Two representations of case: Evidence from numerals and relatives

Abstract

This squib highlights a fundamental tension between the representations required for case syncretism versus the representations required for case priority. Case syncretism is captured with a feature decomposition based on the patterns established in Caha 2009. However, a different decomposition is required for case priority relations, which are instantiated in Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian (BCS) numeral constructions and in BCS and German relative constructions. The squib proposes that this conflict can be resolved by introducing two levels of representation into the case system, where priority is determined by set structures in the syntax, while syncretism is analyzed following post-syntactic set unification.

Unbalanced case and the syntax of coordination

“…The genitive features percolate upward into the higher domain and override the set of accusative features on the topmost node. This part of the analysis relies on a decompositional view of case (Caha 2009;Grabovac 2022b); since accusative, represented as {NOM, ACC} is contained within genitive {NOM, ACC, GEN}, genitive case can override accusative.…”