:SG
GEN:MASC/NUM:PL GEN:MASC/NUM:PL
(6) a.AeditoradarevistapublicouosartigosdoPedro.(transitiveverb)
b. OsartigosdoPedroforampublicadospelaeditoradarevista.
c. OPedroteveosartigospublicadospelaeditoradarevista.
(7) a.AfilhadoJoãochorou.(unergativeverb)
‘João’sdaughtercried’
b. *AfilhadoJoãofoichorada.
c. *OJoãoteveafilhachorada.
(8) a.AcartadaEvachegou.(unnacusativeverb)
‘Eva’sletterarrived’
b.*AcartadaEvafoichegada.
c.*Evateveacartachegada.
Non-canonical passives with ter also have their own properties: a) introduction of a new
argument(9),b)affectednessofthisargumentbytheeventdescribedbytheparticiple(10),c)
obligatoryrelationofthisargumentwithanargumentalreadypresentintheparticipialdomain
(11),andd)useoftheverbterastheauxiliaryoftheconstruction(12):
(9) a.Aquelerioteveaságuaspoluídaspelaindústria.
Literally:Thatriverhadthewaterspollutedbytheindustry
b. *proteveaságuasdaqueleriopoluídaspelaindústria.
c. *proteveaqueleriopoluídopelaindústria.
(10) a.Aatrizteveacarreiradestruídapelasdrogas.(negativeaffectedness)
Literally:Theactresshadthecareerdestructedbythedrugs
b.Aatrizteveacarreiratransformadapelonovotrabalho.(positiveaffectedness)
Literally:Theactresshadthecareerchangedbythenewjob
(11)a.Omeninoteveabicicletadestruídapelocarro.(alienablepossession)
Literally:Theboyhadthebicycledestructedbythecar
b. Ameninateveavidasalvapelobombeiro.(inalienablepossession)
Literally:Thegirlhadtheliferescuedbythefireman
12
c. Minhacasateveotelhadoarrancadopelatempestade.(part-whole)
Literally:Myhousehadtherooftornoffbythestorm
d. Oprédioteveaconstruçãointerrompidapelachuva.(complementation)
Literally:Thebuildinghadtheconstructioninterruptedbytherain
e. *OPauloteveascontasdaMariapagaspelaAna.(nosemanticrelation)
Literally:ThePaulohadMaria’sbillspaidbytheAna
(12) Eutenhoacasainvadidaporinsetostodoverão.
Literally:Ihavethehouseinvadedbyinsectseverysummer
Analysis: The starting point of the analysis is the smuggling approach to passives (Collins
2005).Toexplaintheproperties(4)-(8)sharedbythetwotypesofpassives,Iassumetheyare
the reflex of a derivational link common to the derivation of these types of passives, which is
showedin(13)below:
(13) [v
[
[
[ [
Aux VoiceP PartP DP DP
oPedro]osartigos][ publicados[ ...]][
Part
VP
Voice
por[v*P[DP aeditoradarevista]…
Inordertoaccountfortheexclusivepropertiesofnon-canonicalpassives,Iproposethatthey
aretheconsequenceofthepresenceofa v*head(Chomsky2001)intheNumerationofthese
sentences.
(14)
This head is merged on top of the projection vAux (auxiliary ser) and it is responsible for the
Case- valuation of the internal argument of the participle. Given that this head has a θ-role to
assign; it will need an argument to receive it. This is the source of properties (9) and (10).
Adopting the characterization of θ-roles as features (Boškovič 1994, Lasnik 1995, Boškovič &
Takahashi 1998, Hornstein 1999, 2001, 2003), I suggest that this θ-role is satisfied through
possessorraising(Floripi2003,Rodrigues2010,Lunguinho2006,Floripi&Nunes2009).With
thisproposal,property(11)isalsoaccountedfor.Finally,toexplaintheemergenceofterasthe
auxiliaryofnon-canonicalpassives,IadaptKayne’s(1993)proposalandtreatitastheresultof
thecombinationofv*featureswiththe(abstractfeaturesassociatedwiththe)auxiliaryser.This
compositionalapproachtoterissupportedbythefollowingfacts:a)terandserneverco-occur,
b)theseauxiliarieshaveafixedpositioninthesequenceofauxiliaries,c)bothappearbeforethe
mainverb,d)theylackimperativeandpassiveparticipleforms.Thissimilarityinbehaviorcan
beunderstoodonceweassumethattheauxiliaryterhastheauxiliaryseraspartofit.
References
BOŠKOVIĆ,Ž.1994.D-Structure,theta-criterion,andmovementintotheta-positions.Linguistic
Analysis 24 (3/4): 247-286. BOŠKOVIĆ, Ž. & Takahashi, D. 1998. Scrambling and Last Resort.
LinguisticInquiry29(3):347-366.CHOMSKY,N.2001.DerivationbyPhase.InKenHale:alifein
language, Michael Kenstowicz (ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, p. 1-52. COLLINS, C. 2005. A
smuggling approach to the passive in English. Syntax 8(2): 81-120. FLORIPI, S. 2004.
ArgumentosNulosdentrodeDPsemPortuguêsBrasileiro.Master’sThesis,UniversidadeEstadual
de Campinas. FLORIPI, S. & NUNES, J. 2009. Movement and resumption in null possessor
constructions in Brazilian Portuguese. In Minimalist Essays on Brazilian Portuguese Syntax, J.
Nunes (ed.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 51-68. HORNSTEIN, N. 1999. Movement and
control. Linguistic Inquiry 30(1): 69-96 | Hornstein, N. 2001. Move! A Minimalist Theory of
Construal. Oxford: Blackwell. HORNSTEIN, N. 2003. On control. In Minimalist Syntax, R.
Hendrick (ed.). Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 6-8. KAYNE, R. (1993) Toward a modular theory of
auxiliaryselection.StudiaLinguistica47(1):3-31.LASNIK,H.1995.LastResortandAttractF.In
Proceedings of FLSM 6: 62-81. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club. LUNGUINHO,
M. 2006. Partição de constituintes no português brasileiro: características sintáticas e
semânticas.InLíngua,GramáticaeDiscurso,D.E.G.daSilva(ed.).Goiânia:Cânone,pp.133-147.
LUNGUINHO, M. 2011. Verbos Auxiliares e a Sintaxe dos Domínios não-Finitos. Doctoral
13
Dissertation,UniversityofSãoPaulo.RODRIGUES,C.2010.Possessorraisingthroughthematic
positions. In Movement Theory of Control, Norbert Hornstein & Maria Polinsky (eds).
Amsterdam:JohnBenjamins,pp.217-238.
Arenarrativewhen-clausescanonicaltemporalclauses?
CristianyFernandesdaSilva(UnB)
When-clauses usually can express a vast typology of sentences. They can occur in temporal
clauses, (1a), interrogatives clauses, (1b/c), non-temporal clauses, (1d), relative clauses, (1e),
narrative clauses, (1f), etc. This means that when itself can express several meanings and
syntacticfunctions(AlcaláAlba,1983,Declerck,1997,Silva,2016):
(1) a.Iwillleavewhentheyarrive.
b. Whenwillitrain?
c. Iaskedhimwhenithadhappened.
d. Youhavemuchmoreflexibilitywhenyou’reaprivatecompany.
e.Thosewerethedayswheneverybodyhadflowersintheirhair.
f. Iwassittingquietlyinthekitchenwhensuddenlyastrangerenteredtheroom.
According to Declerck (1997, p. 42) the “so-called ‘narrative when-clauses’ do not have the
semanticfunctionofspecifyingthetimeoftheHC-situationoratimetowhichthetimeoftheHCsituation is related: they do not answer the question ‘When?’. Instead, they are semantically like
HCs: they ‘push forward the action’ (i.e. ‘when’ is equivalent to ‘and then’). For this reason, they
shouldnotbetreatedasadverbialWCs[…]”.LabovandWaletzky(1967)arguethatanarrativeis
a specific way of reporting past events. In this sense, it must follow a sequence, describing an
abstract,anorientation,acomplicationthatmovestoaction,anevaluation,aresolutionanda
coda.
Thepurposeofthispaperistoinvestigatethesimilaritiesanddifferencesbetweenthetemporal
when-clausesandnarrativewhen-clausesintwolanguages(cf.(1a)and(1f))):Portugueseand
Spanish. It has been claimed that the narrative when-clauses are not temporal in the literal
senseoftheword.Wehavecollectedsomesemanticandsyntacticalevidencetoassurethat.In
addition, we will discuss some properties that are found in when-clauses but not in narrative
when-clauses.
References
ALCALÁ-ALBA,A.(1983).Oracionescondicionalesintroducidosporcuandoenelespañolculto
delaciudaddeMéxico.AnuariodeLetras,21,RevistadelCentrodeLinguísticaHispánicaJuanM.
Lope Blanch. pp. 201-210, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. DECLERCK, R. (1997).
When-clausesandtemporalstructure.NewYork:Routledge.LABOV,W.;WALETZKY,J.Narrative
analysis:oralversionsofpersonalexperience.In:JHelm(ed.)Essaysontheverbalandvisualarts
(Proceedings of 1966 Annual Spring Meeting of the American Ethnological Society), Seattle:
UniversityofWashingtonPress.SILVA,C.F.(2016).Oraçõesintroduzidasporquando/cuando:
umacomparaçãoentreoportuguêseoespanhol.TesedeDoutorado.UniversidadedeBrasília,
UnB.
Is“Deusjulga-nosanós”aninstanceofcliticdoublinginPortuguese?
AlineJéssikaPires(Unicamp)
Thepresentpaperfocusesondatafrom OldPortugueseinwhichwecanfindacliticpronoun
co-occurring with a pronoun functioning as a direct object marked by the preposition a, as
illustratedbytheexamplesbelow:
(1) Euvigioogado,elemevigiaa mim.
(2) Amimagrada-metudooquefordesuavontade.
14
In(1)and(2)thereisanaccusativecliticpronoun(me)doublingastrongpronounmarkedbya
(amim).
Thiskindofconstructionseemstobeanoccurrenceofawidespreadphenomenoncalledclitic
doubling,whichcouldbedefinedas“aconstructioninwhichacliticco-occurswithafullDPin
argumentpositionformingadiscontinuousconstituentwithit”(ANAGNOSTOPOULOU,2006,p.
520). Our main goal is to describe the characteristics of this kind of construction and to
determineifthisphenomenoninPortuguesecanbeconsideredasaccusativecliticdoubling.In
ordertodothat,wefocus on data ofthe 16th-19th centuries found in the TychoBraheParsed
CorpusofHistoricalPortuguese.
In many languages we find clitic doubling; some, like Spanish and Romanian, instantiate clitic
doublingofobjects,andothers,likeFrenchandItalian,donotacceptthiskindofconstruction.
Accordingtosomeauthors,Portugueseallowscliticdoublingofobjects.Castilho(2005)states
that in Medieval Portuguese we can find both accusative clitic doubling and dative clitic
doubling.
Diniz (2007) analyzes data from the region of Minas Gerais and claims that in this dialect of
BrazilianPortugueseweactuallyfindcasesofaccusativecliticdoubling,asin“OJoãomeviueu”.
The author further states that accusative clitic doubling solely occurs with first and second
person pronouns, and that the use of the preposition is not necessary. These characteristics
separate Portuguese from Spanish, since in the latter, clitic doubling is regulated by Kayne’s
Generalization, which predicts that an object DP is doubled if it is preceded by a preposition.
Furthermore, in Standard Spanish, accusative clitic doubling just occurs with third person
pronouns.
