Adverbial and Argument-Doubling Clauses in Cree - MSpace

While doubling involves CO-referentiality, the converse is not tnie. Not ail
constituents which are CO-referential involve a doubling relationship. This fact is
important in light of the following sentence (103).
(1 03) John, snores when hei sleeps.
If this sentence occurred in Cree, where 'John' and 'he' are CO-referentiai, we
would not want to daim that they have a doubling relationship. Under the definition of
domain given above, a doubling relationship entails that both the mg and the doubling
constituent form a single domain. We do not want to Say that the matk clause and the
adverbial clause in (103) form a dornain - indeed, the proposed analysis claims that a
sentence containing an adverbial clause and matrix clause has two domains, one per
clause. A Cree example is given in (104).
(1 04) [, mayaw pro,-eh-kawisimot], [, sèmâk pro,-nipâw 1.
as. soon-as cj-lie.down.AI-3 immediately sleep .AL3
'As soon as hei lay dom, hei went to sleep. (P: 176-0 1)
In (104), the subject argument in the subordinate clause is CO-referential with the
subjea argument in the matrix clause, they are both pro,. These arguments however, are
not in a doubling relationship. Furthemore, we have already stated that adverbial clauses
are not a part of the matrix domain. Therefore, it is important to stress that a domain
consists of a verb, its arguments, and any A-doublina constituents. Co-referentidity of
arguments is not a sufficient requirement for the formation of a domain. Thus, adverbial
clauses, whether or not they have a referent in common with the matrk clause, are not A-