Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T03:14:25.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

13 - Agreement

from Part 3 - Syntax

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2024

Danko Šipka
Affiliation:
Arizona State University
Wayles Browne
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Get access

Summary

The present chapter discusses agreement in Slavic languages. Slavic languages are interesting because of their canonical subject-verb agreement, which offers a direct insight into this core syntactic relation (syntactic agreement). Additionally, Slavic languages feature well-documented agreement alternations, which suggest involvement of other language components in agreement (semantic and discourse agreement). Finally, strictly local agreement, often devoid of alternations, operating inside the nominal phrase commands theoretical interest.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akhutina, T., Kurgansky, A., Polinsky, M., & Bates, E. (1999). Processing of grammatical gender in a three-gender system: Experimental evidence from Russian. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 28, 695713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alsina, A. & Arsenijević, B. (2012). The two faces of agreement. Language, 88(2), 388390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arsenijević, B. (2021). No gender in ‘gender agreement’: On declension classes and gender in Serbo-Croatian. Balcania et Slavia, 1(1), 1146.Google Scholar
Arsenijević, B. & Mitić, I. (2016a). Effect of animacy and agentivity on the processing of agreement in Serbo-Croatian. In Halupka-Rešetar, S. & Martínez-Ferreiro, S., eds., Studies in Languages and Mind, Selected Papers from Third Novi Sad Workshop on Psycholinguistics, Neurolinguistic and Clinical Linguistic Research, Novi Sad: Faculty of Philosophy, pp. 4177.Google Scholar
Arsenijević, B. & Mitić, I. (2016b). On the (in)dependence of gender with respect to number in agreement with coordinated subjects: An experimental study. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 24, 4169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Badecker, W. & Kuminiak, F. (2007). Morphology, agreement and working memory retrieval in sentence production: Evidence from gender and case in Slovak. Journal of Memory and Language, 56, 6585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailyn, J. F. & Nevins, A. (2008). Russian genitive plurals are impostors. In Bachrach, A. & Nevins, A., eds., Inflectional Identity, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 237270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bošković, Ž. (2006). Case and agreement with genitive of quantification in Russian. In Boeckx, C., ed., Agreement Systems, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 99121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bošković, Ž. (2009). Unifying first and last conjunct agreement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 27(3), 455496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Browne, W. (1993). Serbo-Croat. In Comrie, B. and Corbett, G. G., eds., The Slavonic Languages, London & New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 306387.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (2000). New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by phase. In Kenstowicz, M, ed., Ken Hale: A Life in Language, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 152.Google Scholar
Citko, B. (2004). Agreement asymmetries in coordinate structures. In Arnaudova, O., Browne, W., Rivero, M. L., & Stojanović, D., eds., Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 12. The Ottawa Meeting 2003, Ann Arbor, MI: Slavic Publications, pp. 91108.Google Scholar
Citko, B. (2018). Complementizer agreement with coordinated subjects in Polish. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 3(1), 124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, G. G. (1979). The agreement hierarchy. Journal of Linguistics, 15, 203224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, G. G. (1983). Hierarchies, Targets and Controllers: Agreement Patterns in Slavic, London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Corbett, G. G. (1991). Gender, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, G. G. (2000). Number, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, G. G. (2006). Agreement, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Driemel, I. & Stojković, J. (2019). How to agree with a QNP. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 4(1), 25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franks, S. (1994). Parametric properties of numeral phrases in Slavic. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 12, 570649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franks, S. (1995). Parameters of Slavic Morphosyntax, New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franks, S. & Willer-Gold, J. (2014). Agreement strategies with conjoined subjects in Croatian. In Jaworski, S. & Witkoś, J., eds., New Insights into Slavic Linguistics, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 91115.Google Scholar
Kučerová, I. (2018). On the lack of φ-feature resolution in DP coordinations: Evidence from Czech. In Lenertová, D., Meyer, R., Šimík, R., & Szucsich, L., eds., Advances in Formal Slavic Linguistics 2016, Berlin: Language Science Press, pp. 169191.Google Scholar
