A robust generalization about coordinate structures is that X and Y may be conjoined in position P if and only if each of X and Y alone may occur in P. In particular, different grammatical categories (e.g., the NP a Republican and the AdjP proud of it ) may be coordinated in a position that allows for either (e.g., Pat is [a Republican and proud of it] ; Sag et al. 1985). Apparent violations of this generalization are sometimes taken as evidence for an asymmetric structure of coordination, where a single conjunct determines categorial features of the coordinate structure. Bruening and Al Khalaf 2020 and Bruening 2023 posit that one such violation involves coordination of AdvPs and AdjPs in prenominal positions that apparently do not allow for AdvPs alone; e.g., The [Once and Future] King (a book title) is grammatical, while the once king alone is claimed either to be ungrammatical or to involve a hypothetical compound once king that only a minority of English speakers accept. On the basis of rich attested data and acceptability judgment experiments, we demonstrate that adverbs such as once , now , soon , and twice combine with nouns in regular syntax, rather than via hypothetical compound forming processes. Hence, constructions exemplified by The Once and Future King do not violate the discussed generalization and do not provide an argument against the symmetric nature of coordination.

Languages with applicative morphology vary in whether their applied arguments can stack, or “recurse.” Focusing primarily on Bantu languages, I argue that the availability of applicative recursion in a given language depends on abstract nominal licensing—in particular, on whether the applicative heads responsible for introducing applied arguments are nominal licensers. Applicative recursion therefore provides a novel diagnostic for the presence of abstract nominal licensing, which is argued to be driven not by Case but by ϕ-feature checking. The proposed approach to applicative recursion provides evidence for the role of abstract licensing in Bantu languages and has implications for approaches to double object symmetry as well as for recursion in causatives.

We consider the typology of attested Ā-extraction asymmetries between core argument DPs and argue that an Ā-probe can be required to specifically target the closest DP. Such an Ā-probe specification is part of Aldridge’s ( 2004 , 2008 ) influential analysis of syntactically ergative extraction restrictions, but has not been widely adopted outside of work on ergative languages. We argue that restricted probing of this form underlies subject-only extraction behaviors in a number of nonergative languages, including some of those in Keenan and Comrie’s (1977) typology of relativization asymmetries. We describe the behaviors of such probes in detail and relate them to other probe-goal behaviors in recent work on composite A /Ā probes.

Assuming Grosu’s (1973) decomposition of Ross’s (1967) Coordinate Structure Constraint into the Conjunct Constraint and the Element Constraint, this article searches for a principled account for the Conjunct Constraint, rebaptized as the Coordinand Constraint. It defends the proposal that different families of effects of the Coordinand Constraint are related to different factors: (a) the lexical information provided by a coordinator, (b) the economy of syntactic displacement operations, and (c) an interface condition prohibiting self-coordination. These three factors are not primitive, but derive from Chomsky’s (1991) Least Effort Principle. Therefore, the Coordinand Constraint is deduced, ultimately, from the Least Effort Principle.

In this article, I argue that when movement maps onto a λ-bound variable (a “trace”), that variable must be of an individual semantic type, such as type e or type d . Thus, even though natural language has expressions of higher types, these expressions cannot be represented as traces. When an individual-type trace would not be able to semantically compose in the launching site of movement, the moved element is forced to syntactically reconstruct. The motivation for this constraint on traces comes from a detailed investigation of how DPs in their different semantic guises—entities, properties, and generalized quantifiers—are interpreted when they move. I then argue that strong definite descriptions exhibit the same type-based restriction—namely, they cannot occur in higher-type positions, which I take as evidence for the theory that traces are definite descriptions.

We explore the proposal in Charnavel 2019, 2020 that nonlocal anaphor binding is only apparent and reduces to local binding by a silent pronominal element— pro log —as the subject of a logophoric operator OP LOG in the left periphery of the anaphor’s local domain. Like any pronominal, pro log can be valued by a distant antecedent and should license split antecedents and partial binding for the anaphor it binds. We show that ϕ-deficient anaphors in different language families allow nonlocal binding, while disallowing split antecedents and partial binding, contra the main hypothesis of the pro log approach. We describe a Multiple Agree–based analysis that accounts for the patterns observed.