InBalearicCatalan,wecanfindconstructionswhichresemblePortuguese.However,EscandellVidal (2009) argues those are not cases of clitic doubling in Balearic Catalan, but that they, in
fact, instantiate topicality in language. Considering the differences between accusative clitic
doubling in Spanish and Portuguese and the similarities between Portuguese and Balearic
Catalan, in this paper we will establish the status of this kind of construction we find in Old
Portuguese.
References
ANAGNOSTOPOULOU, Elena. Clitic doubling. The Blackwell companion to syntax, v. 1, p. 519-
581, 2006. CASTILHO, Celia Maria Moraes de. O processo de redobramento sintático no
portuguêsmedieval:aformaçãodasperífrasescomestar.2005.DINIZ,CarolinaRibeiro.Eute
amo você: O redobro de pronomes clíticos sob uma abordagem minimalista. 2007. GALVES,
Charlotte; FARIA, Pablo. 2010. Tycho Brahe Parsed Corpus of Historical Portuguese. URL:
<http://www.tycho.iel.unicamp.br/~tycho/corpus/en/index.html>.
ESCANDELL-VIDAL,
Victoria. Differential object marking and topicality: The case of Balearic Catalan. Studies in
language,v.33,n.4,p.832-885,2009.
Preposition pied-piping and Brazilian Portuguese free relative
clauses
PauloMedeirosJunior(UnB)
Free Relative Clauses exhibit a restriction on preposition pied-piping usually due to matching
conditions.ThisfactwasoriginallyobservedbyBresnan&Grimshaw(1978)andpointedoutin
Brazilian Portuguese data by Medeiros Junior (2005; 2006) and Lessa de Oliveira (2008). The
generalpointis:thematchingrequirementaffectingFreeRelativeswouldblockpied-pipingin
order to avoid mismatch (see Bresnan & Grimshaw (1978) — for English — and Medeiros
Junior(2014)—forPortuguese).
BrazilianPortuguesewould,than,infaceofmismatchoccurrences,adoptsomestrategiesalso
found in many other languages (see Vogel 2001; 2003) to get rid of undesirable results:
15
prepositiondeletion,forexample,asin(1)(MedeirosJunior2005),oraresumptivestrategyas
in(2)(MedeirosJunior(2014):
(1)AMariasóconvida(prafesta)[PPØ[DPquemelagosta]].
theMaryonlyinvitesforpartyØwhoshelikes
(2)OJoãoconheceuquemvocêgostadele.
theJohnmetwhoyoulike(of)him
There are, however, some specific contexts in which preposition pied-piping seems to freely
occurinBrazilianPortuguese“FreeRelatives”,asonecanseefrom(3),(4)and(5)bellow:
(3)Eumedesligueide[comquem]ItavafalandotiedissequeoJoãotraiamulher.
Irefl.forgotofwithwhom(I)wastalking(to)and(I)saidthattheJohncheatsthewife’
(4)Eumeinteressopor[comquem]ielasaiti
Irefl.(get)interestedforwithwhomshedates
(5)Ninguémsesurpreendecom[dequem]Ielagostati.
Nobodyrefl.(get)surprisedwithofwhomshelikes
Iwillargueinthispaperthatsubordinatesentencesin(3),(4)and(5)mustnotbeunderstood
as free relative clauses, but as indirect questions, with a focalized wh-constituent, due to
syntacticfactssuchas:
1. Preposition pied-piping is freely authorized in interrogative sentences, but not in ordinary
FreeRelatives,justasseenin(6);
2. It is possible to cleft the wh-constituent in (3), (4) and (5), just as in interrogatives (see
Macambira (1998), Alvarenga (1987) Medeiros Junior (2004)); this is not possible in (Free)
RelativeClauses(seeMioto&Negrão(2007)),asonecanseein(7);
3. It is also possible to lexicalize the complementizer in (3), (4) and (5), what is allowed in
interrogatives,butnotinFreeRelatives,asitcanbeseenin(8).
(6)a.Euquerosaber[porquem]ivocêseinteressati.
Iwanttoknowforwhomyourefl.(get)interested
b.*Euconvidei(prafesta)[porquem]ivocêseinteressati.
Iinvited(totheparty)forwhomyourefl(get)interested
(7)a.Eleperguntouqueméquevocêconvidouprafesta.
Heaskedwhoisthatyouinvitedtotheparty
b.*Eleentrevistouqueméquevocêconvidouprafesta.
Heinterviewedwhoisthatyouinvitedfortheparty
(8)a.Nóspergntamosquemquefezisso.
Weaskedwhothatdidthis
b.????Nósentrevistamosquemquefezisso.
Weinterviewedwhothatdidthis
The main conclusion is then: all predicates in matrix clauses of utterances in (3), (4) and (5)
selectcomplementsentenceswithastrong[+Wh]feature,whichissupposedtoberesponsible
forthedisplacementofthewh-element(seeChomsky1977,Cheng1991andRizzi1991);those
sentences should then, be considered interrogative sentences. Syntactic facts exposed above
wouldthenleadustointerpretthesubordinatesentencesinthesedataasinterrogativeclauses
insteadofFreeRelatives.
References
ALVARENGA, D. Sobre interrogativa indireta no português. MSc Dissertation. UFMG, Belo
Horizonte, MG, 1981. BRESNAN, J. & GRIMSHAW, J. The syntax of free relatives in English.
LinguisticInquiry,Massachusetts,v.3,n.9,pp.331-391,1978.CHOMSKY,N.OnWhMovement.
In: CULICOVER, P. W. WASOW, T. & AKMAJIAN, A. (eds.) Formal Syntax. New York: Academic
Press, 71-132, 1977. CHENG, L. L. S. On the typology of wh-questions. Doctoral Dissertation,
MIT,1991. LESSA DE OLIVEIRA, A. Orações Relativas do Português: questões teóricas e fatos de
aquisição.Ph.DThesis,Unicamp,Campinas-SP,2008.MACAMBIRA,J.R.PortuguêsEstrutural.4
ed. São Paulo: Pioneira, 1998. MEDEIROS JÚNIOR, P. Sobre sintagmas-Qu e Relativas Livres no
Português. MSc Dissertation. UnB, Brasília, DF, 2005. MEDEIROS JÚNIOR, P. Relativas Livres:
UmaPropostaparaoPortuguês.InRevistadeEstudosdaLinguagem,14(2)pp.429-455UFMG.
Belo Horizonte, MG, 2006. MEDEIROS JUNIOR, P. Orações relativas Livres do PB: sintaxe,
semânticaediacronia.Ph.DThesis.UniversidadeEstadualdeCampinas(Unicamp)–Campinas,
16
2014.MIOTO,C.&NEGRÃO,E.V.Assentençasclivadasnãocontêmumarelativa.In:CASTILHO,
A.T.de;TORRESDEMORAIS,M.A.,LOPES,R.E.V.;CYRINO,S.M.L.143(orgs).Desrição,Históriae
Aquisição do Português Brasileiro. São Paulo, FAPESP; Campinas, Pontes, p. 159-183, 2007.
RIZZI, L. Residual verb second and the Wh criterion. Technical Reports in Formal and
Computational. Linguistics 2, University of Geneva, 1991. VOGEL, R. Towards an Optimal
Typology of the Free Relatives Construction. IATL 8. Papers from the Sixteenth Annual
ConferenceandfromTheResearchWorkshopoftheIsraelScienceFoundation.TheSyntaxand
RelativeClauseConstructions.ed.AlexanderGrosu.TelAvivUniversity.107-119,2001.VOGEL,
R. Surface Matters. Case conflicts in Free Relative Constructions and Case Theory. In: New
PerspectivesonCaseTheoryEds.EllenBrandnerandHeikeZinsmeister.CSLIPublications.269299,2003.
The semantics of quantity: a comparative study of Wapishana,
BrazilianPortugueseandEnglish
HelenaGuerraVicente(UnB)
MarceloGiovannetti(UFRR)
The empirical domain of this study are constructions containing words which denote large
amounts of something in Wapishana (Aruák), such as iribe, diri’i, tybary and tyykii (roughly
corresponding to ‘much’ and ‘many’ in English and muito(a)(s) in Portuguese), which we will
render as M-words. Our aims are as follows: (i) to contribute to the description of the
Wapishana quantifier system (ii) to contribute to the general discussion on the count/mass
distinction,(iii)toprovidesupportforvonFintel&Matthewson’s(2008)claimthatuniversality
should be viewed as the null hypothesis in semantic work on any given feature of grammar.
Therefore, we assume that the expression of quantity and the count/mass distinction is
universal and that crosslinguistic variation is restricted to the lexicon and to the phonological
component,asdefendedbyChomsky(2001,p.107):“ΣisassumedtobeuniformforallL;NSis
as well, if parameters can be restricted to LEX; Φ, in contrast, is highly variable among Ls”,
where L stands for ‘a possible (I-) language’, Σ for ‘the semantic component’, NS for ‘narrow
syntax’, LEX for ‘the lexicon’ and Φ for ‘the phonological component’. In this work, three
languages are under our scrutiny: Brazilian Portuguese, English and Wapishana. All three
languagesarecapableofexpressingtheideaofalargeamountofsomething,thusbeinguniform
atΣ;allthreepossessM-wordstoconveythisinformation,andhereiswherevariationlies:in
the lexicon – which bears information about (formal and semantic) features carried by lexical
items of L – and in phonology – which carries information about sound (understood in
internalist terms) (Chomsky, 1998). Wapishana possesses specialized quantifiers for count
nounsandmassnouns(Santos,2006;Sanchez-Mendes,2015)(Joãoturniiiribe/*tybary/*diri’i
chururu-nau‘Joãoboughtalotofpants’)–likeEnglishbutunlikePortuguese–and,additionally,
specialized quantifiers for liquids and for non-liquid mass (Zyn-nau na’akan
*iribe/tybary/*diri’i wyn ‘The women brought a lot of water’ and Ana warakan
*iribe/diri’i/*tybary awati’i niken nii sakichap kamuu ‘Ana cooked a lot of rice for lunch’)
(Guerra Vicente & Giovannetti, 2016). As far as we are concerned, no other language displays
thisspecialization,which,atfirstsight,mightberegardedsimplyasafurtherrefinementofthe
count/mass distinction found in the use of ‘many’ and ‘much’ in English. A closer look at
Wapishana,however,willrevealthatthatisnotthecase.Duringelicitationofdata,oneofour
consultants volunteered constructions in which a given noun could have its meaning altered
dependingonthenatureofthequantifierassociatedwithit.Kupaynau‘fish-pl.’,forinstance,can
occur with iribe ‘many’, meaning that the fish are alive, swimming in the water, or with diri’i
‘much-non-liquid’, meaning that the fish were caught and gathered on a surface or in a
container. Wyn, usually understood as ‘water’ (liquid), when occuring with tyykii ‘muchdispersed-mass’ means ‘rain’, which, to our understanding, might be interpreted as dispersed
17
water.Wearguethattheapparentobstacleposedbycrosslinguisticvariationcanbeovercome
ifweunderstandthatthesemanticexpressionoflargeamountsofsomethingisuniversal,and
variationliesinitsmorphosyntacticcodificationinLs,whichreliesonthenatureof(formaland
semantic)featurescarriedbylexicalitemsofL.InEnglish,‘many’selectscountnouns,whereas
‘much’selectsmassnouns.InPortuguese,muito(a)(s)canquantifyovercountandmassnouns,
inarelationthatinvolvesgenderandnumberinflection.WapishanadisplaysfourdifferentMwords, but certain nouns can only be analyzed as count, liquid mass, non-liquid mass, and
dispersed mass in the final construct/complex [M-word + Noun]. Our next step will be to
determine the exact nature of the formal and semantic features involved in the derivation of
sentencescontainingM-words.Bydoingso,weintendtogiveapreciseaccountofthelocusof
variationacrosstheseandotherlanguagesasfarastheexpressionofquantityandcount/mass
distinctionareconcerned.
