Mixed gender agreement in the case of Russian hybrid nouns

Olga Steriopolo 1
  • 1 , Berlin

Abstract

This work presents a study of mixed gender agreement in the case of hybrid nouns in Russian. Examination of a number of approaches which seek to account for the category “gender” shows that these approaches are problematic when trying to explain mixed gender agreement in hybrid nouns. It is proposed here that the multiple-layer DP-hypothesis by Zamparelli (1995 and subsequent work) is best suited to analyze the Russian data. However, this rests on the crucial assumption that Russian demonstratives can occupy multiple positions within the DP, something that must still be verified by future work.

Falls das inline PDF nicht korrekt dargestellt ist, können Sie das PDF hier herunterladen.

  • Abney, S. P. (1987). The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect. (Doctoral dissertation). Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.

  • Cheng, L. L.-S., Heycock, C., and Zamparelli, R. (2017). Two levels for definiteness. In M. Erlewine (Ed.), Proceedings of GLOW in Asia XI. Vol. 1 (pp. 79-93). Cambridge, MA: MIT.

  • Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by phase. In M. Kenstowicz (Ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language (pp. 1-52).Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Corbett, G. (1979). The agreement hierarchy. Journal of Linguistics, 15(2), 203-224.

  • Corbett, G. (2006). Agreement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Kramer, R. (2015). The morphosyntax of gender. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Kučerová, I. (forthcoming). φ-features at the syntax-semantics interface: Evidence from nominal inflection. Linguistic Inquiry.

  • Matushansky, O. (2013). Gender confusion. In L. Cheng and N. Corver (Eds.), Diagnosing syntax (pp. 271-94). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Nesset, T. (2001). How pervasive are sexist ideologies in grammar? In R. Dirven, B. Hawkins, and E. Sandikcioglu (Eds.), Language & ideology: Cognitive theoretical approaches (pp. 197-227). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

  • Pereltsvaig, A. (2006). Small nominals. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 24(2), 433-500.

  • Pesetsky, D. (2013). What is to be done? Paper presented at the 87th annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Boston, January 4.

  • Postal, P. (1969). On so-called pronouns in English. In R. Jacobs and P. Rosenbaum (Eds.), Readings in English transformational grammar (pp. 12-25). Waltham, MA: Ginn.

  • Sauerland, U. (2004). A comprehensive semantics for agreement. Handout from the Phi-Workshop, McGill University, Montreal, August 27.

  • Sauerland, U. (2009). The presuppositional approach to Phi-features. (Unpublished manuscript). ZAS, Berlin.

  • Smith, P. (2015). Feature mismatches: Consequences for syntax, morphology, and semantics. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Connecticut, Storrs.

  • Steriopolo, O., and Wiltschko, M. (2010). Distributed GENDER hypothesis. In G. Zybatow, P. Dudchuk, S. Minor, and E. Pshehotskaya (Eds.), Formal studies in Slavic linguistics (pp. 155-172). New York: Peter Lang.

  • Steriopolo, O. (2017). Nominalizing evaluative suffixes in Russian: The interaction of declension class, gender, and animacy. Poljarnyj vestnik: Norwegian Journal of Slavic Studies, 20, 18-44.

  • Steriopolo, O. (2018). Morphosyntax of gender in Russian sex-differentiable nouns. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 26(1), 307-335.

  • Volynec, T. (2005). Sovremennyj russkij jazyk. Kategorija roda imeni suščestvitel’nogo [Contemporary Russian: The gender of nouns]. Minsk: Belarusian State University, Philology, Russian Language Department.

  • Wurmbrand, S. (2017). Formal and semantic agreement in syntax: A dual feature approach. In J. Emonds and M. Janebová (Eds.), Proceedings of the Olomouc Linguistics Colloquium 2016: Language use and linguistic structure (pp. 19-36). Olomouc: Palacký University.

  • Zamparelli, R. (1995). Layers in the determiner phrase. (Doctoral dissertation). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester.

OPEN ACCESS

Zeitschrift + Hefte

Suche