Syntactic change and the rise of transitivity : the case of the Polish and Ukrainian -no/-to construction

Artykuł przedstawia analizę różnic w rozwoju form predykatów z wykładnikami strony biernej w rodzaju nijakim -no/-to w języku polskim i ukraińskim. Przybranie cech tranzytywnych przez te formy czasownikowe łączy się tu ze zmianami w obrębie morfologii strony gramatycznej w obu językach. Pomimo powierzchniowych podobieństw różnice w dystrybucji konstrukcji z czasownikami zakończonymi na -no/-to we współczesnym języku polskim i ukraińskim wskazują, że gramatykalizacja morfemu strony biernej przebiegła według różnych scenariuszy w obu językach, implikujących zróżnicowanie w strukturze frazy czasownikowej vP, a także powstanie nowych możliwości przypisania cechy biernika.This paper analyzes the historical divergence of predicates marked with old passive neuter -no/-to in Polish and Ukrainian. It is argued that the locus of change leading to the rise of the transitivity property involved a rearrangement of morphologically-eroded voice morphology. Despite the surface similarity of the Polish and Ukrainian constructions, their divergent distribution in the modern languages indicates that grammaticalization of the old passive morpheme proceeded along different pathways, implicating the internal structure of vP, and creating new accusative case-assigning possibilities

Modalities of case assignment: The view from Lithuanian

This paper assesses two competing modalities for the assignment of morphological case. Arguments are provided from Lithuanian against the configurational strategy of Dependent Case (Marantz 1991, Baker 2015) and in favor of case assignment by functional heads (Chomsky 2000, 2001). The first argument comes from a series of Transitive Impersonal constructions in which accusative appears independently, in the absence of a higher, nominative-marked argument, so long as the predicate is two-place and caused, implicating v-Cause as the source of accusative. Further evidence for this analysis comes from the Inferential Evidential, an oblique-subject construction. While the Dependent Case strategy states that nominative automatically shifts to the object if not assigned to the subject, nominative objects are exceedingly rare in the Inferential Evidential, a fact that is entirely consistent with the local, feature-based theory of case advanced in this paper, which relates the appearance of nominative to the Agree relation with Tense

Negotiating for Social Justice and the Promise of Community Benefits Agreements: Case Studies of Current and Developing Agreements

A community benefits agreement (CBA) is a private contract negotiated between a prospective developer and community representatives. In essence, the CBA specifies the benefits that the developer will provide to the community in exchange for the community\u27s support, or quiet acquiescence, of its proposed development. The promise of community support may be especially useful to a developer seeking government subsidies or timely project approvals. The CBA is a relative newcomer to the toolbox of strategies that communities may utilize to ensure that development occurs consistent with the sometimes more narrow goals and desires of neighborhood residents, as opposed to the sometimes broader goals and desires of municipal and regional governing bodies. The CBA concept is still in its infancy. However, with only about ten years of experience with CBAs, a number of differences and similarities are emerging as case studies are developed and reviewed across the country. This article is intended to document a comprehensive review of major CBA processes in cities across the United States; some successful, some not so successful, and some still in the development stages to gain better insights into the legal, social, and political aspects of negotiating for social justice as part of the land development process

Community Benefits Agreements and Comprehensive Planning: Balancing Community Empowerment and the Police Power

Traditionally, the states have empowered local governments to develop plans and implement regulations for neighborhood and community development. When accomplished at the local or regional level, the interests and benefits of the community as a whole are to be weighed against the detriments to individuals. Much has been studied and written about the lack of meaningful public participation in the planning and land use regulatory process, suggesting that often low-income and minority communities are not fully engaged in the process, even when it may result in decisions negatively impacting their neighborhoods. Case studies have also shown that governments are sometimes so eager to stimulate local economic development that they fail to fully engage communities in the project review process, both to expedite development and to avoid confronting local opposition. This emphasis on short-term economic growth, however, may obscure a local government’s perception of the social and environmental needs of particular communities. When this occurs, formal planning processes have failed to accomplish their goals of engaging community members and guiding future growth in a manner that maximizes long-term benefits for the common good. New approaches to planning provide one response to systemic public participation problems. The environmental justice movement, for example, has sought to ensure a fair distribution of both environmental burdens and environmental goods by requiring local governments to make meaningful public participation available to all community members. Community based planning efforts have attempted to improve the planning process by focusing on small and distinct geographic areas and by developing collaborative and inclusive planning programs. Since the late 1990s, community benefits agreements (CBAs) have offered another method to increase community input in the development planning and review process. For communities that have historically been excluded from the planning process, CBAs can be a powerful tool to ensure that neighborhood interests are addressed as an integral component of development. The result, ideally, is growth and development that is accountable to the people it affects and equitable in its distribution of benefits and burdens. However, the people it affects are often a small subset of the municipal jurisdiction and the equitable distribution sought in the CBAs is limited to the proposed project area. This article explores how the comprehensive planning process and CBAs complement and contradict each other, and how both could be improved by innovative and more inclusive planning techniques. Part II provides a brief historical background on comprehensive planning and community development, including issues relating to community planning and public participation. Part III examines CBAs and their role in community empowerment, community development and the promotion of social justice principles, including equitable development. This part also provides examples of typical land use related elements found in existing CBAs. Using these examples, Part IV segues into a discussion regarding whether private CBAs usurp the public planning process. The section explores whether CBAs are just another type of community based plan and whether CBAs advance narrow interests at the expense of the larger community. The question of what local governments should do when presented with a CBA that is inconsistent with the local comprehensive land use plan is examined to determine whether amending the plan to incorporate the community vision as articulated through the CBA is appropriate. The article concludes in Part V by pointing out that shortcomings of the current regulatory system allow local governments, intentionally or inadvertently, to exclude robust public participation from the development and implementation of comprehensive land use plans. This provides the impetus for privately negotiated CBAs, but these agreements may not always be ideal because not all parties to a CBA will have the best interests of the neighborhood or the community as a whole at the forefront of their agendas. While many CBAs have been successful, a number of case studies also reveal pitfalls in the process. The article concludes with the belief that local governments must be more inclusive and accountable in the public planning process to better meet the true goals of the community benefits movement

Land Use Law and Active Living: Opportunities for States to Assume a Leadership Role in Promoting and Incentivizing Local Options

Obesity, asthma and nutrition are just three public health challenges facing children and adults that can be addressed through land use planning and zoning. States must take a leadership role in providing statutory authority and guidance for local governments to enact and implement laws and ordinances designed to promote active living. Land use policies, transportation policies, redevelopment policies and open space and recreation policies are key areas where reform is needed. This paper highlights existing examples from various states and offers lawmakers, policymakers and advocates options for reforming state laws to incentivize and influence local actions

Land Use Law and Active Living: Opportunities for States to Assume a Leadership Role in Promoting and Incentivizing Local Options

Obesity, asthma and nutrition are just three public health challenges facing children and adults that can be addressed through land use planning and zoning. States must take a leadership role in providing statutory authority and guidance for local governments to enact and implement laws and ordinances designed to promote active living. Land use policies, transportation policies, redevelopment policies and open space and recreation policies are key areas where reform is needed. This paper highlights existing examples from various states and offers lawmakers, policymakers and advocates options for reforming state laws to incentivize and influence local actions