References
CHOMSKY,N.(1998)MinimalistInquiries:theframework.MITOccasionalPapersinLinguistics,
n. 15. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL. CHOMSKY, N. (2001) Beyond Explanatory Adequacy. MIT
Occasional Papers in Linguistics, n. 20. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL. VON FINTEL, K. &
MATTHEWSON,L.(2008)Universalsinsemantics. TheLinguisticReview,25(1-2), p. 139-201.
GUERRAVICENTE,H.&GIOVANNETTI,M.(2016)Onthecount/massdistinction:aspectsofthe
quantifier system in Wapishana. Paper presented at SULA, UC Santa Cruz. MATTHEWSON, L.
(2004)Onthemethodologyoffieldwork.IJAL,70(4),p.369-415.SANCHEZ-MENDES,L.(2015)
A distinção contável-massivo em Wapixana: uma descrição preliminar. Paper presented at the
ABRALINConference.Belém-PA,Brazil.SANTOS,M.G.dos.(2006)UmagramáticadoWapixana
(Aruák)–aspectosdafonologia,damorfologiaedasintaxe.PhDdissertation,Unicamp,Brazil.
The acquisition of the clitic “se” as a marker of subject
indetermination and as a marker os pronominal passive voice in
BrazilianPortuguese
LaraRibeirodaSilva(Unicamp)
Thisstudyaimstoinvestigatetheacquisitionoftheclitic"se"inBrazilianPortuguese(BP).The
mainhypothesisisthatthiscliticbehavesjustlikealinguisticlossrecoveredbytheschooland,
consequently,theacquisitionisonlybymeansofeducation.Thishypothesisisalsobasedonthe
proposalofKato(2005)whichstatesthatthewrittenlanguagetaughtinschoolisfardifferent
fromthelanguagespokenbyBPnativespeakersandthatitcanonlyberecognizedasaforeign
language (L2) by the student. Thus, we will also seek to identify the influences of learning to
writeinspeech,basedontheuseoftheclitic"se"asamarkerofsubjectindeterminationorasa
marker of pronominal passive voice, ferreting out the route taken by BP speakers from the
acquisitionoflanguagetothespeechoftheliterateadult.Considertheexamplesbelow:
(1)Antigamente,lia-semuitomais.
*Inthepast,read-SEmuchmore.
Inthepast,readingusedtobemorefrequent.
(2)Essaposturaéfundamentalparaquesealcancemresultados
*ThispositionisfundamentaltoSEreachresults.
Thispositionisfundamentaltoreachresults.
In (1), according to the proposal of Nunes (1990), "se" is a marker of subject indetermination
and (2) a marker of pronominal passive voice. For this investigation, a corpus analysis was
composedofdataderivedfromfourdifferentdatabases,eachofwhichcorrespondstoonestage
oftheacquisitionprocessofsuchmarks.Theyare:collectionOralLanguageAcquisitionProject
CEDAE (IEL / Unicamp); project "The theoretical relevance of the unique data in the written
language acquisition process" (IEL / Unicamp) coordinated by Prof. Dr. Maria Bernadette
MarquesAbaurre;databaseUnicampentranceexamessayevidenceprovidedbythePermanent
Committee of Entrance Exams; Project NURC / SP (Standard Cultured City - São Paulo). From
18
thedataanalyzedinthisstudy,weobservedthatthisclitics’rateisconsiderablyhighinthelast
yearsofschoolingandintheliterateadultspeech.Thisdataprovidesstrongevidence,then,to
the hypothesis defended by Kato, Correa and Cyrino (2009): the use of clitics in BP depends
mainlyonthesuccessoftheeducationsystem,especiallyinwriting.Havingabackdropofthe
generativeperspective,especiallythemodelofPrinciplesandParameters,thisresearchisalso
based on the work of Galves (1986), Nunes (1990) and Melo (2012) on impersonal
constructions with "se”. On the acquisition of L2, White’s (2003) discussions were considered
on the acquisition of L2, as well as the variationist look of Kroch (2003) on grammars
competitionandtheconceptofcode-switchingofPoplack(2001)
References
GALVES,C.Ensaiossobreasgramáticasdoportuguês.Campinas,SP:EditoradaUnicamp.2001.
KATO,M.Aquisiçãoeaprendizagemdalínguamaterna:deumsaberinconscienteparaumsaber
metalinguístico. In: MORAES, J; GRIMM-CABRAL, L. (orgs) Investigações a linguagem: ensaios
emhomenagemaLeonorScliar-Cabral.Florianópolis:EditoraMulher.201-225.1999.KATO,M.
A gramática do letrado: questões para a teoria gramatical. In: MARQUES, M. A.; TEIXEIRA, J.;
LEMOS, A. S. (Orgs.). Ciências da linguagem: trinta anos de investigação e ensino. Braga:
Universidade do Minho. 2005. KATO, M.; CYRINO, S. M. L.; CORRÊA, V.R. Brazilian Portuguese
andtherecoveryoflostcliticsthroughschooling.In:PIRES,A.;ROTHMAN,J.(eds.)Minimalist
Inquiries into Child and Adult Language Acquisition: Case Studies across Portuguese.
Berlin/New York: Mouton De Gruyter. 2009. p. 245-272. NUNES, J. M. O Famigerado se: uma
análise sincrônica e diacrônica das construções com se apassivador e indeterminador.
DissertaçãodeMestrado.Campinas.Unicamp.1990.POPLACK,S.Code-switching(linguistic).In:
International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences, Edição on-line. 2001.
Disponível em: <http://aix1.uottawa.ca/~sociolx/CS.pdf > Acesso em 24-06-2015. WHITE, L.
SecondLanguageAcquisitionandUniversalGrammar.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
2003.
True and false exocentric compounds: the return of empty
categories
VitorNóbrega(USP)
PhoevosPanagiotidis(UniversityofCyprus)
Overview. Semantic headedness is generally employed as the primary criterion for
determiningwhetheracompoundisendocentricorexocentric.Thesemanticheaddefines
the hyperonym from which the denotation of the compound is derived, thus exocentric
compoundsarethosewhosedenotationisnotasubclassofitsheadelement(e.g.,redcapis
neither red nor cap). Headedness, as so defined, leads us to mistakenly analyze noncompositional compounds as exocentric, since these compounds display a referential
mismatch with that of their constituent members. We assume a syntactic orientation and
usetheboundariesbetweensemanticexocentricityandsemanticnon-compositionalityto
assess(i)howexocentricityinimplementedingrammarand(ii)howtheinterplaybetween
exocentricity and non-compositionality may indicate the relevant syntactic domain for
idiomaticinterpretation.
Proposal. Wefirstarguethatdefiningheadednessistermsofasubset-setrelationship,as
formalizedbytheISACondition(Allen1978),isextremelyrestrictive.Weproposeinstead
thatsemanticexocentricityoccurswhenacompoundmodifiesanexternalentity,whichis
frequentlyinstantiatedbyanemptynoun.Thusexocentricitydoesnotmeantheabsenceof
ahead.Itis,infact,therealizationofthecompound’shead–overtlyoremptly–outsidethe
compound’s internal structure. Second, we review Bauer’s (2008) typology of exocentric
compounds, taking into account the exocentricity vs.non-compositionality distinction. We
show that some of his major classes display semantic non- compositionality rather than
19
semantic exocentricity. As a result, we come up with a new typological distribution of
exocentric compounds, to wit: (a) bahuvrihi, (b) dvandva, (c) de-prepositional, and (d)
iterative compounds. Third, we provide a syntactic characterization of exocentricity,
discriminating true exocentric compounds from compounds that are commonly, but
wrongly, defined as exocentric, such as deverbal and synthetic compounds. Finally, we
probe into the syntactic domain of idiomatic meaning by analyzing deverbal compounds
made up of idioms. We claim that VoiceP is realized internally to these compounds, since
theyallowtheovertrealizationofitsexternalhead,i.e.thesubjectoftheembeddedclause
(e.g.,Port.porta-corta-fogolit.door+cut+fire‘firedoor’).
Syntactic classification for exocentric compounds. We depart from our revision of
Bauer’s(2008)typologytoargueforatwo-foldsyntacticclassificationofexocentricity:
I. False exocentric compounds (FECs), i.e. the head is realized as a pro within the
compound, which is a nominalized relative clause (viz., deverbal/synthetic
compounds).
(1) a.BP.limpa-vidros
lit.clean+glasses
‘glass-cleaner,glassdetergent’
b.Gr.xas-o-mer-is
II.
(2)a.BP.cabeça-dura
b.Gr.kser-o-kefal-os
lit.lose+LE+day
‘loafer’
True exocentric compounds (TECs), i.e. compounds modifying null ‘pronominal’
nouns(i.e.,phonologicallynullemptynouns,eN;Panagiotidis2002),thehead,which
is an NP external to the compound’s structure (viz., bahuvrihi, dvandva, deprepositional,anditerativecompounds).
lit.head+hard
lit.dry+head
‘clod’
‘clod’
An analysis. According to our classification, exocentricity is a phenomenon in which
syntactic objects made up of two categorized roots modify empty nouns. Regarding the
syntactic derivation of exocentric compounds, we admit that they are endocentrically
derivedinsyntax;subsequently,theirstructure,composedoftwocategorizedrootsreceive
furthercategorizationinorderforthecompoundtobehaveasasinglesyntacticobjectfor
thepurposesofmovementandbinding.FECshavetheirnullheadsinternallyrealized–i.e.
base-generatedbelowthecompound’scategoryhead–asapro(viz.,[nP pro[n [CP pro[C
[VoicePpro[Voice’limpa[vP[vlimpa][nvidros]]]]]]]]),incontrastwithTECs,whoseheadis
an external null pronominal noun, parallel to noun ellipsis with adjectives. In FECs, pro
raises first to a [Spec, CP] position in order to derive the reduced relative clause
interpretationofdeverbalcompounds(viz.,xwhich/who[x[VN]]).Itthenraisesto[Spec,
nP] to generate a suitable configuration for Agree relations, allowing the emergence of
morphologicalexocentricity.IncontrasttoRomancecompounds,Greekovertlyrealizesthe
compound’snominalizer.
References
ALLEN, M. (1978). Morphological Investigations. Ph.D. dissertation, UConn. BAUER, L.
(2008). Exocentric Compounds. Morphology 18.1. PANAGIOTIDIS, P. (2002). Pronouns,
Clitics and Empty Nouns: ‘Pronominality’ and licensing in syntax. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins. SCALISE ET AL. (2009). Exocentricity in compounding. Gengo Kenkyu 135.1.
URIAGEREKA,J.(2012). Spell-OutandtheMinimalistProgram.Oxford:OUP.
20
AspectualAmbiguity:ananalysisofeventiveandstativepredications
GiovanaSantiago(UnB)
The objective of this research is to analyze syntactic structures that produce aspectual
ambiguity observed mainly in the indicative present periphrasis of Brazilian Portuguese (PB).
