2012
DOI: 10.2989/16073614.2012.737591
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Subject marking and preverbal coordination in Sesotho: A perspective from Optimality Theory

Abstract: Agreement usually operates in a one-to-one fashion where an agreement target is matched to a source of agreement. However, when there is more than one source (for example, in preverbal coordination constructions) agreement mismatches occur. These may be resolved either through partial agreement with only a single source, or by various resolution strategies. Bantu languages with their rich noun-class system are an ideal domain to explore resolution strategies. This paper examines the phenomenon of subject-verb … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A conflict arises in Bantu languages if agreement needs to be expressed between the verb and an NP that consists of two conjoined nouns belonging to different noun classes. Different languages have different strategies to resolve this conflict, which may depend on the semantic and/or grammatical properties of the conjoined nouns, their order, or the position of the conjoined NP in relation to the verb (see Bosch ; Marten ; De Vos & Mitchley ; Simango ). With parameter 12, MKT distinguish between languages which use a default agreement marker in case of noun class conflict, and those in which partial agreement (i.e.…”
Section: Some Morphosyntactic Properties Of Kinyarwandamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A conflict arises in Bantu languages if agreement needs to be expressed between the verb and an NP that consists of two conjoined nouns belonging to different noun classes. Different languages have different strategies to resolve this conflict, which may depend on the semantic and/or grammatical properties of the conjoined nouns, their order, or the position of the conjoined NP in relation to the verb (see Bosch ; Marten ; De Vos & Mitchley ; Simango ). With parameter 12, MKT distinguish between languages which use a default agreement marker in case of noun class conflict, and those in which partial agreement (i.e.…”
Section: Some Morphosyntactic Properties Of Kinyarwandamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based mainly on evidence from Southern Bantu languages like Xhosa and Rhonga, Taraldsen et al (2018) note different agreement patterns with conjoined subjects (cf. Corbett and Mtenje 1987, De Vos and Mitchley 2012, Diercks et al 2015, Marten 2000, Riedel 2009, and Simango 2012 and point out the relevance of this for the analysis of noun class systems. They observe that not all classes permit the expected plural subject agreement with conjoint NPs of the same singular class, showing that in these cases the presumed plural class cannot be analysed as the same gender as the corresponding singular class plus a plural feature, as was proposed in Carstens's (1991) analysis.…”
Section: Number As Inflectionmentioning
confidence: 93%