Case and grammatical functions: The Icelandic passive

Zaenen, Annie; Maling, Joan; Þráinsson, Höskuldur

doi:10.1007/bf00133285

Cited by 375 publications

(134 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

130

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result, the quirky subject behaves like an ordinary nominative subject in nearly every syntactic respect (Zaenen et al 1985). But its quirky case prevents T from agreeing with it.…”

Section: Agreement With the Object In Oblique Subject Constructionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

When agreement is for number and gender but not person

Baker

2011

Nat Lang Linguist Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In many languages, adjectives agree with a noun phrase in number and gender, but not in person. In others, ditransitive verbs can agree with their theme argument in number and gender, but not in person (the Person Case Constraint (PCC)).However, a unified account of these two similar patterns has rarely been attempted. In The work reported in section 4 was done in collaboration with Nadya Vinokurova, and the judgments are hers, in many cases checked with her contacts. I given special thanks to her for her inspiration and generous help in this.Most agreement morphemes are glossed with a complex symbol constructed out of a subset of the following three elements: an Arabic number expressing the person of the agreed with nominal (1, 2, or 3), a lower case letter expressing the number of the agreed with nominal (s singular, d dual, or 3 plural), and an upper case letter expressing the grammatical function of the agreed with nominal (S subject, O object, P possessor, A absolutive, E ergative). Other abbreviations in the glosses of examples include: A,

show abstract

“…As a result, the quirky subject behaves like an ordinary nominative subject in nearly every syntactic respect (Zaenen et al 1985). But its quirky case prevents T from agreeing with it.…”

Section: Agreement With the Object In Oblique Subject Constructionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

When agreement is for number and gender but not person

Baker

2011

Nat Lang Linguist Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As first argued by Andrews (1976), however, they behave like ordinary nominative subjects with respect to various syntactic subjecthood tests or diagnostics, such as reflexivization, word order phenomena and so on. This was further established by Thráinsson (1979) and later by Zaenen, Maling and Thráinsson (1985), Sigurðsson (1989) VII. Subject Floating.…”

Section: Subject Properties Of Icelandic Nnssmentioning

confidence: 78%

“…______________________________________________________________________________________ 2. See Andrews 1976, Thráinsson 1979, Zaenen, Maling and Thráinsson 1985, Yip, Maling and Jackendoff 1987, Sigurðsson 1989, 1992, 2002a, Jónsson 1996, 1997-1998, Barðdal 2001, Landau 2001, among many. -Icelandic nominals inflect for number (singular, plural), gender (masculine, feminine, neuter), and case.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

7. Icelandic non-nominative subjects

Sigurðsson¹

2004

Typological Studies in Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In Icelandic, quirky dative objects are not inherently licensed, since they can raise to a subject position in passives, as illustrated in (1) (see Zaenen, Maling and Thráinsson 1985 for convincing evidence that the dative is a genuine subject). As such, it is immediately clear that morphological case is distinct from Vergnaud licensing in the language.…”

Section: The Evidence For Vergnaud Licensingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nominal licensing in caseless languages

Sheehan

Wal

2018

J. Ling.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides evidence for a kind of nominal licensing (Vergnaud licensing) in a number of morphologically caseless languages. Recent work on Bantu languages, has suggested that abstract Case or nominal licensing should be parameterised (Diercks 2012, Van der Wal 2015a). With this is mind, we critically discuss the status of Vergnaud licensing in six languages lacking morphological case and agreement. While Luganda appears to systematically lack a Vergnaud licensing requirement, Makhuwa more consistently displays evidence in favour of it, as do all of the analytic languages that we survey (Mandarin, Yoruba, Jamaican Creole and Thai). We conclude that, while it seems increasingly problematic to characterise nominal licensing in terms of uninterpretable/abstract Case features, we nonetheless need to retain a (possibly universal) notion of nominal licensing, the explanation for which remains opaque.

show abstract

Case and grammatical functions: The Icelandic passive

Cited by 375 publications

References 5 publications

When agreement is for number and gender but not person

When agreement is for number and gender but not person

7. Icelandic non-nominative subjects

Nominal licensing in caseless languages

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About