This ambiguity occurs in the interpretation of the predicate related to the eventive or stative
natureoftheeventuality.Thedatainthistenseallowsthecompositionwithtemporaladverbial
durative expressions (for ‘x’ time) as this provides the telic nature (in ‘x’ time). This is the
reasonthePBspeakerssometimesneedtoaddadverbialexpressionstothepredicateinorder
to define the aspectual interpretation of eventuality. Thereby the investigation leads to the
syntax-semantic interface to the extent that is necessary to inquire about the aspectual
disambiguation in derivation structures. Verkuyl (1993) considers that aspectuality occurs in
the sentence level by a compositional process as a result of the interaction between the verb
and its arguments as well as the presence of adverbial expressions affect the aspectuality
characterization. Therefore, from the features combination, the author explains the difference
between the terminative and the durative aspects. Consequently, this also proposes, in the
representation level, the notion of inner aspectuality and outer aspectuality. Pesetsky (1987),
reviewing the scope wh-phrase ambiguity, displays the concepts of non-Discourse-linked and
Discourse-linkedtoexplainthatwh-phraseinterpretationmaybegivenbyelementsthatareor
not in discourse. From this theoretic background, and under the scope of Universal Grammar
and Theory of Generative, the data is examined based on the hypothesis that disambiguation
between event and state occurs in aspectual head above TP when aspectual elements in
predicatesstructuredwithindicativepresentperiphrasisinPBareabsent.
References
PESETSKY,David.1987.Wh-in-Situ:MovementandUnselectiveBinding.InTheRepresentation
of (In)definiteness, Eric J. Reuland & Alice G. B. ter Meulen, eds. MIT Press: Cambridge, Mass.
VERKUYL, H. J. 1993. A theory of aspectuality: the interpretation between temporal and
atemporalstructure.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
KillingverbsinEnglishandSpanish
JuliaMilanese(UniversidaddeBuenosAires)
MartínKondratzky(UniversidaddeBuenosAires)
In a preliminary classification of English verbs, Levin (1993) proposes the Killing verbs class,
in which she includes two subgroups: murder verbs, which describe an event of killing that
entails the death result, and poison verbs, which codify means but not necessary death result.
The first category contains twelve verbs, as assassinate, kill, butcher, slaughter among others;
thesecondoneconsistsofthirteenverbs,likeasphyxiate,crucify,drownandelectrocute.
An attempt to provide a more preliminary classification of verbs in Spanish in the lines of
Levin’s work was pursued by Demonte (2002). However, the classes she postulates do not
isolatesemanticcoherentclasses,asLevin’sdo,andnokillingverbsclassisidentified.
In the context of Framenet, a lexical database built under the framework of Frame Semantics
(see Petruck 1996), an alternative classification of verbs is proposed. In this classification,
killing verbs are grouped together under the Killing Frame. Hence, there is no distinction
betweenresultverbsandmannerverbsand,indeed,someofLevin’spoisonverbslikeshootand
stabarenotevenconsideredkillingverbsatall.
Although there are versions of Framenet in Spanish and Brazilian Portuguese, none of them
observestheKillingFrame.
In recent literature on lexical semantics, it has been proposed that there is a
complementarity between result and manner meaning (see Rappaport Hovav & Levin 2010).
Some authors have extended this discussion to explain Talmy’s (1985, 2000) well-known
typologyofsatellite-andverb-framedlanguageslikeEnglishandSpanishrespectively.Beavers
&Koontz-Garboden (2012) use Levin’s classification of Killing verbs to show that there is no
such lexical complementarity in English. As Spanish is the typical example of verb-framed
languages, the opposite typological class to English, our aim is to test how verbs from this
semantic domain behave with regard to manner and result entailment diagnostics and
how are they used insyntax.Inordertodothis,akillingverbsclassinthelinesofLevinand
akillingframeinthelinesofFramenetareproposedinSpanish.WeshowthataFramenet-alike
classificationismoreaccurate since there is no lexical complementarity between manner and
result; in fact, a verbthat does not entail death should be not considered a killing verb at all.
Possibilityof usingaverbasa“mannerofkilling”verbisproposedtobeasyntacticratherthan
alexicalissue.
References
BEAVERS & KOONTZ-GARBODEN (2012) “Manner and result in the roots of verbal meaning”.
LinguisticInquiry. DEMONTE, V. (2002). “Preliminares de una clasificación léxico-sintáctica de
los predicados verbales del español”. Festschrift für Eberhard Gärtmer zu seinem 60.
Geburtstag. Frankfurt am Main: Valentia, 121-144. LEVIN, B. (1993). EnglishVerbClassesand
Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.
PETRUCK, M. (1996). “Frame Semantics”. In J. Östman, J. Blommaert & C. Bulcaen (eds).
Handbook of Pragmatics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia. John Benjamins. TALMY, L. (1985),
“Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms”. In Timothy Shopen (ed.),
Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol. 3: grammatical categories and the lexicon,
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 57-149. TALMY, L. (2000), Toward a cognitive
semantics, Vol. II: Typology and process in concept structuring, Cambridge/Massachusetts,
TheMITPress.
PredicatesoflocativealternationinBrazilianPortuguese
LetíciaCunhaSilva(UnB)
RozanaReigotaNaves(UnB)
From the syntax-semantics interface view, this research investigates the locative alternation
phenomenon(LA)inBrazilianPortuguese(henceforthBP),whichisthepossibilityofaverbto
expressitslocativeargumentindifferentsyntacticconfigurations.Intransitivepredicates,the
locativeswitchesbetweentheobliqueanddirectargumentpositions;inintransitivepredicates,
thelocativeswitchesbetweenobliqueandsubject,asseeninthefollowing,respectively:“oJoão
carregou o trigo no caminhão/o João carregou o caminhão de trigo”; “a água transbordou do
copo/o copo transbordou de água”. The aim of this paper is to characterize the locative
alternation in contrast to other types of syntactic alternation involving a locative (in broad
sense) present in BP, such as the causative-inchoative alternation “o motorista lotou a van de
passageiros/avanlotou(depassageiros)”;theimageimpressionalternation“elagravouonome
nas alianças/ela gravou as alianças com o nome” and the instrument subject alternation “o
sabão removeu a mancha do vestido/a mancha do vestido removeu (com sabão)”, especially
withregardtoverbtypesandargumentsinvolvedandthedifferentinterpretationsbetweenthe
alternatingstructuresinthelightofLevin'sstudies(1993,2003);Mateu(2000),Naves(2005),
Damonte(2005),Cifuentes(2008),amongothers.StartingfromLevinclassification(1993)on
thesemantictypesofverbsparticipatinginspecificalternations,themethodologyisbasedon
the comparison of alternating predicates and non-alternating predicates in English with data
from BP. Partial results point towards that the PB seems to be as productive as English in
relation to predicates alternating transitive, in particular, in relation to removal verbs. On the
otherhand,intransitivepredicatesofLAseemtobemuchmorerestrictedinBPthaninEnglish.
References
CIFUENTES HONRUBIA, J.L. Removal verbs and locative alternations in Spanish. Estudios de
lingüística,n.22,2008.pp.37-64.Disponívelem:<http://cervantes.cpd.ua.es>.Acessoem26de
22
novde2015.DAMONTE,F.ClassifierIncorporationandtheLocativeAlternation.In:Brugé,L.et
al.(eds.),Contributionstothe30ºIncontrodiGrammaticaGenerativa.Venezia:LibreriaEditrice
Cafoscarina. 2005. pp. 83-103. LEVIN, B. English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary
investigation. University of Chicago press, 1993. LEVIN, B. Objecthood and object alternations.
Handout from a talk presented at the Department of Linguistics, University of California, Los
Angeles,v.2,2003.Disponívelem:<http://web.stanford.edu>.Acessoem20demaiode2016.
MATEU, J. Lexicalization patterns and the locative alternation. Unpublished ms., Universitat
AutónomadeBarcelona,2000.NAVES,R.R.Alternânciassintáticas:questõeseperspectivasde
análise. Tese de doutorado, Universidade de Brasília, Departamento de Linguística, Línguas
ClássicaseVernácula,2005.
Teasingapart3rdpersonnullsubjectsinBrazilianPortuguese
JanaynaCarvalho(USP)
The aim of this talk is twofold: (a) to show that 3rd person referential and non-referential
nullsubjectsarenotinstancesofthesamecategoryinBrazilianPortuguese(contraHolmberg
2005,Holmberg,Nayudu&Sheehan2009(HNS);Barbosa2011;2014);(b)topresentevidence
for the existence of two types of non-referential null subjects in Brazilian Portuguese (BP).
Background: Like other partial pro-drop languages, BP contrasts with pro-drop ones in
two crucial aspects. First, a 3rd person referential subject pronoun cannot be null in root
clauses, as shown in (1). Second, a 3rd person non-referential subject pronoun can be null in
rootclauses,asshownin(2).Sentenceslike(2)willbereferredtoasType-1impersonalsfrom
nowon.
(1)*Fala
bem empúblico.
speak.3SGwell
inpublic. Intended:S/hespeakswellinpublic.
(2)NoSul
comemuitochurrasco.
in.thesoutheat.3SGa.lotbarbecue.‘Inthesouthoneeatsalotofbarbecue.’
In embedded clauses, however, both 3rd person referential and non-referential null subjects
are allowed. As repeatedly noted in the mentioned literature, the category that satisfies the
EPP can distinguish these readings, as shown in (3) and (4). In (3), naquele restaurante is
presumablyoccupying the Spec, TP position and the 3rd person pronoun stays inside the vP
(cf. Holmberg2005; HNS; Barbosa 2011; 2014, a.m.o.). In constrast, in (4), the null pronoun
rather than the locative moves to Spec, TP. Although Holmberg, HNS and Barbosa’s
implementations differ somewhat, this movement gives rise to a definite reading of the
pronounintheirview.
(3)João
dissequenaquele
restaurantevendesopa.
João
saidthat in.that
restaurantsell.3SGsoup.
‘Johnsaidthatonesellssoupinthatrestaurant.’
(4)Joãodisse que
vende sopanaquelerestaurante.
Joãosaid that sell.3SGsoupin.thatrestaurant.
‘Johnsaidthathesellssoupinthatrestaurant.’
Hence,forapproachesthatconceive3rdpersonreferentialandnon-referentialnullsubjects as
instances of the same category, the different readings obtain depending on whether this 3rd
person pronoun is inside the vP or in Spec, TP. In the former case, the referential reading is
blocked due to the intervening element in Spec, TP, as in (3). In the latter, it can be in an
anaphoricrelationwiththematrixsubject,renderingthe3rd referentialreadingpossible,asin
(4).
Problems for these accounts: Although appealing, accounts that derive referential and
non- referential readings of 3rd person null subjects in terms of their position cannot explain
some BP data. First, it was only marginally noted in the literature (e.g. Avelar and Cyrino
2008:62, fn.6) that a locative PP does not have to be obligatorily fronted in all the cases a
non-referentialreadingobtains.Theembeddedsubjectin(4),forexample,caneitherrefertoa
referentialornon-referential entity. What is more, (5) illustrates that there is a further class
23
of null impersonals in BP, also noted in Nunes 1991, in which the 3rd person non-referential
null subject is in Spec, TP. These are ‘if… then’ structures (cf. Heim 1982), in which the
generic operator may be covert.Sentenceslike(5)willbereferredtoasType-2 impersonals
fromnowon.
(5)(Emgeraléassim:)senascepobre,trabalha
Ingeneralislike.this:ifborn.3SGpoor,
work.3SG
‘(Itisgenerallylikethis:)ifoneisbornpoor,oneworksalot.’
muito.
a.lot.
