Associative Plurality and the DP/NP typology

Rebecca Lewis

doi:10.3765/ptu.v6i1.5047

Abstract

This paper investigates the phenomenon of additive plural morphology being used to denote the associative plural in a variety of languages. A novel empirical generalization is proposed: Languages with identical additive and associative plural morphology lack free standing definite articles. This follows a line of generalizations made by Boskovic (2008, 2012), who argues that languages without free standing definite articles do not project the DP layer, though the proposed generalization groups affixal article languages with languages without articles (see also Talic (2017)). I propose a new analysis of associative plurals that yields the empirical generalization for free. I argue that Num, the position of additive plural morphology, moves to Associative, which heads a projection on top of the nominal domain. This movement operation is blocked by the presence of D/DP in free standing definite article languages.

Highlights

Associative plurals, known as associatives, are constructions whose meaning is ‘X and X’s associate(s)’ where X is an individual and X’s associate(s) is formally expressed on the noun via an affix, clitic, or word (Moravcsik (2003): 470-71)
The analysis presented in this paper correctly predicts that these languages cannot use regular plural morphology to mark the associative plural because the DP phase prevents Agree between Number Phrase (Num) and Associative, and the follow-up movement operation
This paper has established a novel generalization about languages with identical additive and associative plural morphology (IDENTITY languages)

Summary

Introduction

Associative plurals, known as associatives, are constructions whose meaning is ‘X and X’s associate(s)’ where X is an individual and X’s associate(s) is formally expressed on the noun via an affix, clitic, or word (Moravcsik (2003): 470-71). Such languages would be counterexamples to the empirical generalization I propose. For example, notes that the associative plural ‘This house is big enough for [a grownup.manASS.PL] (i.e. for a man and his family)’ appears to be impossible in languages with associative plural constructions, and Li (1999), Hirose (2004), and Ueda & Haraguchi (2008) all argue that associative plurals are definite in the relevant languages (Chinese in Li (1999) and Japanese in Hirose (2004) and Ueda & Haraguchi (2008)) These and other authors have posited that associative plural morphology is.

PLAdditive NP

Agree fails

Conclusions