The Role Of Agreement In Clitic-Doubled Constructions

These results have two main consequences: (a) the assumption that CLs are morphs of agreement that do not absorb cases becomes viable. This assertion is supported by the doubling of inanimation (section 1.3.1) and even some animaters (17) in the absence of a case of IOs (section 1.3.2) and weak cross effects (section 3.1) for which the CLs-as-agreement are used to identify the relevant empty category. b) Since extractions can be made of both CL-D-IOs (clause 2.1) and CL-DO (clause 2.2), it follows that CL are not theta roller absorbers, as the dual component must be in an argument position. The moral is that the lack of extraction itself does not show that the lining is in the position of A`. On the contrary, it is necessary to look more deeply to determine whether independent principles in language may be responsible for a lack of extraction in such contexts. Footnote 1 Suer, Mr. The role of the agreement in climate-double constructions. Nat Lang Linguist Theory 6, 391-434 (1988). – 1985, `The Unagreement Hypothesis`, in L. King and C. Maley (eds.), Selected Papers from the XIIIth Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, Benjamins, Amsterdam, p. 187-211. Chomsky, Noam: 1965, Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, MIT, Press, Cambridge, Mass.

Home, Irene: 1984, “Where does the Definiteness Restriction Apply? Evidence from the Definiteness of Variables`, unpublished ms., University of Texas at Austin. . Chafe, Wallace: 1976, `Givenness, Contrastive, Definiteness, Subjects, Topics, and Point of View`, in Charles Li (Ed.), Subject and Topic, Academic Press, New York, 25-55. Borer, Hagit: 1981, parametrication in Clitic Constructions, unpublished, MIT. Judith Klavans: 1985, `The Independence of Syntax and Phonology in Cliticization`, Language 61, 95-120. . . . . Jackendoff, Ray: 1977, (`bar X`) -Syntax: A Study of Phrase Structure, Linguistic Inquiry Monograph 2, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. — 1980b, `Anaphora and GB: Some Preliminary Remarks`, NELS X, Ottawa Linguistic Papers, Dept. Linguistics, University of Ottawa, 223-236.

. Gary Milsark: 1977, “Toward an Explanation of Certain Peculiarities of the Existential Construction in English,” Linguistic Analysis 3, 1-29.