Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T22:05:51.691Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Raising and long-distance agreement in Passamaquoddy: A unified analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 September 2018

PHILIP S. LESOURD
PHILIP S. LESOURD*
Affiliation:
Indiana University
*
Author’s address: Department of Anthropology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47401, USA[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article presents an analysis of two constructions in the Eastern Algonquian language Passamaquoddy in which the position of the object of a verb of cognition (‘know’, ‘believe’, ‘remember’, ‘wonder about’, ‘suspect’) is linked, either by apparent raising or by apparent long-distance agreement, to a position within a clausal complement to the verb. The latter position may be arbitrarily deeply embedded. The analysis developed here, formulated in the framework of Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar, demonstrates that the two constructions in fact represent alternative realizations of identical argument structures for the verbs in question and that the apparent long-distance dependencies involved can be accounted for in terms of a purely local principle of argument selection.

Keywords

Algonquian syntaxlong-distance agreementPassamaquoddyraising
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 55 , Issue 2 , 01 April 2019 , pp. 357 - 405
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

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.)

Footnotes

I owe a great debt to Passamaquoddy speakers Estelle Neptune, Wayne Newell, and especially the late Anna Harnois for their assistance with the research on which this article is based. An earlier version of this work was presented at the Twenty-first International Conference on Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Buffalo, NY, August 2014. I am grateful to the audience at that presentation for helpful comments. I have also profited from many useful suggestions by three anonymous Journal of Linguistics referees.

References

Bloomfield, Leonard. 1962. The Menomini language. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Bouma, Gosse. 1997. Valence alternation without lexical rules. In Landsbergen, Jan, Odijk, Jan, van Deemter, Kees & van Zanten, Gert Veldhuijzen (eds.), Computational linguistics in the Netherlands 1996: Papers from the Seventh CLIN Meeting, 25–40. Eindhoven: Center for User–System Interaction.Google Scholar
Branigan, Phil & MacKenzie, Marguerite. 2002. Altruism, Ā-movement, and object agreement in Innu-aimûn. Linguistic Inquiry 33.3, 385–407.Google Scholar
Bruening, Benjamin. 2001. Syntax at the edge: Cross-clausal phenomena and the syntax of Passamaquoddy.Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Bruening, Benjamin. 2004. Split coordination in Passamaquoddy. Ms., Department of Linguistics and Cognitive Science, University of Delaware.Google Scholar
Bruening, Benjamin. 2006. Discrepancies between projection and selection: Split coordination and raising to object in Passamaquoddy. Ms., Department of Linguistics and Cognitive Science, University of Delaware.Google Scholar
Bruening, Benjamin. 2009. Algonquian languages have A-movement and A-agreement. Linguistic Inquiry 40.3, 427–445.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1973. Conditions on transformations. In Anderson, Stephen R. & Kiparsky, Paul (eds.), A Festschrift for Morris Halle, 232–286. New York: Holt, Reinhart & Winston.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Martin, Roger, Michaels, David & Uriagereka, Juan (eds.), Step by step: Essays on Minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, 89–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Copestake, Ann, Flickinger, Dan, Pollard, Carl & Sag, Ivan A.. 2005. Minimal recursion semantics: An introduction. Research on Language and Computation 3.2–3, 281–332.Google Scholar
Dahlstrom, Amy. 1987. Discontinuous constituents in Fox. In Kroeber, Paul D. & Moore, Robert E. (eds.), Native American languages and grammatical typology, 53–73. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Dahlstrom, Amy. 1991. Plains Cree morphosyntax. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Dahlstrom, Amy. 1995. Topic, focus, and other word order problems in Algonquian: The Belcourt Lecture delivered before the University of Manitoba on 25 February 1994. Winnipeg: Voices of Rupert’s Land.Google Scholar
Dahlstrom, Amy. 1996. Morphology and syntax of the Fox (Mesquakie) language. Ms., University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Davis, Henry, Waldie, Ryan & Wojdak, Rachel. 2007. Condition C effects in Nuu-chah-nulth. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 52.1–2, 185–222.Google Scholar
Demirdache, Hamida. 1997. Condition C. In Bennis, Hans, Pica, Pierre & Rooryck, Johan (eds.), Atomism and binding, 51–87. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Francis, David A. & Leavitt, Robert M.. 2008. Peskotomuhkati Wolastoqewi latuwewakon/A Passamaquoddy–Maliseet dictionary. Orono, ME: University of Maine Press.Google Scholar
Frantz, Donald G. 1978. Copying from complements in Blackfoot. In Cook, Eung-Do & Kaye, Jonathan (eds.), Linguistic studies of native Canada, 90–109. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar
Fry, Brandon J. & Hamilton, Michael David. 2014. Long-distance agreement in Algonquian: Accounting for syntactic variation. Proceedings of the Fiftieth Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (CLS 50). Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society. [Available at http://artsites.uottawa.ca/brandonjfry/doc/CLS50_BJFMDH_CLSTemp.pdf]Google Scholar
Gabriel, Lorraine. 1979. Ehpit naka ’puwin/The woman and the body. Indian Township, ME: Wabnaki Bilingual Education Program.Google Scholar
Ginzburg, Jonathan & Sag, Ivan A.. 2000. Interrogative investigations: The form, meaning, and use of English interrogatives. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Johnson, David E. & Lappin, Shalom. 1999. Local constraints vs. economy. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information structure and sentence form: Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lasnik, Howard. 1989. On the necessity of Binding Conditions 1986. In Lasnik, Howard (ed.), Essays on anaphora (Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16), 149–167. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Leavitt, Robert M. 1996. Passamaquoddy-Maliseet. Munich: Lincom-Europa.Google Scholar
LeSourd, Philip S. 2013. On Split Coordination in Passamaquoddy. In Hele, Karl S. & Valentine, J. Randolph (eds.), Papers of the Forty-first Algonquian Conference, 120–142. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Massam, Diane. 1985. Case theory and the projection principle.Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
May, Robert. 1979. Must COMP-to-COMP movement be stipulated? Linguistic Inquiry 10.4, 719–725.Google Scholar
Miller, Philip H. & Sag, Ivan A.. 1997. French clitic movement without clitics or movement. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 15.3, 573–639.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Lewis. 1976. Espons/Raccoon. Indian Township, ME: Wabnaki Bilingual Education Program.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David & Torrego, Esther. 2001. T-to-C movement: Causes and consequences. In Kenstowicz, Michael (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language, 355–426. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pollard, Carl & Sag, Ivan A.. 1994. Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ritter, Elizabeth & Rosen, Sara Thomas. 2005. Agreement without A-positions: Another look at Algonquian. Lingusitic Inquiry 36.4, 648–660.Google Scholar
Sag, Ivan A., Wasow, Thomas & Bender, Emily M.. 2003. Syntactic theory: A formal introduction. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Linda. 1988. Asymmetric feature distribution in pronominal ‘coordinations’. In Barlow, Michael & Ferguson, Charles A. (eds.), Agreement in natural languages: Approaches, theories, and descriptions, 237–249. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Sherwood, David Fairchild. 1986. Passamaquoddy verb morphology (Canadian Ethnology Service Paper 105). Ottawa: National Museums of Canada.Google Scholar