Proposal:TheseandothercharacteristicsofnullimpersonalsinBPcanbeaccountedifwe take
the3rdpersonnon-referentialsubjectpronountobeanindefinitepronoun,i.e.apronounthat
has no quantificational force on its own and depends on sentential operators to get its
denotation (Kamp 1979; Heim 1982). In particular, the properties of Type-1 and Type-2
impersonals reflect the syntactic characterization of indefinites as proposed by Diesing
(1992). According to this author, the existential reading of an indefinite obtains if a weak
indefinite (e.g. ‘some’) stays inside the vP, under the scope of an existential operator. The
generic reading, on the other hand, obtains if a strong indefinite pronoun (e.g. ‘every’) is
mapped into Spec, TP, under the scope of a generic operator. In BP null impersonals, Type-1
illustrates an existential reading of an indefinite. The non-referential subject of (3) is
interpreted as ‘someone’, compatible with the existential reading of an indefinite. Type-2
illustratesthegenericreading,andthenon-referentialsubject ofa sentence like (5) reads as
‘everyone’. Moreover, as noted in Diesing (1992), weak indefinite subjects are arguments of
stage-level verbs. Indefinites that are under the scope of a generic operator, on the other
hand,canbeeitherindividualorstage-levelverbs.(6)shows thatindividual-levelverbsarenot
licensedinType-1impersonals.Incontrast,(7)shows thatindividual-levelverbsarelicensed
inType-2.
(6)*Naquelaescolasabe matemática.
In.thatschoolknowsmath.Intended:Inthatschool,oneknowsmath.
(7)Nessa
escolaéassim:sesabematemática,passa
rapidinho.
In.this
school islike.this:ifknows math,pass
quick.diminutive.
‘Itworkslikethisinthisschool:ifoneknowsmath,onewillquicklymoveontothenextgrade.’
These two types of impersonals also differ in the licensing of agentive elements. Weak
indefinites show preference for narrow scope, thus unless in a pressupositional reading,
as in (4), theygenerallystayinsidethevP.(8),adaptedfromRodrigues(2004:71),showsthat
the non- referential subject pronoun in Type-1 impersonals does not license secondary
predicates nor subject-oriented adverbs, which is unexpected if 3rd referential and nonreferential null subjects are the same category. The behavior of Type-1 impersonals in
respect to the licensing of these elements indicates that the weak quantification force of the
subjectin thistypeistiedtoapoorphi-featurespecification.
(8)*Aquiconsertasapatobêbado/irritado/comzelo.
Hererepair.3SGshoedrunk/irritated/carefully.
Intended:‘Hereonerepairsshoesdrunk/irritated/carefully.’
Furthermore, the obligatory presence of locatives and, in a lesser degree, temporal elements
in Type-1 impersonals adds additional support to the claim that the pronoun undergoes
existential closure in Type-1 impersonals, since locative and temporal elements have been
analyzed asrelatedtoexistentialclosure(Freeze1992,Borer2005,Diesing1992).Incontrast,
Type-2impersonals,asin(9),licensesecondarypredicatesandsubject-orientedadverbs.
(9) Geralmenteéassim:
entrou nafirma, vaitrabalhar agitado/
Generally islike.this:
got
in:thecompany,willwork
agitated
vaidartrabalhoproscolegas intencionalmente.
willgiveworkto.thecoleagues intentionally.
‘It is generally like this: if one starts working here, one is going to work agitated, will be a
handfulonpurpose.’
The restrictions we have witnessed in Type-1 and Type-2 impersonals show that the 3rd
personnon-referentialandreferentialnullsubjectscannotbetreatedequallyfortworeasons.
24
First, there is more than one type of non-referential null subject in BP. Second, each of the
types described above has a specific distribution that strongly supports our analysis of 3rd
person non-referential subjects as indefinites. 3rd person referential subject is a definite
pronounand,assuch,doesnotrelyonoperatorstogetitsdenotation.
References
Barbosa,P.2014/Forthcoming.proasaminimalpronoun.LI.Diesing,M.1994.Indefinites.MIT
Press.Holmberg,A.2005.Istherealittlepro?LI
LocativesandDativesinMozambicanPortuguese(MP)andBrazilian
Portuguese(BP):theroleoflanguagecontact
SarahFreitasRabêlo(UnB/CAPES)
HeloísaSalles(UnB)
ThisstudyinvestigatesthesyntaxoflocativesanddativesinMozambicanPortuguese(MP)and
BrazilianPortuguese(BP),asopposedtoEuropeanPortuguese(EP),takingintoconsideration
the role of language contact. We examine the occurrence of data such as [1-6], collected from
Gonçalves & Sitoe (1999); Gonçalves; Chimbutane (2004), which involve verbs of movement
and stative predicates [1-4], the so-called topic-subject construction [5] and the double object
construction. While MP differs from EP and BP in the choice of the preposition in locative
phrasesselectedbyverbsofmovement[1-4],itdiffersfromtheEuropeanvariety,butnotfrom
(dialectal) BP, in licensing prepositional locatives in the topic-subject construction, and the
double object construction (DOC), as in [5] and [6], respectively (cf. PONTES 1986; RAMOS
1992; SALLES 1997; GOMES 2003; PILATI 2006, for BP). It is noted that the choice of the
preposition‘em’(in)inlocativephrasesselectedbyverbsofmovementisungrammaticalinPE
(1-2), the prepositions ‘a’ and ‘para’ being used in this context. Conversely, the preposition
‘para’(to)isselectedin[3-4]inMP,whileEPselects‘em’(in).In[5]and[6]areversepatternis
foundaswell:whilein[5]thepreposition“em”éinsertedinacontextinwhichaprepositionis
notfoundinEP,in[6]theprepositioniselidedinacontextinwhichEPusesthepreposition‘a’
(cf.RABÊLO2014).
1.vemmatinêdançantenoZambi
2.chegamosaténoMaputo
3.fuicolocadoparaafaculdadedeeducação
4.quandovimvivercáparaoMaputo
5.nestelugarestáforadocoiso,estáforadacidade
6.Ospaisescondemosfilhosaverdade
WeproposethatinMozambiquethesecondlanguagearisesundersocialpressure.Inparticular,
in the above-mentioned contexts, a reanalysis of the formal properties of the locative
prepositionheadoccursintherelevantcontexts,duetointerferenceofthefirstlanguage,under
asituationofirregulartransmission(cf.LUCCHESI2001;PAGOTTO2005).Itisfurtherclaimed
that the innovative properties of dative constructions in this language interact with locative
encoding, with further implications for the occurrence of the locative phrase in the subject
positioninMP(aswellasinPB).Stillconcerningthedate[1-6],inspiteoftheopposingpatterns
mentionedabove,intheuseofprepositions,itisrelevanttosaythattheyallsharetheproperty
ofexcludingthepreposition‘a’,implyingthattheyshareformalpropertiesthatareencodedby
‘a’inEP.Accordingly,dativeandlocativeconstructionsshareformalproperties.Intheabsence
of the functional category ‘a’ in both MP and BP, locatives selected by verbs of movement are
uniformly licensed by ‘em’, and datives are realized as Double Object Constructions, which in
turn requires a null preposition (cf. SALLES 1997; TORRES MORAIS; SALLES 2010). Being
functional,theprepositionem’becomeseligibleforintroducinglocativesubjects.
References
GOMES,C.A.Variaçãoemudançanaexpressãododativonoportuguêsbrasileiro.In:PAIVA,M.
daConceição;DUARTE,M.EugêniaL.(Orgs.)Mudançalinguísticaemtemporeal.RiodeJaneiro:
25
Contra Capa, 2003, pp. 81–96. GONÇALVES, P. Falsos sucessos no processamento do input na
aquisição de L2: papel da ambiguidade na génese do português de Moçambique. Revista da
ABRALIN.v.IV,n.1e2,2005,pp.47–73.GONÇALVES,P;CHIMBUTANE,F.Opapeldaslínguas
bantu na génese do português de Moçambique: o comportamento sintáctico de constituintes
locativos e direcionais. PAPIA. n. 14, 2004, pp. 7–35. GONÇALVES, P; SITOE, B. Mudança
linguísticaemsituaçãodecontactodelínguas:ocasodoChanganaedoportuguês.Travessias.v.
I.RiodeJaneiro,1999,pp.73–86.PILATI,E.(2006).TesedeDoutorado[PhDThesis].PONTES,
E. (1986). RABÊLO, S. Mudança categorial da preposição ‘em’ no processo de aquisição do
português de Moçambique. In: Anais do I Encontro Internacional e VII Encontro Nacional do
GrupodeEstudosdeLinguagemdoCentro-Oeste–27a29deagostode2014.CidadedeGoiás:
UEG, 2014. pp. 1083–1093. RAMOS, J.Marcação Sintática e Mudança Sintática no
Português[Syntactic marking and syntactic change in Portuguese]. Tese de Doutorado [PhD
Thesis].Campinas,SP:UniversidadeEstadualdeCampinas,1992.SALLES,H.M.L.Prepositions
andtheSyntaxofComplementation.PhDThesis.UniversityofWales,1997.TORRES-MORAIS,M.
A.; SALLES, H. M. L. Parametric change in the grammatical enconding of indirect objects in
BrazilianPortuguese.Probus,n.22,2010,pp.181–209.
26
ORALPRESENTATIONS
Aktionsarten and the interpretation of tense in future/non.future
languages
AnaMuller(USP)
This talk focuses on the interaction between tense and aktionsarten in a FUTURE/NON.FUTURE
language—Karitiana,Tupianstock.OurgoalistoinvestigatewhethertheeffectsofAktionsart/
aspect-driven temporal orientation in FUTURE/NON-FUTURE tense systems are the mirror image
ofthoseinPAST/NON-PASTtensesystems.Karitianaoffersthepossibilityofexploringthisissue.
Naturallanguagestensesystemsareorganizedaroundtwobasicdistinctions: PAST/NON-PASTor
FUTURE/NON-FUTURE (Comrie 1985). Most European languages have a tense system based on a
PAST/NON-PASTcontrast.Asaconsequence,theeventualitydenotedbya NON-PASTtenseclause
may be simultaneous to UTTERANCE-TIME (MariaisinRionow), but it may also be located after
UTTERANCE-TIME (Maria leaves Rio tomorrow). By contrast, in languages with a tense system
based on a FUTURE/NON-FUTURE contrast the eventuality denoted by a NON-FUTURE tense clause
may be simultaneous to UTTERANCE-TIME, but may also be located before UTTERANCE-TIME.
Karitianainstantiatessuchatensesystem(1).
(1)CØ-na-aka-ti-aka-tSão.Paulopipkabm/koot/ka’it.
C3-DCL-cop-NFTPART-cop-ABSSão.PauloPOSnow/yesterday/tomorrow
‘CisinSPnow’/CwasinSPyesterday’’/‘#CwillbeinSPtomorrow’
In PAST/NON-PAST languages, this temporal orientation is not arbitrary, but determined by an
interplay between the Aktionsart of the predicate and the aspectual system of each language.
The generalizations that have emerged so far are: (i) states may always exhibit simultaneous
interpretations(Johnissick);(ii)achievementsandaccomplishmentsneverexhibitsimultaneous
interpretations(OurtrainleavesfromplatformC);(iii)thepossibilityofobtainingsimultaneous
interpretations for activities and for those accomplishments that easily coerce into activities
depends on the existence and degree of grammaticalization of progressive morphology in the
language(Laka&Hofherr2010,Smith2008).