Lorimor, H., Bock, K., Zalkind, E., Sheyman, A., & Beard, R. (2008). Agreement and attraction in Russian. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 769799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyskawa, P. (2020). The structure of Polish numerically-quantified expressions. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 5(1), 3137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madariaga, N. & Igartua, I. (2017). Idiosyncratic (dis)agreement patterns: The structure and diachrony of Russian paucal subjects. Scando-Slavica, 63(2), 99132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marušič, F. & Nevins, A. (2010). Two types of neuter: Closest-conjunct agreement in the presence of ‘5&ups’. In Browne, W., Cooper, A., Fisher, A., Kesici, E., Predolac, N., & Zec, D., eds., Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 18. The Second Cornell Meeting, 2009, Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications, pp. 301317.Google Scholar
Marušič, F., Nevins, A., & Badecker, B. (2015). The grammars of conjunction agreement in Slovenian. Syntax, 18(1), 3977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mirković, J. & Macdonald, M. C. (2013). When singular and plural are both grammatical: Semantic and morphophonological effects in agreement. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(3), 277298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mitić, I. & Arsenijević, B. (2019). Plural conjuncts and syncretism facilitate gender agreement in Serbo-Croatian: Experimental evidence. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 942. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00942.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murphy, A. & Puškar, Z. (2018). Closest conjunct agreement is an illusion: Evidence from gender agreement in Serbo-Croatian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 36, 12071261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereltsvaig, A. (2006). Small nominals. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 24(2), 433500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pesetsky, D. (1982). Paths and Categories. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Prażmowska, A. (2016). Full agreement with coordinate subjects in Polish: Gender resolution rules revisited. Roczniki Humanistyczne, 64(11), 7186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puškar, Z. (2018). Interactions of gender and number agreement: Evidence from Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian. Syntax, 21(3), 257318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ristić, B., Molinaro, N., & Mancini, S. (2016). Agreement attraction in Serbian: Decomposing markedness. The Mental Lexicon, 11(2), 242276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sekerina, I. A. (2012). The effect of grammatical gender in Russian spoken-word recognition. In Makarova, V., ed., Russian Language Studies in North America. New Perspectives in Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, New York, NY: Anthem Press, pp. 107132.Google Scholar
Sekerina, I. A. (2017). Slavic psycholinguistics in the 21st century. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 25(2), 463487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slioussar, N. & Malko, A. (2016). Gender agreement attraction in Russian: Production and comprehension evidence. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1651. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01651.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steriopolo, O. (2018). Morphosyntax of gender in Russian sex-differentiable nouns. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 26(2), 307336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stroińska, M. (1992). Numerals and agreement in Polish. Canadian Slavonic Papers, Revue Canadienne des Slavistes, 34(4), 429444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swan, O. (2015). Polish gender, subgender, and quasi-gender. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 23(1), 83122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wechsler, S. & Zlatić, L. (2003). The Many Faces of Agreement. Morphology, Syntax, Semantics, and Discourse Factors in Serbo-Croatian Agreement, Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Willer-Gold, J., Arsenijević, B., Batinić, M., Čordalija, N., Kresić, M., Leko, N., Marušič, L., Milićev, T., Milićević, N., Mitić, I., Nevins, A., Peti-Stantić, A., Stanković, B., Šuligoj, T., & Tušek, J. (2016). Conjunct agreement and gender in South Slavic: From theory to experiments to theory. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 24(1), 187224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willer-Gold, J., Arsenijević, B., Batinić, M., Becker, M., Čordalija, N., Kresić, M., Leko, N., Marušič, F. L., Milićev, T., Milićević, N., Mitić, I., Peti-Stantić, A., Stanković, B., Šuligoj, T., Tušek, J., & Nevins, A. (2018). When linearity prevails over hierarchy in syntax. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America PNAS, 115(3), 495500.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Agreement
  • Edited by Danko Šipka, Arizona State University, Wayles Browne, Cornell University, New York
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Slavic Linguistics
  • Online publication: 16 May 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108973021.014
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Agreement
  • Edited by Danko Šipka, Arizona State University, Wayles Browne, Cornell University, New York
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Slavic Linguistics
  • Online publication: 16 May 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108973021.014
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Agreement
  • Edited by Danko Šipka, Arizona State University, Wayles Browne, Cornell University, New York
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Slavic Linguistics
  • Online publication: 16 May 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108973021.014
Available formats
×