paper

More documents

Recommendations

Info

PHON phon ¡ £¥¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ ¦ most intriguing fact is that they exhibit a number of features not found in other withconstructions: the order of the constituents with respect to their person specification is unique; an IPPC cannot be substituted with an equivalent coordinate phrase. Since IPPCs pattern neither with coordinate comitatives nor with comitative adjunction, we assume that the plural pronouns that occur in such structures are heads that select with-phrases with particular specifications. Such an assumption requires some additional modification of the hierarchy of nominal objects. According to this hierarchy, pronouns can be transitive and intransitive. In Russian, transitive prounouns are plural and select a PP complement, and therefore, will be treated as transitive 13 : ¢ (63) nom obj npro pron non com nom com nom ana ppro pro i pro tr (64) ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ ¢ CAT¢ HEAD noun VAL COMPS PP ¢ ¡ CONTENT ¢ ¦¥¤ ¤©¦ INDEX¤ ¡ £ ¦ 13 Notice that transitive pronouns exist in some languages, e.g. Cayuga, an Iroquoian language.
NP HEAD¤ PP HEAD¡ (65) H C HEAD¤ VAL COMPS PP ¢ ¡ £ ¦ NP¢ H C my P prep PFORM s ¡ HEAD¡ VAL ¡ COMPS £¤ ¦ ¥ ¢ ¥ NP nei s (64) and (65) above illustrate the idea. The plural pronoun selects a PP ¢ . However, such an account is not complete. As has been discussed in the previous sections, the denotation of the complement should be included in the denotation of the head (in order to get the inclusive interpretation) and also, we must impose restrictions on the order of elements in IPPCs with respect to the person hierarchy. We can then define the following relation: (66) include–in(SUPERSET, SUBSET) iff SUBSET is a subset of SUPERSET and the cardinality of the SUPERSET denoted by the plural pronoun is one greater than the cardinality of the SUBSET denoted by the object of s and the denotation of the SUBSET is included in the denotation of the SUPERSET. Perhaps the best approach to this phenomenon is to assume that there is a pragmatic constraint requiring that the relation holds between the elements of the IPPC and state another constraint on the person hierarchy. We assume that the person hierarchy is a linear order on person values and we state a disjunction as exemplified in (67): the possible person values are expressed as an object language relation (and not as a pragmatic constraint).
Page 1 and 2: Comitative and Plural Pronoun Const
Page 3 and 4: (b) Im xočetsja They.Dat want.neut
Page 5 and 6: (9) (a) [adjunction] S With kem who
Page 7 and 8: The ability of a s-phrase to occur
Page 9 and 10: of arguments to support this claim.
Page 11 and 12: (25) (a) Pisatel’ Writer i and eg
Page 13 and 14: 4 Binding Facts: Ordinary and S-Coo
Page 15 and 16: (2) The theory is defined in terms
Page 17 and 18: PHON s ¡ HEAD ¡ CONTENT RESTR
Page 19 and 20: One additional point that we need t
Page 21 and 22: Dašei¡ Dasha¡ The construction i
Page 23 and 24: 6.2 Inclusive PPCs (IPPC’s) In th
Page 25: In other aspects, inclusive PPCs re
Page 29 and 30: However, there are several issues w
Page 31: SCHWARTZ, LINDA. 1988. Conditions f

paper

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?