Smith2008accountsforthegeneralizationsabovethroughtheBoundedEventConstraint(BEC),
whichisbasedontheassumptionthatthetimeoftheevaluation(normallytheUTTERANCE-TIME)
isapointintime.BECstatesthatboundedpredicatesintheabsenceofimperfectiveaspectmay
notbelocatedinthepresentbecauseasituationtimeisaninterval,andanintervalcannotbe
locatedatapointintime.
InKaritiana,theAktionsartofthepredicatedoesnotplayanyroleinthearrayofinterpretations
available for the NON-FUTURE tense, as illustrated by the possibility of both present and past
interpretationsforsentences(1)&(2).Giventhat,weconcludethatwithoutfurtheraspectual
markers FUT/NON.FUT morphology is unmarked for the PERFECTIVE/IMPERFECTIVE distinction in
thelanguage.
(2)JoãoØ-na-aka-ti-otam-ØynSPpipACCOMPLISHMENT
João3-DCL-cop-NFTPART-arrive<TV>ABSISPPOS
‘Joãois(just)arrivinginSP.’/‘JoãoarrivedinSP.’
The prediction is that PRESENT-ONLY and PAST-ONLY meanings should arise in the presence of
overtaspectualmarkers.IfBECholds,weexpectimperfectivemarkerswith NON-FUTUREtense
to yield PRESENT interpretations; whereas perfective markers should not do so. Sentence (3)
shows that our prediction upholds. The imperfective marker tyka yields a PRESENT-ONLY
interpretationwheninflectedforNON-FUTUREtense;whereastheperfectivemarkerandykyields
PAST-ONLY interpretation when inflected for NON-FUTURE tense. Thus, Karitiana shows that
aktionsartenmaynotnecessarilyplayarolein NON.Xtenses.Itmayverywellbethecasethat
NON.PASTisnotunmarkedforaspectinmanylanguages.
27
(3)LetíciaØ-naka-’ytyka-t/andyk-Øasyryty
Letícia3-DCL-eatIMPFV-NFT/PFV-NFTbanana
‘Liseatingbananas./Latebananas.’
PronominalpossessivesinPro-droplanguages:anexperimental
study
CileneRodrigues(PUC-Rio)
LenaDalPozzo(Puc-Rio)
1. Full Pro-Drop vs. partial Pro-Drop Brazilian Portuguese (BP) and Finnish (Fin.) are
partialpro-droplanguages(Holmbergetal.2009).Asopposedtofullpro-droplanguages,
such as Italian (It.), partial pro-drop languages have anaphoric null pronouns, requiring a
local c-commanding DP as its antecedent. This anaphoric behavior is not clear when null
possessives are considered. While BP null possessives have been analyzed as anaphors
(Rodrigues2004,2009;Nunes&Floripi2009),Fin.nullpossessivesareratheranalyzedas
pronouns, dispensing with local c-commanding antecedents (Huhmarniemi & Brattico
2015). Another problem is the fuzzy boundary between preference and acceptability.
Calabrese(1986),forinstance,affirmsthatItalianshaveastrongpreferenceforanaphoric
readings of null pronouns, although they also accept non-anaphoric readings. Thus, what
are we dealing with in Partial Pro-Drop languages? Do speakers have just a strong
dispreference for non-anaphoric readings or do they really reject (do not accept) these
readings?
2. Possessives pronouns: a cross-linguistic experimental study A 2x2x2 acceptability
judgment test was designed to verify the syntactic status of null and full possessive
pronouns in BP, It. and Fin. With respect to the antecedent-pronoun relationship, the
conditions were: locality and c-command. 24 target sentences were created, all of them
involving inalienable possession (body-part), and the antecedents were all definite &
animated non-pronominal DPs (12 items per condition, 6 for full pronouns and 6 for null
pronouns). The fillers (24 items) included ellipsis, quantification and definiteness.
Participantswereaskedtohelpinthetranslationofnewmovie(ThereturnofPeterPan)to
their native language. The task was the evaluation, using a 0-4 scale (where 0= the worst
answerand4=thebestanswer),ofthebestreadingsforagivensentence,asillustratedin
(1).Thetargetsentenceswerefollowedbyaquestionprobingthepossiblereadingsofthe
possessivepronoun(nullorfull).Morethanoneanswercouldreceivethesameevaluation.
The research platform onlinepesquisa (https://www.onlinepesquisa.com) was used to
run the experiment. In Finnish, twelve items more were included to contemplate the
complex syntactic configuration in which the possessum noun displays possessive
agreement under the presence of a null possessive pronoun. Therefore in these language
we tested the following types of possessive DPs: [DP PRONFULL NPAGR], [DP proNPAGR], [DP
proNP]
3.Results&DiscussionResultsfromapreliminarypilotstudyindicatethatBPisdifferent
fromIt.(cf.(2)):nullpossessivesinBPacceptonlyananaphoricreading.Fullpronouns,on
theotherhand,displayjustapreferencefornon-anaphoricreadings;thejudgmentsareall
ofovertheplaceindicatingthatanaphoricreadingisalsoallowed.FullpronounsinFin.are
similar to their counterpart in It.. Nevertheless, Fin. null pronouns pattern with BP: null
pronounsfollowedbyagreeingnounsarecategoricallyanaphoric(similartonullpronouns
in BP), and null pronouns followed by non-agreeing nouns behave (like full pronouns in
BP).
Thesepreliminaryresultssupportthetheoreticalanalysesthatconsidernullpronounsas
anaphors in partial pro-drop languages, although it raises new question about possessive
agreementinFin.Weareaimingtoconsistentlyenlargedoursampleinthe3languages,in
28
order to present a robust and clear picture of the nature of pronominal possessives in
theselanguages,contributingtoabetterunderstandingofPro-Dropparameterwithinthe
DPdomain.
References
CALABRESE, A. 1986. In: MIT WPL 8. FLORIPI, S. NUNES, J. 2009. In Nunes, J. (ed.).
MinimalistessaysonBrazilianPortuguesesyntax.JohnBenjamins.HOLMBERG,A.,NAYUDU,
A., & SHEEHAN, M. 2009. In Studia Linguistica 63:1. Wiley-Blackwell Publishing.
HUHMARNIEMI, S. & BRATTICO, P. 2015. The Finnish possessive suffix. Finno-Ugric
Languages and Linguistics Vol. 4. No. 1-2., 2-41. RODRIGUES, C. 2004. PhD Diss, Univ. of
MarylandatCPark.
CardinalsandsilentnounsinBrazilianPortuguesenominalconcord
BrunaKarlaPereira(UFVJM)
This paper examines the DP-internal distribution of the plural morpheme in non-standard
BrazilianPortuguese(BP)andarguesthatthisisdeterminedbythepositionofeithercardinal
numerals(Danon,2011;Norris,2014)orsilentnouns(Kayne,2005)intheDP-hierarchy.
AccordingtoDanon(2011)andNorris(2014),inseverallanguages,suchasFinishandEstonian,
cardinals work as a boundary dividing the DP into two domains in which, on the one hand,
phrasesthataretotheleftofthecardinalaremarkedforplural;ontheotherhand,phrasesthat
aretotherightofitareunmarked.
This prediction applies to BP. In (1), only the phrases preceding the cardinal are marked for
plural. Therefore, in (1a), the determiner is marked with the plural morpheme; and, in (1b),
both the determiner and its most adjacent adjective are marked. In contrast, (1c) is ruled out
both (i) because phrases located to the left of the cardinal are not marked with the plural
morpheme when they should and (ii) because phrases located to the right of the cardinal are
markedwiththepluralmorphemewhentheyshouldnot.
(1) a.[DPDOs[NumP(dois)[APúnico[AgrPvestidoi[APazul[NPti]]]]]]
The-PL
two only-ϕ dress-ϕ blue-ϕ(‘-ϕ’standsforunmarkedplural)‘The
only(two)bluedresses’((1b)and(1c)havethissametranslation).
b. [DPDOs[TopPúnicosk[NumP(dois)[APtk[AgrPvestidoi[APazul[NPti]]]]]]]
The-PL
only-PL two
dress-ϕblue-ϕ
c. *[DPDO[TopPúnicosk[NumP(dois)[APtk[AgrPvestidosi[APazul[NPti]]]]]]]
The-ϕ
only-PL two
dress-PLblue-ϕ
This prediction also applies to interrogatives and exclamatives containing DPs with the whdeterminer‘ques’,indialectalBP(2).Whenthecardinalisovert(2),itispossibletoobservethat
‘ques’, which precedes the cardinal, is marked for plural, whereas ‘jabuticaba’ and ‘docinha’,
whichfollowit,areunmarked.
(2) [CP[DPDQues[NumP(duas)[AgrPjabuticabak[APdocinha[NPtk]]]]]iC(que)[IP(év)[VPtv[SC(essas)ti]]]]!
What-PL
two
jabuticaba-ϕ sweet-DIM-ϕ
(that)(is)
(these)
‘Howsweetthese(two)Braziliangrapesare!’
29
Inaddition,thispredictionseemstoaccountforotherpuzzlesinBPDPs,like“baresingulars”
(Pires de Oliveira; Swart, 2015). In (3), ‘menino’ is not “singular”, because it gets valued with
pluralfeaturesviaconcordwithNumP[PL],anditisunmarkedforplural,becauseitistothe
rightofacovertcardinal.
(3) Vi[NumP(cinco)[NPmenino]]brincandonojardim.
Saw (five)
boy-ϕ playingin-thegarden
Isaw(five)boysplayinginthegarden.
However,therearenominalconfigurationsthatdonotallowtheoccurrenceofcardinals(4b,
5b):
(4) a.[CP[QPQuantos[FPAMOUNTPL][NPe]]iC(que)[IPIcustav[VPtvesse[ti]]]]?
How-much-PL
thatcost-3rdSGthis?
‘Howmuchdoesthisonecost?’
b. *[CP[QPQuantos[NumPtrês[NPreal]]]i
C(que)[IPIcustav[VPtvesse[ti]]]]?
How-much-PL three (Brazilian)Real-ϕ that cost-3rdSG
this?
(5) a.Levou[DPDumas[FPHOURPL][AgrP[APmeia[NPhora]]pra(cólica)passar.
Took
a-PL
half-SGhour-SGto-the(cramp)pass
‘Ittookaroundhalfanhourtogetsomerelieffromthecramps’.
b. ???Levou[DPDumas[NumPduas[AgrP[APmeia[NPhora]]pra(cólica)passar.
Took
a-PL
two
half-ϕhour-ϕto-the(cramp)pass
Kayne (2005, p. 241-242) observes that functional adjectives, like ‘few’ (6b), “modify a noun
distinct from the visible plural ‘books’ […] The noun in question is a silent counterpart of the
overt‘number’seenin:”(6c).Thishypothesisisextendedto‘much’,“takentomodifyAMOUNT”,
and to ‘time’, taken to modify HOUR. Number features on silent nouns vary across languages.
For instance, in Italian (7a) and French (7b), a plural article modifies a singular noun, which
indicatesthat,intheselanguages,thesilentHOURisplural.
(6) a.“*abooks”;b.“afewbooks”;c.“afewNUMBERbooks/asmallNUMBERofbooks”(Kayne,2005,p.
241-242).
(7) a.“Sonoleoreuna.(‘arethe(pl.)hoursone’)”(Kayne,2005,p.259).
b. “Verslesuneheure.(‘towardthe(pl.)onehour’=‘aroundoneo’clock’)”(Kayne,2005,p.260).
