Affiliation:
1. University of Connecticut
Abstract
This paper examines the distribution and properties of agreement-drop constructions in Singlish, which are distinguished by the absence of overt subject agreement morphology. I demonstrate that these constructions are distinct from their minimally different fully-agreeing counterparts in that they (i) bleed object topicalisation, (ii) block the extraction of adjuncts which are lower in the structure, (iii) are scopally frozen, (iv) are unable to be embedded under regret-class predicates, and (v) impose a specificity condition on their subjects. I argue that these properties rule out prior characterisations of the alternation as the output of free variation in the PF. On the basis that agreement-drop constructions in Singlish consistently parallels topicalisation structures cross-linguistically, I sketch a syntactic account that unifies the two constructions within the syntax.
Publisher
Open Library of the Humanities
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Language and Linguistics
Reference76 articles.
1. Arends, Jacques & Muijsken, Pieter & Smith, Norval (eds.). 1994. Pidgins and creoles: An introduction. John Benjamins. https://www.jbe-platform.com/content/books/9789027299505. DOI: 10.1075/cll.15
2. Is topic a root phenomenon?;Bianchi, ValentinaFrascarelli, Mara;Iberia,2010
3. Bobaljik, Jonathan David & Jonas, Dianne. 1996. Subject positions and the roles of tp. Linguistic Inquiry 27(2). 195–236. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4178934.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献