Cardinal numerals and complex numerals as specifiers
-
Jacek Witkoś
und
Dominika Dziubała-Szrejbrowska
Abstract
The goal of this study is to argue for a more widespread application of a uniform representation of Numeral Noun Constructions (NNCs) which captures both patterns with higher numerals (≥5, NumH) agreeing in case with the modified noun (case matching pattern) or bearing a distinct case from a noun (case independence pattern) in Polish and in other languages. Our account draws on the analysis of cardinal numerals in Bailyn (2004) in which both agreeing and non-agreeing numerals are placed within the projection (QP) of the functional head FQ, but contrary to Bailyn (2004), it advocates a predominant cardinal-as-specifier representation of NNCc and complex NNCs in Polish, a language whose numeral/quantificational system is fairly challenging. We propose that many cases discussed in Bošković (2006), Ionin and Matushansky (2006), Kayne (2010), Danon (2012), Norris (2014) and Willim (2015) may have a uniform representation. In short, both the case matching and the case independence patterns are represented as equivalent to the cardinal-as-specifier representation. This serves to preserve derivational and structure building transparency and avoids the issue of look-ahead and the No Tampering ban (Chomsky 2000, 2001; Stepanov 2001, 2007). In the spirit of Burzio’s (1986) Generalization we submit that the case valuation capacity of FQ is conditioned directly by an independent case (feature) of NumP occupying FQ’s specifier position. Our proposal receives further support from recent work on the structure of complex numerals in Di Sciullo (2015, 2017) and Kayne (2016), where their component parts are combined in asymmetric structures involving silent functional projections.
References
Babby, L. 1986. “The locus of case assignment and the direction of percolation”. In: Brecht, R. and J. Levine (eds.), Case in Slavic Columbus, OH: Slavica Publishers. 91–117.Suche in Google Scholar
Babby, L. 1987. “Case, prequantifiers, and discontinuous agreement in Russian”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 5. 91–138.10.1007/BF00161869Suche in Google Scholar
Bailyn, J.F. 2004. “The case of Q”. In: Arnaudova, O. (ed.), Proceedings of Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Ottawa Meeting 2003 Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications. 1–36.Suche in Google Scholar
Bondaruk, A. 2013. Copular clauses in English and Polish. Structure, derivation and interpretation Lublin: KUL.Suche in Google Scholar
Bošković, Ž. 2006. “Case and agreement with genitive of quantification in Russian”. In: Boeckx, C. (ed.), Agreement systems Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 99–120.10.1075/la.92.07bosSuche in Google Scholar
Burzio, L. 1986. Italian syntax Dordrecht: Reidel.10.1007/978-94-009-4522-7Suche in Google Scholar
Caha, P. 2009. Nanosyntax of case. (PhD dissertation, University of Tromsø.Suche in Google Scholar
Caha, P. 2010. The parameters of case marking and Spell-Out driven movement. <http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/001026> (accessed 15 Feb 2011).Suche in Google Scholar
Caha, P. 2013. Czech numerals and no bundling. <http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/001723> (accessed 10 Feb 2013).Suche in Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 1995. The Minimalist Program Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 2000. Minimalist inquiries In: Martin, M., D. Michaels, J. Uriagereka and S.J. Keyser (eds.), Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 89–156.Suche in Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 2001. “Derivation by phase”. In: Kenstowicz, M. (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 1–52.Suche in Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 2013. “Problems of projection”. Lingua 130. 33–49.10.1075/la.223.01choSuche in Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 2015. “Problems of projection: Extensions”. In: Di Domenico, E., C. Hamann and S. Matteini (eds.), Structures, strategies and beyond: Studies in honor of Adriana Belletti Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1–16.Suche in Google Scholar
