Coordinating gender : what can coordinate structure agreement tell us about gender?

Przedmiotem analizy przedstawionej w artykule jest akomodacja wartości kategorii rodzaju w zdaniach z podmiotem szeregowym o składnikach w liczbie pojedynczej w języku serbskim. Szczegółowo omówione są cztery problematyczne właściwości akomodacji wartości rodzaju przez podmiot szeregowy ze spójnikiem współrzędnym. Przedstawione są argumenty popierające tezę, że wartość rodzaju męskiego jest wartością nieuzgodnioną (domyślną) imiesłowów oraz przymiotników predykatywnych wtedy, gdy składniki podmiotu szeregowego różnią się pod względem informacji o rodzaju, co wbrew oczekiwaniom może występować zarówno wtedy, gdy składniki podmiotu szeregowego mają tę samą wartość gramatycznej kategorii rodzaju, jak i wtedy, gdy jeden ze składników podmiotu szeregowego nie posiada określonej wartości cechy rodzaju. Na podstawie analizy dystrybucji rodzaju nijakiego postuluje się, że cecha rodzaju w języku serbskim (oraz przypuszczalnie w innych językach słowiańskich) jest cechą kompleksową o wartościach binarnych [±masculinum] oraz [±femininum].This paper examines gender agreement with coordinate structures in Serbian, focusing exclusively on coordinate phrases with singular conjuncts. I discuss in detail four unexpected and challenging facts about coordinate structure gender agreement and provide a unified account of them. I argue that a participle or predicative adjective agreeing with a coordinate phrase takes the default masculine form either when the coordinate phrase contains conflicting gender information, which can sometimes surprisingly happen even when all conjuncts have identical gender specifications, or when at least one of the conjuncts is not marked for a gender value. On the bases of behavior of neuter, I also propose that gender in Serbian (and possibly other Slavic languages) should be represented in terms of binary features [±masculine] and [±feminine]

Coordinating Gender: What Can Coordinate Structure Agreement Tell Us about Gender?

This paper examines gender agreement with coordinate structures in Serbian, focusing exclusively on coordinate phrases with singular conjuncts. I discuss in detail four unexpected and challenging facts about coordinate structure gender agreement and provide a unified account of them. I argue that a participle or predicative adjective agreeing with a coordinate phrase takes the default masculine form either when the coordinate phrase contains conflicting gender information, which can sometimes surprisingly happen even when all conjuncts have identical gender specifications, or when at least one of the conjuncts is not marked for a gender value. On the bases of behavior of neuter, I also propose that gender in Serbian (and possibly other Slavic languages) should be represented in terms of binary features [±masculine] and [±feminine]

Coordinating Gender: What Can Coordinate Structure Agreement Tell Us about Gender?

This paper examines gender agreement with coordinate structures in Serbian, focusing exclusively on coordinate phrases with singular conjuncts. I discuss in detail four unexpected and challenging facts about coordinate structure gender agreement and provide a unified account of them. I argue that a participle or predicative adjective agreeing with a coordinate phrase takes the default masculine form either when the coordinate phrase contains conflicting gender information, which can sometimes surprisingly happen even when all conjuncts have identical gender specifications, or when at least one of the conjuncts is not marked for a gender value. On the bases of behavior of neuter, I also propose that gender in Serbian (and possibly other Slavic languages) should be represented in terms of binary features [±masculine] and [±feminine]

Definiteness across languages

Definiteness has been a central topic in theoretical semantics since its modern foundation. However, despite its significance, there has been surprisingly scarce research on its cross-linguistic expression. With the purpose of contributing to filling this gap, the present volume gathers thirteen studies exploiting insights from formal semantics and syntax, typological and language specific studies, and, crucially, semantic fieldwork and cross-linguistic semantics, in order to address the expression and interpretation of definiteness in a diverse group of languages, most of them understudied. The papers presented in this volume aim to establish a dialogue between theory and data in order to answer the following questions: What formal strategies do natural languages employ to encode definiteness? What are the possible meanings associated to this notion across languages? Are there different types of definite reference? Which other functions (besides marking definite reference) are associated with definite descriptions? Each of the papers contained in this volume addresses at least one of these questions and, in doing so, they aim to enrich our understanding of definiteness

Definiteness across languages

Definiteness has been a central topic in theoretical semantics since its modern foundation. However, despite its significance, there has been surprisingly scarce research on its cross-linguistic expression. With the purpose of contributing to filling this gap, the present volume gathers thirteen studies exploiting insights from formal semantics and syntax, typological and language specific studies, and, crucially, semantic fieldwork and cross-linguistic semantics, in order to address the expression and interpretation of definiteness in a diverse group of languages, most of them understudied. The papers presented in this volume aim to establish a dialogue between theory and data in order to answer the following questions: What formal strategies do natural languages employ to encode definiteness? What are the possible meanings associated to this notion across languages? Are there different types of definite reference? Which other functions (besides marking definite reference) are associated with definite descriptions? Each of the papers contained in this volume addresses at least one of these questions and, in doing so, they aim to enrich our understanding of definiteness