We present an account of why disjoint reference effects obtain in verbal but not in adjectival passives. Passives in child language are independently argued to always be adjectival, which allows us to use a natural experiment in child grammar that is not available in the adult grammar: predicting the lack of a disjoint reference effect in even those passives that prima facie seem verbal. We conduct our discussion against the background of the difference between adjectival and verbal passives in general. Our account is based on (grammatical) Implicature Theory. Since the initiator in the semantic representation of adjectival passives stays at a kind level, it cannot introduce a discourse referent, hence cannot trigger a disjointness implicature, unlike the initiator in verbal passives (Gehrke 2013, 2015). We show in two experiments that children’s passives do not exhibit disjoint reference, unlike adults’ verbal passives, even though children have no trouble computing disjointness implicatures elsewhere. Our contribution thus confirms with a novel kind of evidence the syntactic nature of young children’s difficulty with verbal passives. It offers a new perspective on the external argument difference between verbal and adjectival passives based on Reinhart’s (2016) Theta System, while also offering additional evidence for a grammatical, rather than general pragmatic, theory of implicatures.

Within the typology of embedded pronouns, there are languages that allow for non–first person pronouns to apparently control first person agreement morphology when in certain embedded contexts. This type of agreement displays some degree of optionality: it is also possible for the pronoun to control the expected agreement morphology given the pronoun’s own overt morphological features. This squib provides new data from the Dravidian language Telugu showing that when the embedded pronoun controls agreement on two separate targets, agreement may be uniform across the two targets or the two targets can mismatch in one direction, but crucially not the other. I show how this paradigm can be accounted for using the assumptions that the pronouns in question are similar to so-called hybrid nouns and that agreement features are restricted in principled ways.

Many languages have words that can be interpreted either as question words or as existentials. We call such words quexistentials . It has been claimed in the literature (e.g., Haida 2007 ) that, across languages, quexistentials are (a) always focused on their interrogative interpretation and (b) never focused on their existential interpretation. We refer to this as the quexistential-focus biconditional . The article makes two contributions. The first is that we offer a possible explanation for one direction of the biconditional: the fact that quexistentials are generally contrastively focused on their interrogative use. We argue that this should be seen as a particular instance of an even more general fact—namely, that interrogative words (quexistential or not) are always contrastively focused—and propose an account for this fact. The second contribution of the article concerns the other direction of the biconditional. We present evidence that, at least at face value, suggests that focus on a quexistential does not necessarily preclude an existential interpretation. Specifically, we show that it is possible for Dutch wat to be interpreted existentially even when it is focused. We attempt to explain this phenomenon.

This article demonstrates that abessive PPs impose the same type of definiteness restriction on their complements that existential predicates impose on their subjects. The definiteness effect (DE) in PPs is accounted for in the framework of the DE theory of Szabolcsi ( 1986a , b , 1992 ), who derives the DE from the incompatibility of a presuppositional subject and a logical predicate of existence that is present in a wide class of predicates (including verbs meaning ‘(cause to) come to exist in a particular fashion’ and nominal predicates meaning ‘(non)existence at a particular location’). The analysis points out this predicate of existence in the small clause complements of abessive Ps.

Bruening and Al Khalaf (2020) deny the possibility of coordination of unlike categories. They use three mechanisms to reanalyze such coordination as involving same categories: conjunction reduction, super-categories, and empty heads. We show that their proposal leaves many cases of unlike category coordination unaccounted for, and we point out various methodological, technical, and empirical problems that it faces. We conclude that the so-called Law of the Coordination of Likes is a myth. Instead, all conjuncts must satisfy any external restrictions on the syntactic position they occupy. Such restrictions may be rigid, resulting in categorial sameness, but when they are underspecified or disjunctive, category “mismatches” may arise.

It is claimed in Key 2013 that Turkish, despite allowing multiple causative morphemes on a single complex verb, does not in fact allow causative recursion, where one causing event is embedded by another causing event. This squib argues against Key’s conclusion, using evidence from eventhood diagnostics to show that “double” causatives in Turkish encode two distinct, syntactically represented causing events in addition to the caused event. Thus, Turkish causatives are indeed recursive. This finding supports approaches to productive affixal causatives that allow recursive embedding of the same category over approaches that rely on a fixed functional hierarchy.

This article presents a new perspective on the derivational source for transitive verbs of possession. These are commonly postulated to be derived from a preposition expressing possession by incorporation of the preposition into an auxiliary. I reframe the contrast between prepositional and verbal expression of possession as an opposition between dependent and head marking of the possession relation, implemented syntactically as marking of either the specifier or the head of the projection encoding the possession relation. This conclusion is inferred from an investigation of Syrian Arabic showing that morphemes expressing possession alternate between a prepositional and a verbal use, but the verbal use does not involve incorporation of functional material. Evidence is presented that languages that show such incorporation, that is, where possession is expressed by a term of the form Aux+P, have passed through a diachronic stage similar to contemporary Syrian, where P functions as a verb in its own right. These considerations support the conclusion that transitive verbs of possession are derived not by preposition incorporation but by reanalysis of dependent marking as head marking, which may or may not feed incorporation.

