Natural Language & Linguistic Theory

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 447–491 | Cite as

Pied-piping, abstract agreement, and functional projections in Tzotzil

  • Judith Aissen


This paper investigates the role of (abstract) Agreement within functional projections in Tzotzil, as revealed through wh-Movement and constraints on Pied Piping. After establishing an s-structure condition which requires that elements Agree with C[+WH] to be interpreted as interrogative, we go on to consider how this requirement interacts with the internal structure of Tzotzil noun and prepositional phrases to permit internal elements access to interrogative interpretations. The discussion is extended to two further domains of fact: the licensing of focus interpretations and the licensing of subjunctive verbs in Tzotzil “free-choice” wh constructions. In both cases, abstract Agreement at s-structure within the Infl projection is the determining condition. The “free-choice” construction provides visible evidence that the abstract relations which form the basis for the overall analysis are indeed significant.


Artificial Intelligence Internal Structure Visible Evidence Abstract Relation Prepositional Phrase 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abney, Steven: 1987, The English Noun Phrase in its Sentential Aspect, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  2. Aissen, Judith: 1987, Tzotzil Clause Structure, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  3. Aissen, Judith: 1992, ‘Topic and Focus in Mayan’, Language 68, 43–80.Google Scholar
  4. Aissen, Judith: 1994, ‘Tzotzil Auxiliaries’, Linguistics 32, 657–690.Google Scholar
  5. Baker, Mark: 1988, Incorporation, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  6. Berinstein, Ava: 1985, Evidence for Multiattachment in K'ekchi Mayan, Garland, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Black, Cheryl: 1994, Quiegolani Zapotec Syntax, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, UCSC, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
  8. Carlson, Gregory: 1981, ‘Distribution of Free-choice any’, in Papers from the 17th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, pp. 8–23.Google Scholar
  9. Chomsky, Noam: 1986, Barriers, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  10. Chomsky, Noam: 1993, ‘A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory’, in K. Hale and S. J. Keyser (eds.), The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  11. Chung, Sandra: 1991, ‘On Proper Head Government in Chamorro’, in L. Dobrenin, L. Nichols and R. M. Rodriguez (eds.), CLS 27-I: Papers from the Twenty-Seventh Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago, pp. 60–84.Google Scholar
  12. Cinque, Guglielmo: 1990, Types of A-bar Dependencies, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  13. Craig, Colette: 1977, The Structure of Jacaltec, University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar
  14. Dayley, Jon: 1985, Tzutujil Grammar, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  15. England, Nora: 1983, A Grammar of Mam, a Mayan Language, University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar
  16. Fukui, Naoki: 1986, A Theory of Category Projection and its Applications, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  17. Haviland, John: 1981, Sk'op Sotz'leb: el Tzozil de San Lorenzo Zinacantán, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico City.Google Scholar
  18. Haviland, John: 1991, ‘The Grammaticalization of Motion (and Time) in Tzotzil’, Working PaperNo.2, Cognitive Anthropology Research Group, Max-Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen.Google Scholar
  19. Haviland, John: 1993, ‘The Syntax of Tzotzil Auxiliaries and Directionals: the Grammaticalization of “motion”’, in Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Berkeley Linguistics Society, Berkeley, pp. 35–49.Google Scholar
  20. Hornstein, Norbert and Amy Weinberg: 1981, ‘Case Theory and Preposition Stranding’, Linguistic Inquiry 12, 55–92.Google Scholar
  21. Kadmon, Nirit and Fred Landman: 1993, ‘Any’, Linguistics and Philosophy 16, 353–422.Google Scholar
  22. Kayne, Richard: 1981, ‘ECP Extensions’, Linguistic Inquiry 12, 93–133.Google Scholar
