The Activity Condition as a Microparameter

Abstract

Using data from agreement in three Algonquian languages (Ojibwe, Cheyenne, and Plains Cree), this squib shows that effects typically attributed to Chomsky’s ( 2000 , 2001 ) Activity Condition (AC) can vary not only across languages, as in Baker’s (2008b) macroparametric proposal, but within a language as well. AC effects are thus another instance in which an apparent macroparameter turns out, on closer inspection, to be a microparameter instead, as in prominent cases such as the pro-drop parameter and the polysynthesis parameter ( Kayne 2005 , Baker 2008a ).

Complementizer Agreement and the T0‐Φ Parameter in Jordanian Arabic

“…This language‐internal variation in the Activity Condition complies with Oxford's () proposal that the Activity Condition is a micro‐parameter. The Activity Condition is a property of a particular functional head, rather than a property of the language as a whole.…”

“…However, with the fact that T 0 in JA cannot, at any rate, agree with an Accusative object, it seems that the effects of Chomsky's active Case requirement for goals only hold for the goals that T 0 agrees with. 20 This language-internal variation in the Activity Condition complies with Oxford's (2017) proposal that the Activity Condition is a microparameter. The Activity Condition is a property of a particular functional head, rather than a property of the language as a whole.…”

“…This paper provides evidence that such conditions are not universal as the complementizer ʔinn in JA may agree with a fronted object that bears accusative case. This paper also supplies empirical evidence in favour of Oxford's () microparametric proposal. Unlike T 0 , the complementizer ʔinn may agree with an inactive goal.…”

“…The Activity Condition is a property of a particular functional head, rather than a property of the language as a whole. Oxford () provides evidence from Plain Cree, an Algonquian language, that functional heads may differ from each other with respect to the application of the Activity Condition. In Plain Cree, C 0 and T 0 agree with the subject (of the intransitive clause) which appears indexed with T 0 ‐agreement and C 0 ‐agreement in the present tense, (e.g.…”

“…the [3PL] subject is indexed by T 0 ‐agreement (o‐…‐ htȃwȃw ‘pret.3PL’)) but no C 0 ‐agreement. This discrepancy between the two tenses in Plain Cree proves that this language “displays a tense‐based split in the applicability of the AC [Activity Condition]” (Oxford :719). JA facts lend empirical support in favour of microparameterization of the Activity Condition, as T 0 and C 0 differ with respect to whether or not they agree with inactive goals…”