Abstract
Abstract. Bantu languages display a number of constructions that raise serious questions about the universality of the theory of abstract Case as currently realized in the Minimalist Program. Chomsky (2000) claims that positing uninterpretable features (like Case features) is not purely stipulation but that uninterpretable features are justified by their visible effects in the syntax. This paper presents evidence that the syntactic effects predicted by Case theory are not borne out in Bantu languages, which in fact display effects that are only predicted to be possible in the absence of uninterpretable Case features. Evidence includes constructions where Case‐checking should require a DP to cease being active, but it does not do so (e.g., compound tenses and raising constructions), as well as instances where Case‐checking could not have occurred, but the constructions are nonetheless acceptable (e.g., possible‐constructions and locative inversion). It is claimed that uninterpretable Case features are not present in Bantu languages and that it is instead gender features that make a goal active for Agree (following Carstens 2011).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
