Syntax of Dutch. Nouns and Noun Phrases Volume 2

The aim of this publication is to present a complete synthesis of the available knowledge of Dutch syntax. It is primarily concerned with language description and not with linguistic theory, providing support to all researchers of language and linguistics, including graduate students. The first two volumes in this series, Nouns and Noun Phrases, discuss the internal make-up as well as the distribution of noun phrases, and address the following areas: complementation and modification of noun phrases; properties of determiners (articles and demonstratives), numerals and quantifiers; the use of noun phrases as arguments, predicates and adverbial modifiers.

On inclusive reference anaphora: New perspectives from Hungarian

Generatieve Syntaxi

More on phi-features in and out of copular sentences:A reply to Béjar and Kahnemuyipour 2018

Hartmann J, Heycock C. More on phi-features in and out of copular sentences: A reply to Béjar & Kahnemuyipour 2018. Journal of Linguistics. 2018;54(3):637-646

A remark on Béjar & Kahnemuyipour 2017:Specificational subjects do have phi-features

In a number of languages, agreement in specificational copular sentences can or must be with the second of the two nominals, even when it is the first that occupies the canonical subject position. Béjar & Kahnemuyipour (2017) show that Persian and Eastern Armenian are two such languages. They then argue that ‘NP2 agreement’ occurs because the nominal in subject position (NP1) is not accessible to an external probe. It follows that actual agreement with NP1 should never be possible: the alternative to NP2 agreement should be ‘default’ agreement. We show that this prediction is false. In addition to showing that English has NP1, not default, agreement, we present new data from Icelandic, a language with rich agreement morphology, including cases that involve ‘plurale tantum’ nominals as NP1. These allow us to control for any confound from the fact that typically in a specificational sentence with two nominals differing in number, it is NP2 that is plural. We show that even in this case, the alternative to agreement with NP2 is agreement with NP1, not a default. Hence, we conclude that whatever the correct analysis of specificational sentences turns out to be, it must not predict obligatory failure of NP1 agreement

On the Topic of Pseudoclefts

This paper presents arguments in favor of a pseudocleft analysis of a certain class of sentences in Malagasy, despite the lack of an overt wh-element. It is shown that voice morphology on the verb creates an operator-variable relationship much like the one created by wh-movement in free relatives in English and other languages. The bulk of the paper argues in favor of an inversion analysis of specificational pseudoclefts in Malagasy: a predicate DP is fronted to a topic position from within a small clause constituent. Moreover, it is shown that the same inversion occurs in equative and specificational sentences in Malagasy, which suggests that these types of sentences share the same syntactic structure. The proposed analysis also provides support for the view that specificational pseudoclefts have a topic \u3e focus structure, where the wh-clause has been overtly topicalized