Case in Sakha: are two modalities really necessary?
Baker and Vinokurova (2010) argue that the distribution of morphologically observable case in Sakha (Turkic) requires a hybrid account, which involves recourse both to configurational rules of case assignment (Bittner and Hale 1996; Marantz 1991; Yip et al. 1987), and to case assignment by functiona...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Springer Netherlands
2016
|
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/103323 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8936-5388 |
| _version_ | 1811082765506969600 |
|---|---|
| author | Levin, Theodore Preminger, Omer |
| author2 | Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Linguistics and Philosophy |
| author_facet | Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Linguistics and Philosophy Levin, Theodore Preminger, Omer |
| author_sort | Levin, Theodore |
| collection | MIT |
| description | Baker and Vinokurova (2010) argue that the distribution of morphologically observable case in Sakha (Turkic) requires a hybrid account, which involves recourse both to configurational rules of case assignment (Bittner and Hale 1996; Marantz 1991; Yip et al. 1987), and to case assignment by functional heads (Chomsky 2000, 2001). In this paper, we argue that this conclusion is under-motivated, and present an alternative account of case in Sakha that is entirely configurational. The central innovation lies in abandoning Chomsky’s (2000, 2001) assumptions regarding the interaction of case and agreement, and replacing them with Bobaljik’s (2008) and Preminger’s (2011) independently motivated alternative, nullifying the need to appeal to case assignment by functional heads in accounting for the Sakha facts. |
| first_indexed | 2024-09-23T12:08:39Z |
| format | Article |
| id | mit-1721.1/103323 |
| institution | Massachusetts Institute of Technology |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-09-23T12:08:39Z |
| publishDate | 2016 |
| publisher | Springer Netherlands |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | mit-1721.1/1033232022-10-01T08:28:37Z Case in Sakha: are two modalities really necessary? Levin, Theodore Preminger, Omer Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Linguistics and Philosophy Levin, Theodore Baker and Vinokurova (2010) argue that the distribution of morphologically observable case in Sakha (Turkic) requires a hybrid account, which involves recourse both to configurational rules of case assignment (Bittner and Hale 1996; Marantz 1991; Yip et al. 1987), and to case assignment by functional heads (Chomsky 2000, 2001). In this paper, we argue that this conclusion is under-motivated, and present an alternative account of case in Sakha that is entirely configurational. The central innovation lies in abandoning Chomsky’s (2000, 2001) assumptions regarding the interaction of case and agreement, and replacing them with Bobaljik’s (2008) and Preminger’s (2011) independently motivated alternative, nullifying the need to appeal to case assignment by functional heads in accounting for the Sakha facts. 2016-06-24T17:00:26Z 2016-06-24T17:00:26Z 2014-07 2012-09 2016-05-23T12:07:25Z Article http://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticle 0167-806X 1573-0859 http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/103323 Levin, Theodore, and Omer Preminger. “Case in Sakha: Are Two Modalities Really Necessary?” Nat Lang Linguist Theory 33, no. 1 (July 2, 2014): 231–250. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8936-5388 en http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11049-014-9250-z Natural Language & Linguistic Theory Article is made available in accordance with the publisher's policy and may be subject to US copyright law. Please refer to the publisher's site for terms of use. Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht application/pdf Springer Netherlands Springer Netherlands |
| spellingShingle | Levin, Theodore Preminger, Omer Case in Sakha: are two modalities really necessary? |
| title | Case in Sakha: are two modalities really necessary? |
| title_full | Case in Sakha: are two modalities really necessary? |
| title_fullStr | Case in Sakha: are two modalities really necessary? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Case in Sakha: are two modalities really necessary? |
| title_short | Case in Sakha: are two modalities really necessary? |
| title_sort | case in sakha are two modalities really necessary |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/103323 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8936-5388 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT levintheodore caseinsakhaaretwomodalitiesreallynecessary AT premingeromer caseinsakhaaretwomodalitiesreallynecessary |