Considering Kayne’s (2005) hypothesis, I assume that (4a, 5a) have a silent noun, which
providestheDPwithpluralfeatures.Ialsoclaimthatthefunctionalprojection(FP)thathosts
silent nouns works like the one that hosts cardinals as a boundary for the distribution of the
pluralmorpheme.Accordingly,in(4a),‘quantos’precedesAMOUNTandismarked.Likewise,in
(5a), ‘umas’ precedes HOUR and is marked. Moreover, the FP with plural HOUR has a
preposition‘of’,asin(6c),whichallowsitscomplement‘meiahora’tobesingular.Toconclude,as
opposed to proposals that argue for an “autonomous morphological component” (Costa;
FigueiredoSilva,2006,p.44)anda“singletonmorpheme”,whichdoesnotaccountforthefacts,
theanalysisassumedhererevealsthattheunderlyingreasonwhysomeconstituentsmust,may
orcannotbemarkedwiththepluralmorphemeisdeterminedbysyntax,namely:thepositionof
cardinalsandsilentnounsintheDP.
NullObjectsinBrazilianPortugueseasArgumentEllipsis
EzekielPanitz(UCL)
MostauthorsstudyingthenullobjectinBrazilianPortuguese(BP)haveconcludedthatthenull
objectinthislanguageispro(Farrell1990,Ferreira2000,Galvez2001,a.o.).Inthistalk,Iargue
thattheseresearchersarecorrect,butonlypartiallyso:theBPnullobjectmayindeedbepro;
however,itmayalsobederivedunderArgumentEllipsis(AE).
ThefollowingsetofexamplesillustratesthatthenullobjectcanbederivedunderAE.Consider,
first, the contrast between (1) and (2). The indefinite nenhuma sontata in (1) is obligatorily
interpretedwithinthescopeofnegationand,assuch,failstoestablishadiscoursereferentto
whichthepronounelacouldrefer.(1)isthereforeoddsounding,giventhatthepronounlacksa
referent. Unsurprisingly, (2), in which the pronoun has been replaced by nenhuma sonata, is
30
perfect. With this contrast in mind, consider (3), which contains a null object and which is,
moreover,synonymouswith(2).Ifthenullobjectin(3)werepro,(3)wouldbeasoddsounding
as(1),giventhatprowouldlackareferent.Thefactthat(3)doesnotsoundoddandthatitis
synonymouswith(2)isimmediatelyexplainedif(3)'sderivationisasin(4),involvingAE.Since
(3) is identical to (2), notwithstanding the overtness of nenhuma sonata, the fact that (3)
patternswith(2)isexpected.
(1)#OJoãonuncaviunenhumasonata(ser)tocadanobanjoeoPedronuncaviuela
(ser)tocadanoviolão.
(2)
OJoãonuncaviunenhumasonata(ser)tocadanobanjoeoPedronuncaviu
nenhumasonata(ser)tocadanoviolão.
(3)
OJoãonuncaviunenhumasonata(ser)tocadanobanjoeoPedronuncaviu__
(ser)tocadanoviolão.
(4) OJoãonuncaviunenhumasonata(ser)tocadanobanjoeoPedronuncaviu
nenhumasonata(ser)tocadanoviolão.
'Joãohasneverseenasonata(be)playedonthebanjoandPedrohasneverseen
it/asonata(be)playedontheguitar.'
Thefollowingsetofexamplesprovidesfurthersupportforthisconclusion.
(5)#OJoãoquerdoisquadrosnessaparedeeoPedroquerelesnaquela.
(6)
OJoãoquerdoisquadrosnessaparedeeoPedroquerdoisquadrosnaquela.
(7)
OJoãoquerdoisquadrosnessaparedeeoPedroquer__naquela.
'JoãowantstwopaintingsonthiswallandPedrowantsthem/twopaintingson
thatwall.'
(5)isunacceptable,sincedoisquadrosinobligatorilyinterpretedwithinthescopeofquerand
thus fails to establish a discourse referent for the pronoun. Replacing the pronoun with dois
quadrosproducesanacceptablesentenceinwhichbothoccurrencesofdoisquadrostakescope
underquer.Crucially,(7)patternswith(6)andnotwith(5),notonlyintermsofacceptability
but also in terms of interpretation (i.e., (6) and (7) are synonymous). The acceptability and
interpretationof(7)thusindicatethatthenullobjectisanellipticalcopyofdoisquadros,elided
underAE,ratherthanapro.
Having concluded that null objects in BP may be generated under AE, I turn to the broader
questionofwhatlicensesAE,cross-linguistically.WhydosomelanguagesexhibitAE,andothers
do not? In particular, I discuss three recent proposals--Saito (2007), Cheng (2013), and
Boškovic̀ (2016)--and argue that AE in BP proves problematic for each of these proposals.
Simplifying slightly, Saito proposes that AE is possible only with arguments with which
agreement does not occur; evidently, the acceptability of AE in (3), in which the participle
tocadaagrees with the null object (in gender and number), indicates that agreement does not
block AE, contra Saito. Cheng's proposal is multi-faceted; of relevance is his proposal that AE
obligatorilytargetstheverb'scomplement.Inboth(3)and(7),thenullobjectisnottheverb's
complementbutratherthesubjectofasmallclause;accordingtoCheng'sproposal,AEshould
be impossible here, contrary to fact. Boškovic̀'s proposal is likewise multi-faceted, but what is
crucialishisclaimthatAEinvolvesthedeletionofexpressionsoftype<e,t>.Theacceptabilityof
(3) and (7), which involve quantificational null objects, demonstrates that AE can target
expressions of type <e,<e,t>>, contra Boškovic̀. Like Saito's and Cheng's accounts, then,
Boškovic̀'saccountistoorestrictive.
Having argued that existing accounts of AE cannot account for AE in BP, I develop a novel
accountofAEinBPinwhichaccusativeCasefunctionsasthelicensorofAE:inBP,accusativemarkedexpressionsmayundergoAE;expressionsnotbearingaccusativemaynot.
References
BOŠKOVIC( 2016Oncliticdoublingandargumentellipsis.(availableonLingBuzz).CHENG2013
Argument ellipsis, classifier phrases, and the DP Parameter (PhD Dissertation, UConn).
FARRELL1990NullobjectsinBrazilianPortuguese,NLLT.FERREIRA2000Argumentosnulos
emportuguêsbrasileiro(Master’sthesis,UNICAMP).GALVEZ2001Oobjetonuloeaestrutura
dasentençaemportuguêsbrasileiro,InGalvez(Ed.),Ensaiossobreasgramáticasdoportuguês,
31
Campinas,EditoradaUNICAMP.
NasalityandvowelharmonyinYuhup
DalvaDelVigna(UnB)
ThiagoChacon(UnB)
This work discusses nasality and its correlation with vowel harmony in Yuhup. We show that
YuhupdatamustbeexplainedbyacombinedframeworkofLexicalPhonology(Kiparsky1982),
Underspecification (Steriade 1987) and Feature Geometry (Clements and Hume, 1995). In
Yuhup,nasalityiscontrastiveforvowelsandconsonants.Interestingly,onlyloworhighvowels
are underlyingly nasal, never mid vowels. We argue that [nasal] is a monovalent feature
licensedbytheROOTnodeofsegments.Nasalvowelsandconsonantsarespecifiedby[nasal];
nonmid oral vowels and [+sonorant] segments are unspecified by [nasal]; mid vowels and [sonorant] segments are underspecified for [nasal], i.e. they lack a structural representation for
nasality. Within lexical roots, a [nasal] vowel can nasalize any adjacent sonorant segment,
whereasa[nasal]consonantdoesnotnasalizeanoralvowel,surfacinginsteadwithanoral-tonasaltransition(e.g/am/à[abm]).Voicelessstopsareopaquetonasalization.Becauseglides,
butnevervowels,assimilateto[nasal]withinroots,weargueforaredundancylexicalrulethat
specifies all contrastive, non-mid vowels as [± nasal]. Vowel harmony takes place across a
lexicalrootandaffixes,whichhavevowelsunspecifiedforplaceandmannerfeatures.Thus,the
vowel of the affix “copies” the entire root node of the vowel from the root morpheme. This is
ilustratedby–Vt‘locative,instrumental’below:
(1a)/tiw/
(1b)/mõm/
(1c)/wam/
(1d)/teŋ/
[tiw] ‘way’→/tiw-Vt/[tiwit]
[mõm]‘axe’→/mõm-Vt/[mõmõt]
[wabm]‘shelf’→/wam-Vt/[wabmãt]
[tegŋ]‘shotgun’→/teŋ-Vt/[tegŋet]
‘ontheway’
‘withtheaxe’
‘ontheshelf’
‘withshotgun’
Anoralornasalvowelisfullycopiedbytheaffix,includingthenasalfeaturespecification,asin
(1a)and(1b).In(1c),weseethatafteranasalstopthevoweloftheaffixassimilatestothenasal
feature, despite the fact that the root vowel is oral. Thus, nasal assimilation occurs in two
different cycles: in cycle 1, in the root level, it is structure preserving; and in cycle 2, after
affixation,itisstructurealteringandcanchangea[-nasal]vowelto[+nasal].In(1d)weseethat
midvowelsfailtoassimilateto[+nasal].Wearguethatthroughoutthephonologicalderivation
thesesegmentsremainunderspecifiedfor[nasal].
References
CLEMENTS,G.N.,HUME,E.V.Theinternalorganizationofspeechsounds.In:GOLDSMITH,J.A
(ed.). Thehandbookofphonologicaltheory. Oxford: Blackwell, 1995. p. 245-306. KIPARSKY, P.
Word formation and the Lexicon. In: F. INGEMANN (ed.). Proceedings of the Mid-America
Linguistics Conference. Lawrence, Kansas, 1982. STERIADE, D. Underspecification and
markedness. In: GOLDSMITH, J. A (ed.). The handbook of phonological theory. Cambridge:
BlackwellPublishers,1995.p.114-174.
Derivingnon-compositionalinterpretationindiminutiveand
augmentativeformation:alocalistapproachtomeaning
PaulaArmelin(UFJF)
This work discusses the mechanisms responsible by attributing meaning to the syntactic
derivation.Morespecifically,itfocusesonthestructurallimitsthatareabletolicensenon-
compositionalinterpretation.Theoretically,itassumesasyntacticviewofwordformation
(cf. Halle and Marantz, 1993; Borer, 2003) in which the only generative system is the
syntax, responsible by building the hierarchical structure of words, phrases or sentences.
32
Crucially,assumingaderivationaltheoryofwordformationdoesnotentaildispensingthe
idea that non-compositional meaning needs to be listed. The question to be addressed,
then,isatwhichpointinthesyntacticderivationmeaningcanbeaccessed.Inthiscontext,
syntacticapproachestowordformationhavefocusedondefiningasyntacticwell-defined
domainwithinwhichnon-compositionalinterpretationmaybelicensed.
Theempiricaldataconsideredinthisworkconsistsofdiminutiveformationwith-inhoand
augmentative formation with -ão, since these formatives may trigger non-compositional
interpretation. Suchformationswillbecomparedtotheirrespectivecounterpartsformed
by-zinhoand-zão,inwhichthenon-compositionalinterpretationisnolongerapossibility.
Withinalocalistviewofgrammar,thesyntacticpositionsassignedtoeachoftheevaluative
morphemes should be able to predict the possibilities and impossibilities for noncompositionalinterpretationtobelicensed.