  23. Kayne, Richard: 1994, The Antisymmetry of Syntax, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  24. Kiss, Katalin: 1992, ‘Logical Structure in Syntactic Structure: the Case of Hungarian’, in C.-T. Huang and R. May (eds.), Logical Structure and Linguistic Structure, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 111–147.Google Scholar
  25. Koopman, Hilda and Dominique Sportiche: 1991, ‘The Position of Subjects’, Lingua 85, 211–258.Google Scholar
  26. Kuroda, Yuki: 1988, ‘Whether We Agree or Not: A Comparative Syntax of English and Japanese’, Lingvisticae Investigationes 12, 1–47. (Reprinted in S. Y. Kuroda: 1992, Japanese Syntax and Semantics, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 315–357.)Google Scholar
  27. Lasnik, Howard and Mamoru Saito: 1992, Move-α, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  28. Laughlin, Robert: 1977, Of Cabbages and Kings, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  29. Laughlin, Robert: 1980, Of Shoes and Ships and Sealing Wax, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  30. Longobardi, Giuseppi: 1991, ‘Extraction from NP and the Proper Notion of Head Government’, in A. Giorgi and G. Longobardi, The Syntax of Noun Phrases, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 57–112.Google Scholar
  31. Mahajan, Anoop: 1990, The A/A-bar Distinction and Movement Theory, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  32. May, Robert: 1985, Logical Form: Its Structure and Derivation, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  33. McCloskey, James: 1990, ‘Resumptive Pronouns, A-bar-Binding, and Levels of Representation in Irish’, in R. Hendrick (ed.), Syntax and Semantics, Volume 23, (The Syntax of the Modern Celtic Languages), Academic Press, New York, pp. 199–248.Google Scholar
  34. Moritz, Luc and Daniel Valois: 1994, ‘Pied-Piping and Specifier-Head Agreement’, Linguistic Inquiry 25, 667–707.Google Scholar
  35. Pesetsky, David: 1987, ‘Wh-in-Situ: Movement and Unselective Binding’, in E. Reuland and A. ter Meulen (eds.), The Representation of (In)definiteness, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 98–129.Google Scholar
  36. van Reimsdijk, Henk: 1982, A Case Study in Syntactic Markedness, Foris, Dordrecht (also published in 1978 by Peter de Ridder Press, Lisse).Google Scholar
  37. Rizzi, Luigi: 1990, Relativized Minimality, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  38. Rizzi, Luigi: 1991, ‘Residual Verb Second and the wh Criterion’, Technical Reports in Formal and Computational Linguistics, no. 2, University of Geneva; published 1996 in Adriana Belletti and Luigi Rizzi (eds.), Parameters and Functional Heads, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 63–90.Google Scholar
  39. Rosen, Carol: 1987, ‘Possessors and the Internal Structure of Nominals’, paper delivered at the Third Biennial Conference on Relational Grammar, University of Iowa.Google Scholar
  40. Rudin, Catherine: 1988, ‘On Multiple Questions and Multiple wh Fronting’, NLLT 6, 445–501.Google Scholar
  41. Safir, Ken: 1985, ‘Relative Clauses in a Theory of Binding and Levels’, Linguistic Inquiry 17, 663–689.Google Scholar
  42. Smith, Thomas C: 1976, ‘Some Hypotheses on Syntactic and Morphological Aspects of Proto-Mayan (*PM)’, in M. McClaran (ed.), Mayan Linguistics I, American Indian Studies Center, UCLA, pp. 44–66.Google Scholar
  43. Smith Stark, Thomas C: 1988, ‘“Pied piping” con Inversion en Preguntas Parciales’, manuscript, Colegio de Mexico, Mexico City.Google Scholar
  44. Speas, Margaret: 1990, Phrase Structure in Natural Language, Kluwer, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  45. Szabolcsi, Anna: 1983, ‘The Possessor that Ran Away from Home’, Linguistic Review 3, 89–102.Google Scholar
  46. Szabolcsi, Anna: 1994, ‘The Noun Phrase’, in F. Kiefer and K. Kiss (eds.), The Syntactic Structure of Hungarian, Academic Press, New York, pp. 179–274.Google Scholar
  47. Zagona, Karen: 1982, Government and Proper Government of Verbal Projections, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Judith Aissen
    • 1
  1. 1.Stevenson CollegeUniversity of California, Santa CruzSanta Cruz

Personalised recommendations