Chomsky, N., A. Gallego and D. Ott. 2017. Generative Grammar and the faculty of language: insights, questions and challenges. (Ms., MIT.)Suche in Google Scholar
Cinque, G. 2005. “Deriving Greenberg’s Universal 20 and its exceptions”. Linguistic Inquiry 36. 315–332.10.1162/0024389054396917Suche in Google Scholar
Cinque, G. 2010. The syntax of adjectives: a comparative study Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262014168.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Collins, C. 2007. “Home sweet home”. NYU Working Papers in Linguistics 1. 1–27.Suche in Google Scholar
Corver, N. and J. Zwarts. 2006. “Prepositional numerals”. Lingua 116(6). 811–835.10.1016/j.lingua.2005.03.008Suche in Google Scholar
Danon, G. 2012. “Two structures for numeral-noun constructions”. Lingua 122. 1282–1307.10.1016/j.lingua.2012.07.003Suche in Google Scholar
Di Sciullo, A.M. 2015. “On the domain specificity of the human language faculty and the effects of principles of computational efficiency: contrasting language and mathematics”. Revista Linguistica 11(1). 28–56.Suche in Google Scholar
Di Sciullo, A.M. 2017. “Asymmetry and the language faculty”. Revista Linguistica 13(2). 88–107.10.31513/linguistica.2017.v13n2a14030Suche in Google Scholar
Franks, S. 1994. “Parametric properties of numeral phrases in Slavic”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 12. 597–674.10.1007/BF00992929Suche in Google Scholar
Franks, S. 1995. Parameters of Slavic morphosyntax New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195089707.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Franks, S. 2002. “A Jakobsonian feature based analysis of the Slavic Numeric Quantifier Genitive”. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 10. 141–181.Suche in Google Scholar
Giusti G. and N. Leko. 2004. “The categorial status of quantity expressions”. Lingvistički Vidici 34(5). 121–183.Suche in Google Scholar
Ionin, T. and O. Matushansky. 2006. “The composition of complex cardinals”. Journal of Semantics 23. 315–360.10.1093/jos/ffl006Suche in Google Scholar
Kayne, K. 2010. “A note on the syntax of numerical bases”. In: Kayne, R., Comparisons and contrasts Oxford: Oxford University Press. 57–72.Suche in Google Scholar
Kayne, R. 2016. Some thoughts on One and Two and other numerals. (Ms., New York University.)Suche in Google Scholar
Klemensiewicz, Z., T. Lehr-Spławiński and S. Urbańczyk. 1965. Gramatyka historyczna języka polskiegoi [A historical grammar of Polish]. Warsaw: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.Suche in Google Scholar
Klockmann, H. 2015. “What are categories? Adjective-like and noun-like semi-lexical numerals in Polish”. In: Błaszczak, J., D. Klimek-Jankowska and K. Migdalski (eds.), How categorical are categories? New approaches to the old questions of Noun, Verb and Adjective Boston: Walter de Gruyter. 236–271.Suche in Google Scholar
Klockmann, 2017. The design of semi-lexicality: Evidence from Case and Agreement in the nominal domain. (PhD dissertation, LOT, the Netherlands.)Suche in Google Scholar
Landau, I. 2008. “Two routes of control: evidence from case transmission in Russian”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26(4). 877–924.10.1007/s11049-008-9054-0Suche in Google Scholar
Łoś, J. 1927. Gramatyka polskaCzęść 3. Odmiennia (fleksja) historyczna) [A Polish grammar. Part 3. Historical inflection]. Lwów: Wydawnictwo Zakładu Narodowego Imienia Ossolińskich.Suche in Google Scholar
Miechowicz-Mathiasen, K. 2014. “Numeralization of numeral nouns in Polish”. In: Veselovská, L. and M. Janebová (eds.), Nominal structures: All in complex DPs Olomouc: Palackỳ University. 48–68.Suche in Google Scholar
Norris, M. 2014. A theory of nominal concord. (PhD dissertation, University of California, Santa Cruz.)Suche in Google Scholar
Pereltsvaig, A. 2006. “Small nominals”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 24. 433–500.10.1007/s11049-005-3820-zSuche in Google Scholar
Pereltsvaig, A. 2007. “The universality of DP: A view from Russian”. Studia linguistica 61(1). 59–94.10.1111/j.1467-9582.2007.00129.xSuche in Google Scholar
Pesetsky, D. 1982. Paths and categories. (PhD dissertation, MIT.)Suche in Google Scholar