We discuss remarkable constructions in Icelandic that have the distributive pronoun hvor ‘each’ in common: the reciprocal construction hvor annar ‘each other’, and the distributive construction hvor sinn ‘each their’, which also comes in a sinn hvor ‘their each’ version. We provide the first detailed description of these constructions, in particular their case and word order properties, which raise recalcitrant puzzles, and then we discuss what they say about the syntax of nonfinite verbs. Specifically, the word order and case properties of these constructions indicate that nonfinite verbs in Icelandic undergo short verb movement within the verb phrase. That is, the evidence indicates that the leftmost element in these constructions, alternatively hvor or sinn , originates inside an object DP and moves, by what we call e-raising, to the base position of an antecedent with which it agrees, before being stranded by that very antecedent. Nevertheless, the verb appears to the left of this element, even when it is a nonfinite verb, showing that it must undergo short movement to the left of Spec,vP. In addition, the interaction of e-raising and case has important consequences for Case theory, as it indicates that case agreement and case marking take place in PF.

Person systems convey the roles entities play in the context of speech (e.g., speaker, addressee). As with other linguistic category systems, not all ways of partitioning the person space are equally likely crosslinguistically. Different theories have been proposed to constrain the set of possible person partitions that humans can represent, explaining their typological distribution. This article introduces an artificial language learning methodology to investigate the existence of universal constraints on person systems. We report the results of three experiments that inform these theoretical approaches by generating behavioral evidence for the impact of constraints on the learnability of different person partitions. Our findings constitute the first experimental evidence for learnability differences in this domain.

This article develops a new approach to a family of hierarchy-effect-inducing configurations, with a focus on Person Case Constraint effects, dative-nominative configurations, and copula constructions. The main line of approach in the recent literature is to attribute these effects to failures of ϕ-Agree or, more specifically, failures of nominal licensing or case checking. We propose that the problem in these configurations is unrelated to nominal licensing, but is instead the result of a probe participating in more than one Agree dependency, a configuration we refer to as feature gluttony . Feature gluttony does not in and of itself lead to ungrammaticality; rather, it can create irresolvably conflicting requirements for subsequent operations. We argue that in the case of clitic configurations, a probe that agrees with more than one DP creates an intervention problem for clitic doubling. In violations involving morphological agreement, gluttony in features may result in a configuration with no available morphological output.

This squib argues that adverbs can act as primary predicates. In Polish, a relatively large class of adverbs are frequently used in predicative constructions when the subject of predication is an InfP (infinitival phrase) or a CP referring to abstract objects: event kinds or facts. This requirement of a purely verbal rather than nominal subject of predication is the main difference between predicative adverbs and predicative adjectives, explaining contrasts between their syntactic behavior in extraction and coordination. Predicative adverbs usually express attitudes toward event kinds or facts and often combine with dative experiencers; in the case of InfP subjects, dative experiencers obligatorily control the subject.

It has been debated in phonological literature whether word stress should be modeled using metrical grids or feet and how its directionality is assigned. In this article, we discuss new data from Ukrainian, which has a hybrid metrical system with unpredictable lexical stress and grammatical iterative secondary stress. We demonstrate that Ukrainian poses a challenge for current metrical theories relying on gradient alignment and propose an analysis based on categorical alignment coupled with a rhythmic licensing constraint mandating that lapses are located near the main stress (L APSE - AT -P EAK ). We argue that L APSE - AT -P EAK is required regardless of the stress representations (feet or grids) assumed.

Pronominal paradigms in Philippine-type Austronesian languages show a robust and curious gap: in transitive clauses, pivot arguments and nonpivot agents may have bound pronominal forms, appearing as second-position clitics, but pronominal nonpivot themes must be full, free pronouns. This gap is instructive regarding the orga-nization of the lower phase edge. As cliticization involves a syntactic dependency between the host and argument position and all syntactic dependencies are constrained by phases, the gap is explained if pivots and nonpivot agents are specifiers of the phase head, making them the only DPs accessible for operations from outside of the lower phase.

This article develops an analysis of Gender whereby D-gender enters grammar as a feature variable (edge linker), without a fixed value, either probing n or scanning the context for a value. Only the latter strategy is available in pronominal gender languages such as English, as they lack n-gender, whereas both strategies are applicable in n-gender languages, variably so for variable DPs, depending on their nP content and on context. The article adopts the idea that context linking does not merely involve pragmatic context scanning but also has a syntactic side to it, edge computation, whereby context-scanned and recycled features are computed at the phase edge in relation to CP-internal elements, via edge linkers. The context-linking approach has been previously launched for Tense and Person. This article extends it to Gender, thereby generalizing over context-sensitive grammatical categories and developing a novel view of the overall architecture of grammar.