Definiteness across languages

Definiteness has been a central topic in theoretical semantics since its modern foundation. However, despite its significance, there has been surprisingly scarce research on its cross-linguistic expression. With the purpose of contributing to filling this gap, the present volume gathers thirteen studies exploiting insights from formal semantics and syntax, typological and language specific studies, and, crucially, semantic fieldwork and cross-linguistic semantics, in order to address the expression and interpretation of definiteness in a diverse group of languages, most of them understudied. The papers presented in this volume aim to establish a dialogue between theory and data in order to answer the following questions: What formal strategies do natural languages employ to encode definiteness? What are the possible meanings associated to this notion across languages? Are there different types of definite reference? Which other functions (besides marking definite reference) are associated with definite descriptions? Each of the papers contained in this volume addresses at least one of these questions and, in doing so, they aim to enrich our understanding of definiteness

Definiteness across languages

Definiteness has been a central topic in theoretical semantics since its modern foundation. However, despite its significance, there has been surprisingly scarce research on its cross-linguistic expression. With the purpose of contributing to filling this gap, the present volume gathers thirteen studies exploiting insights from formal semantics and syntax, typological and language specific studies, and, crucially, semantic fieldwork and cross-linguistic semantics, in order to address the expression and interpretation of definiteness in a diverse group of languages, most of them understudied. The papers presented in this volume aim to establish a dialogue between theory and data in order to answer the following questions: What formal strategies do natural languages employ to encode definiteness? What are the possible meanings associated to this notion across languages? Are there different types of definite reference? Which other functions (besides marking definite reference) are associated with definite descriptions? Each of the papers contained in this volume addresses at least one of these questions and, in doing so, they aim to enrich our understanding of definiteness

Definiteness across languages

Definiteness has been a central topic in theoretical semantics since its modern foundation. However, despite its significance, there has been surprisingly scarce research on its cross-linguistic expression. With the purpose of contributing to filling this gap, the present volume gathers thirteen studies exploiting insights from formal semantics and syntax, typological and language specific studies, and, crucially, semantic fieldwork and cross-linguistic semantics, in order to address the expression and interpretation of definiteness in a diverse group of languages, most of them understudied. The papers presented in this volume aim to establish a dialogue between theory and data in order to answer the following questions: What formal strategies do natural languages employ to encode definiteness? What are the possible meanings associated to this notion across languages? Are there different types of definite reference? Which other functions (besides marking definite reference) are associated with definite descriptions? Each of the papers contained in this volume addresses at least one of these questions and, in doing so, they aim to enrich our understanding of definiteness

Definiteness across languages

Definiteness has been a central topic in theoretical semantics since its modern foundation. However, despite its significance, there has been surprisingly scarce research on its cross-linguistic expression. With the purpose of contributing to filling this gap, the present volume gathers thirteen studies exploiting insights from formal semantics and syntax, typological and language specific studies, and, crucially, semantic fieldwork and cross-linguistic semantics, in order to address the expression and interpretation of definiteness in a diverse group of languages, most of them understudied. The papers presented in this volume aim to establish a dialogue between theory and data in order to answer the following questions: What formal strategies do natural languages employ to encode definiteness? What are the possible meanings associated to this notion across languages? Are there different types of definite reference? Which other functions (besides marking definite reference) are associated with definite descriptions? Each of the papers contained in this volume addresses at least one of these questions and, in doing so, they aim to enrich our understanding of definiteness

Definiteness across languages

Definiteness has been a central topic in theoretical semantics since its modern foundation. However, despite its significance, there has been surprisingly scarce research on its cross-linguistic expression. With the purpose of contributing to filling this gap, the present volume gathers thirteen studies exploiting insights from formal semantics and syntax, typological and language specific studies, and, crucially, semantic fieldwork and cross-linguistic semantics, in order to address the expression and interpretation of definiteness in a diverse group of languages, most of them understudied. The papers presented in this volume aim to establish a dialogue between theory and data in order to answer the following questions: What formal strategies do natural languages employ to encode definiteness? What are the possible meanings associated to this notion across languages? Are there different types of definite reference? Which other functions (besides marking definite reference) are associated with definite descriptions? Each of the papers contained in this volume addresses at least one of these questions and, in doing so, they aim to enrich our understanding of definiteness