Abstract

The paper proposes an account of asymmetries in agreement patterns that obtain in restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses headed by hybrid agreement nouns d(j)eca ‘children’, braća ‘brothers’, and gospoda ‘gentry’ in Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian (BCS). We note that relative clauses headed by hybrid nouns display different possibilities of agreement morphology on the relative pronoun koji/a/e ‘which’, depending, on the one hand, on whether the relative clause is restrictive or non-restrictive and on the other, on the case of the relative pronoun. We argue that the observed differences are the result of a conspiracy of the following factors: (i) hybrid number-agreement nouns introduce a null plural pronoun unspecified for gender (Postal 1966; den Dikken 2001; Torrego and Laga 2015), (ii) all plural case forms of the relative pronoun except for nominative and accusative show full gender syncretism (Alsina and Arsenijević 2012b), and (iii) non-restrictive relative clauses involve a null definite pronoun and attach to the head noun higher than the restrictive relative clauses (Postal 1994; de Vries 2002; 2006). We maintain that the facts discussed in the paper argue against analyses which derive the differences between restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses from their LF representations, rather than from their overt syntax.

Highlights

  • Restrictive relative clauses (RRCs) and their non-restrictive counterparts (NRCs), string-identical, exhibit a number of differences in interpretation

  • We investigate agreement between the relative pronoun and the head noun in RRCs and NRCs in Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian (BCS) and argue that differences in agreement patterns that obtain in the two types of relative clauses can only be explained if RRCs and NRCs differ in their overt syntax

  • We argue that the Possibility 2 provides a better account of the observed facts, and that what is dubbed semantic agreement of relative pronoun (RP) in NRCs is not agreement with the null plural pronoun associated with the hybrid noun, but with a null definite pronoun postulated independently in analyses of NRCs (Postal 1994; de Vries 2002; 2006)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Restrictive relative clauses (RRCs) and their non-restrictive counterparts (NRCs), string-identical, exhibit a number of differences in interpretation. We investigate agreement between the relative pronoun and the head noun in RRCs and NRCs in Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian (BCS) and argue that differences in agreement patterns that obtain in the two types of relative clauses can only be explained if RRCs and NRCs differ in their overt syntax. It has to happen at a point in the derivation that precedes spell-out (Chomsky 2000; 2001).2 Under this assumption, different agreement patterns that the hybrid nouns show in RRCs and NRCs imply that the structures of the two types of relative clauses must be sufficiently different from each other to allow for the observed differences before the level of LF. Accounts in which agreement takes place in two stages, one of which is in narrow syntax (Agree/Link) and the other at PF (Agree/Copy), such as Arregi and Nevins (2013), and most other multi-component views of agreement (a.o. Guasti & Rizzi 2002; van Koppen 2005; Franck et al 2006; Marušič et al 2007; 2015; Benmamoun et al 2009; Franck 2011; Bhat & Walkow 2013; Polinsky 2014) are still compatible with our data

The three BCS hybrid nouns
Genderless null plural pronoun
Implications for analyses of differences between RRCs and NRCs
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call