In general lines, this work proposes that the diminutive -inho differs from the other
formatives,becauseitshareswiththerootthesamegenderhead.Morespecifically,-inhois
attachedtothesamegenderprojectionresponsiblebycategorizingtheroot.Thisstructure
iscapableofaccountingfor,amongotherempiricalfacts,thepossibilitythatthefinalvowel
ofthediminutiveformisidenticaltothefinalvowelofthenon-diminutiveform,evenifthis
finalvowelisrootconditioned.Ontheotherhand,theaugmentative-ãoandtherootmay
haveindependentgenderheads.Thesyntacticstructureofthe-ãoaugmentativepresents,
then, two gender heads: one that attaches to the root, and another that attaches to the
augmentativeitself.Regardingtheaugmentativeanddiminutiveheadedby-z,thepresence
ofanindependentgenderheadisevenclearer.Thisissobecausethevowelcompletingthe
root and the vowel completing the -z formative are both phonologically identified in the
output. The differences detected between the -ãoformations on the one hand, and the -z
formations, on the other hand, are, then, explained by the fact that the former is attached
belowanumberprojection,whilethe-zformsentersthestructureafteranumberhead.In
otherwords,-zinhoand-zãoareevenhigherinthestructure.
BasedontheproposalputforthinBorer(2013),thisworkproposesthatelementswithin
thefirstfunctionalprojectionareabletotriggernon-compositionalreading.Thisisexactly
the case of - inho diminutive formative, which attaches inside the gender projection that
categorizesderoot.Similarly,itisproposedthatthisisalsothecaseof-ãoaugmentatives
whenevertheinternal(optional)genderheadisabsent.Theevidencefortheabsenceofthe
internal gender head is the lack of agreement between the augmentative and the nonaugmentative form. Regarding the formatives headedbyconsonant,thepresenceofmore
syntactic material intervening between them and the root is responsible for deriving the
factthatthenon-compositionalinterpretationisnotapossibilityfor-zinhodiminutivesand
for-zãoaugmentatives.
References
ARAD, Maya. Locality Constraints on the Interpretation of Roots: the Case of Hebrew
Denominal Verbs. Natural Language and Linguistics Theory, v. 21, p. 737-778, 2003.
BORER, Hagit. Exo-skeletal vs. Endo-skeletal explanations: syntactic projections and the
lexicon’,inMoore,J.andM.Polinsky(eds.)TheNatureofExplanationinLinguisticTheory.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press (CSLI), 31–67, 2003. BORER, Hagit. Taking Form:
StructuringSense,Vol.II.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2013.HALLE,Morris;MARANTZ,
Alec.DistributedMorphologyandthepiecesofinflection.In:HALE,K.;KEYSER,S.J.(eds.).
TheviewfromBuilding20.Cambridge,MA:MITPress,p.111-176,1993.MARANTZ,Alec.
Words and Things.Manuscrito. NYU, 2001. MARANTZ, A. Locality Domains for Contextual
AllomorphyacrosstheInterfaces.In:MATUSHANSKY,O.;MARANTZ,A.(Orgs.)Distributed
Morphology Today: Morphemes for Morris Halle. Cambridge Mass: MIT Press, p. 95-116,
2013.
33
CONFERENCES
Investigatingphonologicalbiaswithartificialgrammarexperiments
AdamAlbright(MIT)
Generative phonology posits thatphonological grammars are constrained by universal
principles: some phonological restrictions or alternations can be expressed by the formalism,
and others cannot. The evidence for such restrictions has traditionally come from typological
asymmetries: processes devoicing final obstruents are found in genetically and geographically
diverselanguages,whereasprocessesturningfinalobstruentsintonasals,liquids,orstridents
arevanishinglyrareorevennon-existent.Typologicalinvestigationhasbeenanimportanttool
inuncoveringphonologicalasymmetries.However,therearealsolimitations:frequently,robust
typological generalizations have exceptions, raising the question of how rare patterns are
learned.A common response to this problem is to posit that certain grammatical preferences
are biases, rather than absolute restrictions (Wilson, Moreton, Hayes, White, Do, Green, and
others).Furthermore, even when a generalization holds exceptionlessly, it is difficult to be
certainthatthisisforgrammaticalreasons,ratherthanhistoricalreasons.Inordertoaddress
this,weneedadditional,convergingevidencethattheserestrictionsare`synchronicallyactive'.
Bothoftheseconsiderationspointtoaneedtostudyhowlanguageislearned.Ifwecanshow
using controlled comparisons that some phonological patterns are learned more slowly, less
accurately, or using different mechanisms than others, then we would have evidence that
humansareindeedbiasedtowardscertainpatternsoverothers.
In this talk, I discuss the use of Artificial Grammar experiments to demonstrate learning
asymmetries in the lab. I present results from a series of experiments carried out in
collaboration with Youngah Do (Hong Kong University) to test several different types of
phonological preferences. The first concerns a bias against phonological alternations: when
presentedwithphonologicalalternationsthatapply100%ofthetime,participantsfrequently
nonetheless prefer forms that obey paradigm uniformity. By varying the amount of data that
participantsreceive,wecanshowthatthisisanuntrainedpreference;learnersbringtothetask
apriorassumptionthatparadigmswillbeuniform.Asecondtypeofpreferenceisagenerality
bias: by training participants on alternations involving some segments and withholding data
aboutothers,orbygivingparticipantsconflictingdataaboutdifferentsegments,wecanshow
thatlearnersnonethelessassumethatprocessestargetbroadclassesofphonologicallysimilar
segments.
Thefinaltypeofpreferenceisasubstantivepreferenceforcertainphonologicalprocessesover
others. By presenting participants with two phonological alternations simultaneously, it is
possible to compare how quickly or accurately they are learned. The results show that
participantsprefercertainalternations,suchasfinaldevoicingofvoicedstopsandintervocalic
voicing of voiceless stops, over others, such as final nasalization of voiced obstruents and
intervocalic spirantization of voiceless stops. These preferences mirror observed typological
asymmetries: final devoicing of obstruents is well attested, but there are few languages with
finalnasalization.Atthesametime,thereareinterestingdiscrepanciesbetweenthepreferences
weobserveinthelabandthetypologicaldata:infact,intervocalicspirantizationiswellattested
typologically. I discuss possible sources of these discrepancies, and ways that further
experimentsmayhelptoshedlightonthenatureofsubstantivebiases.
34
Segmental blocking in dissimilation: an argument for co-occurrence
constraints
JulietStanton(MIT)
Mostcontemporaryworkassumesthatdissimilationismotivatedbysegmentalorfeaturalcooccurrence(OCP)constraints(e.g.Alderete1997,Suzuki1998):aprocessthatmaps/X…X/to
[X…Y](forexample)wouldbeexplainedbypositingabanonco-occurring[X]s.Ifirstshowhow
thisapproachcanbeextendedtoanalyzethetypologyofsegmentalblockingeffects(namedue
toBennett2015),atermusedtodescribecasesinwhichadissimilatoryprocessisblockedby
somesegments,butnotothers.Forexample,dissimilationmightapplyacrosssomesegmentZ
(/X…Z…X/ → [X…Z…Y]), but not some other segment Y (/X…Y…X/ → [X…Y…X]). This pattern
canbeexplainedinthefollowingway:ifabanonco-occurring[Y]s(violatedintheunattested
/X…Y…X/ → *[X…Y…Y]) takes priority over the ban on co-occurring [X]s (violated in the
attested /X…Y…X/ → [X…Y…X]), then dissimilation of /X/ to [Y] will fail if some other [Y] is
present elsewhere in the word (see also Kenstowicz 1994, Steriade 1995). Dissimilation does
not fail across [Z], because the resulting [X…Z…Y] is not dispreferred by the ban on multiple
[Y]s. I then argue that all attested cases of segmental blocking should be analyzed as an
interaction between two competing co-occurrence constraints (as above), and provide new
evidencefromlexicalstatisticsinsupportofthisconclusion.Timepermitting,Iwillintroducean
alternative correspondence-based analysis of blocking in dissimilation (Bennett 2015), and
arguethatitspredictionsarelessrestrictivethanthoseoftheproposedanalysis.
Splitergativityandembedding:evidencefromBasque
KarlosArregi(UniversityofChicago)
Basqueisanaspect-basedsplitergativelanguage.Inmostclausetypes,transitivesubjectsare
ergative, while direct objects and intransitive subjects are absolutive. On the other hand,
sentenceswithprogressiveaspectdisplaynonergativity:thesubjectisabsolutive,regardlessof
thetransitivityofthepredicate.InaninfluentialanalysisoftheBasqueprogressive,Laka(2006)
proposesthattheabsenceofergativityinthisconstructionisanillusionduetothecomplexity
ofclausalstructureinprogressivesentences,asopposedtootheraspects.Morespecifically,the
progressive involves an auxiliary that Laka analyzes as the main verb of the sentence. This
progressive verb takes two arguments: the subject and an embedded nominalized clause
inflectedforinessive(locative)casecontainingthemainsemanticpredicate.Asaconsequence,
the main verb (i.e. the progressive “auxiliary”) is in essence an intransitive predicate, whose
subject is unsurprisingly absolutive, even if the main semantic predicate (contained in the
embeddedclause)istransitive.Coon(2010,2013)expandsandmodifiesthisanalysisinorder
to account for a wide range of aspect-based splits in several languages. One of the main
objectives of this type of analysis is to provide an explanatory account of the direction of the
split: crosslinguistically, nonergativity in ergative languages is found in nonperfective aspects
(includingtheprogressive),butnotintheperfective.UndertheLaka-Coonaccount,thisisdue
tothefactthatthemeaningoftheprogressive(andmoregenerally,nonperfectiveaspect)can
beexpressedwithconstructionsinvolvingnominalizedpredicatesandadpositions(orlocative
cases),butperfecivesemanticscannot.
IcriticallyexamineLaka'soriginalanalysisoftheprogressiveinBasque,inthelightofawider
studyofnominalizedembeddedclausesandtheverbsthatselectfortheminthislanguage.The
core of the talk centers on presenting a puzzle uncovered by this study. On the one hand, I
provide ample evidence for the main ingredients of Laka's analysis, namely, that the main
semanticpredicateheadsanembeddednominalizedclauseinflectedforinessivecase,andthat
theprogressiveverbisinfactamainverb,notanauxiliary(inasensethatwillbegivenamore
35
precise characterization). On the other hand, Laka's assumption that these properties of the
progressive lead us to expect that the subject is absolutive is not warranted. Specifically, a
numberofotherverbsthattakeembeddednominalizedclauses(suchasjarraitu'continue'and
jakin 'know') share these properties (they are main verbs and their clausal complement is
inessive) yet their subject is ergative, not absolutive, regardless of the transitivity of the
embeddedpredicate.
Inthefinalpartofthetalk,Iattempttosolvethispuzzlebytakingintoaccountamoreprecise
characterizationofthedistributionofergativecaseinBasque.Althoughthelanguageisbroadly
ergative,anumberofitsintransitivepredicatestakeergative(notabsolutive)subjects(thatis,
Basque is a split-S ergative language). This set of predicates includes unergative verbs, which
typically take ergative subjects, in contrast to unaccusative subjects, which are typically
absolutive (both generalizations have a few exceptions). I thus argue that the reason that
progressive subjects are absolutive is not simply that the progressive verb is intransitive, but
that it is unaccusative. On the other hand, other verbs that take inessive clausal complements
are argued to be unergative, which explains the ergative case of their subjects. The revised
analysis keeps Laka's and Coon's insights intact, and provides a more fine-grained set of
predictionsaboutthedistributionofergativecaseinnonperfectiveaspects.
36