Abstract
According to Chomsky’s Labeling Algorithm the merger of two phrases, i.e., {XP, YP}, is labeled either via feature sharing between the two elements or by ignoring the lower copies of movement chains. It is not immediately clear, within this approach, how adjunction structures such as {aP, nP} are to be labeled. In those languages where adjectives show concord with nouns in φ features, the shared features may provide the label.This option is not available for non-concord languages, however. In this paper, we focus on the labeling of {aP, nP} in Turkish, a non-concord language. We claim that the categorizing n0 head in Turkish lacks grammatical features, as a result of which aP fails to find valued instances of its unvalued features. In the absence of feature sharing, aP is marked as a Spell-Out domain, and {aP, nP} is labeled as nP as soon as aP is sent to the interfaces. Since aP in Turkish is a Spell-Out domain, the left-branch extraction of adjectives (i.e., aP movement) is not possible. Moreover, the lack of any grammatical features on n0 in Turkish accounts for the availability of suspension of the plural morpheme.
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Language and Linguistics
Reference68 articles.
1. Joseph, Andrew, and Predolac, Esra (2015). Proceedings of the 9th Workshop on Altaic Formal Linguistics, MITWPL.
2. Suspended affixation with derivational suffixes and lexical integrity;Mediterranean Morphology Meetings,2016
3. Locality constraints on the interpretation of the roots: The case of Hebrew denominal verbs;Natural Language and Linguistic Theory,2003
4. Gündoğdu, Songül, Taghipour, Sahar, and Peters, Andrew (2021). Proceedings of Tu+6, Linguistic Society of America.
5. Baker, Mark (2008). The Syntax of Agreement and Concord, CUP.