Binding and Phasehood in South Slavic Revisited

Q2 Arts and Humanities
S. Franks
{"title":"Binding and Phasehood in South Slavic Revisited","authors":"S. Franks","doi":"10.4467/23005920spl.19.014.11079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In a series of works and using a variety of diagnostics, Bošković argues that languages can be divided into those in which nominals project to DP and those in which they do not. Since Bulgarian (and Macedonian) express definiteness morphologically, they would appear to differ from Bosnian/Croatian/Montenegrin/Serbian (and Slovenian) in counte-nancing DP, but recent work argues that evidence for Bg as a DP-language is not so clear cut. In an attempt to set the record straight about the South Slavic data she describes, this paper addresses the criticisms specifically raised by LaTerza (2016), who explores Despić’s (2009, 2011, 2013) observations about binding and phasehood in BCMS. In revisiting her claims it will be shown that the relevant differences between the South Slavic languages do in fact lend support to the “parameterized DP” account of the different binding possibilities.","PeriodicalId":37336,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Polish Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Polish Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4467/23005920spl.19.014.11079","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

In a series of works and using a variety of diagnostics, Bošković argues that languages can be divided into those in which nominals project to DP and those in which they do not. Since Bulgarian (and Macedonian) express definiteness morphologically, they would appear to differ from Bosnian/Croatian/Montenegrin/Serbian (and Slovenian) in counte-nancing DP, but recent work argues that evidence for Bg as a DP-language is not so clear cut. In an attempt to set the record straight about the South Slavic data she describes, this paper addresses the criticisms specifically raised by LaTerza (2016), who explores Despić’s (2009, 2011, 2013) observations about binding and phasehood in BCMS. In revisiting her claims it will be shown that the relevant differences between the South Slavic languages do in fact lend support to the “parameterized DP” account of the different binding possibilities.
重新审视南斯拉夫语的约束与分阶段
在一系列的著作中,Bošković使用了各种各样的诊断方法,认为语言可以分为那些名称投射到DP的语言和那些它们不投射到DP的语言。由于保加利亚语(和马其顿语)在形态学上表达了确定性,它们在计数DP方面似乎与波斯尼亚语/克罗地亚语/黑山语/塞尔维亚语(和斯洛文尼亚语)不同,但最近的研究认为,Bg作为DP语言的证据并不那么明确。为了澄清她所描述的南斯拉夫数据,本文针对LaTerza(2016)特别提出的批评进行了阐述,后者探讨了despiki(2009、2011、2013)对BCMS中结合和阶段的观察。在回顾她的观点时,我们会发现南斯拉夫语言之间的相关差异实际上为“参数化DP”对不同绑定可能性的解释提供了支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Studies in Polish Linguistics
Studies in Polish Linguistics Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信