Nominal speech act structure: Evidence from the structural deficiency of impersonal pronouns

Ritter, Elizabeth; Wiltschko, Martina

doi:10.1017/cnj.2019.10

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since D is the locus of Case assignment, both DOM-less and DOM nominals require Case. DOM nominals are further licensed by a sentience requirement on K. K, as a funtional projection high in the extended nominal projection, is responsible for sentience, perspective, interaction between speech act participants and the like, along the lines of Speas and Tenny (2003) and Ritter and Wiltschko (2019). The sentience feature on K is checked by a functional projection in the vP layer.…”

Section: Oblique Differential Object Marking Nominal Structure and Licensing Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The questions this special issue addresses include but are not limited to the following:. What functional projections are found in the extended nominal projection? Is the functional hierarchy universal (Cinque 2010), language-specific, or is its variation constrained in some way (Wiltschko 2014)? . What kinds of reduced nominal expressions are found in natural language? Bare NPs? Bare NumPs? Cl+N expressions without numerals? Caseless nouns? How does this inventory of reduced nominals inform us about, and relate to noun incorporation and pseudo noun incorporation?

show abstract

Section: Oblique Differential Object Marking Nominal Structure and Licensing Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This paper aims to presents a unified analysis for two phenomena involving the category person: nominal imposters, which are nominal expressions with personal reading, and imposter pronouns, which are personal pronominal forms with impersonal reading. This analysis is based on the referential structure proposed by Collins and Postal (2012), and the speech act projection by Ritter and Wiltschko (2019) and assumes that imposter expressions have participant pragmatic features to which the syntactic structure is sensitive, namely: [ AUTHOR] and [ADDRESSEE]. These features, however, differ from the 1st and 2nd person phi-features, which are responsible only for the agreement operation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dupla representação de pessoa e a sintaxe dos impostores

Carvalho

2024

RAbralin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

O presente trabalho tem como objetivo introduzir uma análise unificada para dois fenômenos envolvendo a categoria pessoa: impostores nominais, expressões nominais com leitura pessoal, e pronomes impostores, formas pronominais pessoais com leitura impessoal. Baseado na estrutura referencial de Collins e Postal (2012), e da estrutura do DP pronominal de Orlando e Saab (2021), proponho uma análise em que as expressões impostoras possuem traços pragmáticos participantes aos quais a estrutura sintática é sensível, a saber: [AUTOR] e [DETINATÁRIO]. Esses traços, no entanto, diferem dos traços-phi de 1ª e 2 ª pessoas, estes responsáveis apenas pela operação de concordância. Assim, há uma assimetria na configuração dos DPs impostores: enquanto as expressões-R impostoras não apresentam traços-phi de pessoa, o que bloqueia a morfologia pessoal na concordância sentencial dessas expressões, os pronomes impostores carecem dos traços pragmáticos participantes, impedindo uma leitura referencial. Esses traços pragmáticos são computáveis em uma projeção sintática responsável por ligar os nominais às relações discursivas: GroundP (RITTER; WILTSCHKO, 2019). Por fim, demonstro que os impostores nominais e pronominais têm seus traços participantes valorados na posição de especificador de dois núcleos funcionais acima do DP, que são responsáveis pelas leituras de falante e destinatário.

show abstract

Oblique differential object marking and types of nominals

Irimia

2021

Can. J. Linguist.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The question of whether differentially marked objects should be linked with Case licensing or some other mechanism in the grammar has given rise to numerous debates. Addressing contexts of differential object marking (DOM) with oblique morphology, this article shows that, while the Case licensing approach might be adequate for varieties of Spanish, oblique differential marking rather signals an independent licensing operation, beyond Case, in languages like Romanian, Gujarati or Mandarin Chinese. This additional mechanism, relevant at the syntax-semantics-pragmatics interface, tracks the role of grammaticalized animates or how the speaker relates to other entities in the discourse. Additionally, the data examined here indicate that objects can come in a variety of sizes and structures, with distinct licensing constraints, such that the divide Case licensed/unlicensed or Case licensing/(pseudo-)incorporation is not enough.

show abstract

Nominal speech act structure: Evidence from the structural deficiency of impersonal pronouns

Cited by 8 publications

References 30 publications

Introduction

Introduction

Dupla representação de pessoa e a sintaxe dos impostores

Oblique differential object marking and types of nominals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About