案例作为隐喻的协议效应:来自因纽特语的证据

IF 1.6 1区文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS

Linguistic Inquiry Pub Date : 2023-03-21 DOI:10.1162/ling_a_00443

Michelle Yuan

{"title":"案例作为隐喻的协议效应:来自因纽特语的证据","authors":"Michelle Yuan","doi":"10.1162/ling_a_00443","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The anaphor agreement effect (AAE) is the crosslinguistic inability for anaphors to covary with φ-agreement (Rizzi 1990, Woolford 1999); languages use various strategies that conspire to circumvent this effect. In this squib, I identify and confirm a prediction arising from two previous observations by Woolford (1999) concerning the scope of the AAE, based on new evidence from Inuktitut (Eastern Canadian Inuit). I propose that anaphors in Inuktitut are lexically specified as projecting additional syntactic structure, spelled out as oblique case morphology; because φ-Agree in Inuktitut may only target ERG and ABS arguments, encountering an anaphor inevitably leads to failed Agree in the sense of Preminger 2011, 2014. I moreover argue that this exact AAE pattern is previously unattested, yet is predicted to arise given the range of existing strategies. Finally, this squib provides evidence against previous detransitivization-based approaches to reflexivity in Inuktitut (e.g., Bok-Bennema 1991).","PeriodicalId":48044,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Inquiry","volume":"54 2","pages":"413-428"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Case as an Anaphor Agreement Effect: Evidence from Inuktitut\",\"authors\":\"Michelle Yuan\",\"doi\":\"10.1162/ling_a_00443\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The anaphor agreement effect (AAE) is the crosslinguistic inability for anaphors to covary with φ-agreement (Rizzi 1990, Woolford 1999); languages use various strategies that conspire to circumvent this effect. In this squib, I identify and confirm a prediction arising from two previous observations by Woolford (1999) concerning the scope of the AAE, based on new evidence from Inuktitut (Eastern Canadian Inuit). I propose that anaphors in Inuktitut are lexically specified as projecting additional syntactic structure, spelled out as oblique case morphology; because φ-Agree in Inuktitut may only target ERG and ABS arguments, encountering an anaphor inevitably leads to failed Agree in the sense of Preminger 2011, 2014. I moreover argue that this exact AAE pattern is previously unattested, yet is predicted to arise given the range of existing strategies. Finally, this squib provides evidence against previous detransitivization-based approaches to reflexivity in Inuktitut (e.g., Bok-Bennema 1991).\",\"PeriodicalId\":48044,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Linguistic Inquiry\",\"volume\":\"54 2\",\"pages\":\"413-428\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Linguistic Inquiry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10302007/\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistic Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10302007/","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

摘要

回指协议效应（AAE）是指回指不能与φ-协议共变的跨语言现象（Rizzi 1990，Woolford 1999）；语言使用各种策略来规避这种影响。在这篇爆炸性文章中，我根据因纽特人（加拿大东部因纽特人）的新证据，确定并证实了Woolford（1999）之前关于AAE范围的两次观测所产生的预测。我认为，在词汇上，因纽特人的回指被指定为投射额外的句法结构，拼写为斜格形态；由于因纽特语中的φ-Agree可能只针对ERG和ABS论点，因此遇到回指不可避免地会导致Preminger 20112014意义上的Agree失败。此外，我认为，这种确切的AAE模式以前是未经测试的，但考虑到现有策略的范围，预计会出现。最后，这个哑炮提供了证据，反对以前在因纽特人中基于去变性的自反性方法（例如，Bok Bennema 1991）。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Case as an Anaphor Agreement Effect: Evidence from Inuktitut

The anaphor agreement effect (AAE) is the crosslinguistic inability for anaphors to covary with φ-agreement (Rizzi 1990, Woolford 1999); languages use various strategies that conspire to circumvent this effect. In this squib, I identify and confirm a prediction arising from two previous observations by Woolford (1999) concerning the scope of the AAE, based on new evidence from Inuktitut (Eastern Canadian Inuit). I propose that anaphors in Inuktitut are lexically specified as projecting additional syntactic structure, spelled out as oblique case morphology; because φ-Agree in Inuktitut may only target ERG and ABS arguments, encountering an anaphor inevitably leads to failed Agree in the sense of Preminger 2011, 2014. I moreover argue that this exact AAE pattern is previously unattested, yet is predicted to arise given the range of existing strategies. Finally, this squib provides evidence against previous detransitivization-based approaches to reflexivity in Inuktitut (e.g., Bok-Bennema 1991).

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Linguistic Inquiry Multiple-

CiteScore

2.50

自引率

12.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： Linguistic Inquiry leads the field in research on current topics in linguistics. This key resource explores new theoretical developments based on the latest international scholarship, capturing the excitement of contemporary debate in full-scale articles as well as shorter contributions (Squibs and Discussion) and more extensive commentary (Remarks and Replies).