Pesetsky, D. 2013. Russian case morphology and the syntactic categories Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262019729.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Pesetsky, D. and E. Torrego. 2001. “T-to-C movement: Causes and consequences”. In: Kenstowicz, M. (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 355–426.Suche in Google Scholar
Pesetsky, D. and E. Torrego. “2007. The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features”. In: Karimi, S., V. Samiian and W. Wilkins (eds.), Phasal and clausal architecture: Syntactic derivation and interpretation Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 262–294.10.1075/la.101.14pesSuche in Google Scholar
Przepiórkowski, A. 1999. Case Assignment and the complement-adjunct dichotomy: A non-configurational constraint-based approach. (PhD dissertation, Universität Tübingen.)Suche in Google Scholar
Przepiórkowski, A. 2004. “O wartości przypadka podmiotów liczebnikowych”. Bulletin de la société polonaise de linguistique LX. 133–143.Suche in Google Scholar
Przepiórkowski, A. and A. Patejuk. 2012. “The puzzle of case agreement between numeral phrases and predicative adjectives in Polish”. In: Butt, M. and T.H. King (eds.), The Proceedings of the LFG’12 Conference Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. 490–502.Suche in Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. 1990. Relativized Minimality Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Rutkowski, P. 2007. Hipoteza frazy przedimkowej jako narzędzie opisu składniowego polskich grup imiennych [The Determiner Phrase hypothesis as a tool for the syntactic description of Polish nominal phrases]. (PhD dissertation, Uniwersytet Warszawski.)Suche in Google Scholar
Stavrou, M. and A. Terzi. 2008. Cardinal numerals and other numerical expressions. GLOW 2008 presentation.Suche in Google Scholar
Stepanov, A. 2001. “Late adjunction and Minimalist Phrase Structure”. Syntax 4, 94–125.10.1111/1467-9612.00038Suche in Google Scholar
Stepanov, A. 2007. “The end of CED? Minimalism and extraction domains”. Syntax 10. 80–126.10.1111/j.1467-9612.2007.00094.xSuche in Google Scholar
Willim, E. 2015. “Case distribution and φ-agreement with Polish Genitive of Quantification in the feature sharing theory of Agree”. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 51(2). 315–57.10.1515/psicl-2015-0013Suche in Google Scholar
Witkoś J. and D. Dziubała-Szrejbrowska. 2016. “Numeral phrases as subjects and agreement with participles and predicative adjectives”. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 24(1). 225–260.10.1353/jsl.2016.0005Suche in Google Scholar
Witkoś J., D. Dziubała-Szrejbrowska, P. Cegłowski and P. Łęska. 2018. The syntax of numeral noun constructions: A view from Polish Berlin: Peter Lang.10.3726/b12901Suche in Google Scholar
Zabbal, Y. 2005. The syntax of numeral expressions. (Ms., University of Massachusetts, Amherst.)Suche in Google Scholar
© 2018 Faculty of English, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Foreword to this volume
- Stative and eventive passives of subject experiencer verbs in Polish
- Binding as agree and index raising: The case of Polish accusative object experiencers
- Binding by objects in Polish docs and please-type double object unaccusatives: Testing theoretical accounts
- On left-peripheral particle to in Polish and Czech: A focus, a topic head, or neither?
- A note on lexicalizing ‘what’ and ‘who’ in Russian and in Polish
- Cardinal numerals and complex numerals as specifiers
- Clause structure, case and agreement in Polish existential, possessive and locative sentences: A phase-based account
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Foreword to this volume
- Stative and eventive passives of subject experiencer verbs in Polish
- Binding as agree and index raising: The case of Polish accusative object experiencers
- Binding by objects in Polish docs and please-type double object unaccusatives: Testing theoretical accounts
- On left-peripheral particle to in Polish and Czech: A focus, a topic head, or neither?
- A note on lexicalizing ‘what’ and ‘who’ in Russian and in Polish
- Cardinal numerals and complex numerals as specifiers
- Clause structure, case and agreement in Polish existential, possessive and locative sentences: A phase-based account
