2014
DOI: 10.1007/s11049-014-9239-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The structural ergative of Basque and the theory of Case

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
23
0
2

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 109 publications
0
23
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…On structural approaches to ergative, see, i.a., Bobaljik and Branigan (2006), Deal (2010a,b), Rezac et al (2014), Erlewine (2016), Clem (2018). split ergativity.…”
Section: Are There Inherent-ergative Languages?mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…On structural approaches to ergative, see, i.a., Bobaljik and Branigan (2006), Deal (2010a,b), Rezac et al (2014), Erlewine (2016), Clem (2018). split ergativity.…”
Section: Are There Inherent-ergative Languages?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Overall, there is clearly more to be done empirically to assess the prospects for Shipibo of an antilocality principle of grammar. 30 SeeLevin 1983, Bittner and Hale 1996a,b, Johns 1992, Paul and Travis 2006, Wiltschko 2006, Aldridge 2008, Legate 2008, Rezac et al 2014, Deal 2015a, Polinsky 2016, Clem 2018…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If v is obligatorily a licenser across the board, then no matter whether the higher licenser is T (rows J and K) or Asp (rows L and M) and no matter whether v licenses its specifier (rows K and M) or the closest nominal it c‐commands (rows J and L), the resulting pattern will be split‐S with no DOM. Split‐S varieties of Basque, for which ergativity has specifically been argued to be a structural Case from T (see, e.g., Rezac, Albizu & Etxepare ), may furnish us with examples of row J systems . On the other hand, if transitive v is an obligatory licenser, then the resulting patterns will either be erg‐abs with no DOM (for v as an inherent licenser, rows K and M) or nom‐acc with no DOM (for v as a structural licenser, rows J and L).…”
Section: The Crosslinguistic Picturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In fact, in Eastern dialects, certain simplex agentive verbs align with unaccusatives under a number of syntactic diagnostics, such as the fact that they occur with absolutive subjects and the auxiliary izan 'be'. We have referred to this group of verbs as agentive process verbs, as they convey (non-static) processes, where the subject is interpreted as both the force initiating the process and the entity undergoing it, as illustrated in (6) It must be noted that our proposal is also compatible with a structural approach to ergative case in Basque (e.g., Laka 1993;Fernández 1997;Rezac et al 2014) as long as the DP in [spec, Voice] is always assigned ergative case and the DP within vP always gets absolutive. As a reviewer notes, this can be the case if T assigns ergative to the highest caseless DP in its c-command domain, and Voice assigns absolutive to the DP within vP (see Tollan 2013 for a similar approach).…”
Section: Dialectal Variation: Agentive Process Verbs With Unaccusativmentioning
confidence: 95%