No abstract

The paper provides evidence for a more articulated structure of the comparative as compared with the one in Bobaljik (2012). We propose to split up Bobaljik's cmpr head into two distinct heads, C1 and C2. Looking at Czech, Old Church Slavonic and English, we show that this proposal explains a range of facts about suppletion and allomorphy. A crucial ingredient of our analysis is the claim that adjectival roots are not a‐categorial, but spell out adjectival functional structure. Specifically, we argue that adjectival roots come in various types, differing in the amount of functional structure they spell out. In order to correctly model the competition between roots, we further introduce a Faithfulness Restriction on Cyclic Override, which allows us to dispense with the Elsewhere Principle.

We present a novel account of root suppletion in comparatives and superlatives, and show how it accounts for the presence of ABB and ABC patterns, as well as the absence of ABA patterns. The account assumes that suppletive roots, despite appearances to the contrary, are not contextual allomorphs, but portmanteaus spelling out two distinct features, one belonging to the lexical root, and another one belonging to the comparative. The regular comparative affix then spells out an additional feature relating to the comparative domain. In other words, we show that the comparative (cmpr) head that enters into the morphological makeup of the comparative (Bobaljik 2012) is to be split up into two distinct heads, C1 and C2 (see also Caha 2016). We extend this idea to sprl, which we show is likewise to be split up into S1 and S2, in order to account for suppletive ABC patterns. These four distinct heads receive empirical support from facts of the degree morphology in Czech and Latin. The new account of root suppletion allows a straightforward way of deriving the attested and unattested patterns of (root) suppletion in degree comparison. The analysis developed supports the hypothesis that the absence of AAB patterns in degree comparison is due to a constraint of a different nature altogether.

In this paper, we discuss a cross-linguistically rare pattern of comparative formation found in Slovak. This pattern is theoretically interesting, because it violates a candidate universal on the relationship between the positive and the comparative degree. The universal, discussed in Grano & Davis (2018), says that the comparative is always either identical to, or derived from, the positive degree. This universal is violated by a number of adjectives in Slovak. These adjectives have a suffix -k in the positive degree, which is absent in the comparative. We capture this pattern in terms of a non-containment structure of the positive and the comparative degrees and the nanosyntax model of spellout (Starke 2009 et seq.).

In L1 acquisition of English, Dutch, Russian, and Icelandic, children do not acquire Principle B until age 7--8, while in L1 acquisition of Italian, French, and German children no such delay is observed. This is the Delay of Principle B Effect (DPBE). Existing accounts of this contrast in terms of the clitic status of the relevant pronouns or their referential properties are unable to account for the dividing line between the languages with and without the DPBE. We relate the DPBE in language acquisition to the Absence of Principle B Effect (APBE) in the adult language. The APBE is the fact that cross-linguistically pronouns express reflexive meanings when dedicated reflexive pronouns are not available. The reason for this is that Principle B effects result from the competition between pronouns and dedicated reflexives. The delay in the acquisition of Principle B is accounted for by a delay in this competition taking effect. This delay is in turn caused by the morphological makeup of dedicated reflexive pronouns. Principle B will be acquired sooner, i.e. there will be no DPBE, when the internal morphological makeup of dedicated reflexives is more transparent. Only if dedicated reflexives are easily recognised as such in the course of acquisition will they compete with pronouns from the start. In such a case, there will be no developmental delay in the acquisition of Principle B. This approach allows us to correctly predict which languages do and which do not show the effect.