Advertisement

Natural Language & Linguistic Theory

, Volume 6, Issue 3, pp 353–389 | Cite as

Theta theory and the syntax of applicatives in Chichewa

  • Mark Baker
Article

Abstract

Abbreviations used in the glosses in this article are: A, gender agreement; ABS, absolutive; APPL, applied affix; ASP, mood morpheme; EX, exclusive; HAB, habitual tense; OP, object prefix; PASS, passive; PRES, present; RECIP, reciprocal; SP, subject prefix; SUF, suffix. Glosses of pronominal agreement consist of a number indicating person, a lower case letter indicating number (singular or plural), and an upper case letter indicating grammatical function (subject or object). Noun classes are not indicated in the glosses, but certain agreement relationships are shown by highlighting. The notation...*(B)...means that the structure is grammatical only if B is included;...(*B)...means that it is grammatical only if B is not included. Tone is not marked.

Keywords

Artificial Intelligence Lower Case Case Letter Lower Case Letter Grammatical Function 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aissen, Judith: 1983, ‘Indirect Object Advancement in Tzotzil’, in D. Perlmutter (ed.), Studies in Relational Grammar 1, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 325–366.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, Barbara, Donna Gardiner, and Donald Frantz: 1984, ‘Noun Incorporation in Southern Tiwa’, IJAL 50, 293–311.Google Scholar
  3. Andrews, J. Richard: 1975, Introduction to Classical Nahuatl, University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar
  4. Baker, Mark: 1985, Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  5. —: 1988, Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  6. Baker, Mark, Kyle Johnson, and Ian Roberts: to appear, ‘Passive Arguments Raised’, Linguistic Inquiry.Google Scholar
  7. Belleti, Adriana: 1988, ‘Unaccusatives as Case Assigners’, Linguistic Inquiry 19, 1–34.Google Scholar
  8. Belletti, Adriana and Luigi Rizzi: 1986, ‘Psych-Verbs and TH-Theory’, Lexicon Project Working Papers # 13, Center for Cognitive Science, MIT; published in NLLT 6, 3 (this issue).Google Scholar
  9. Borer, Hagit: 1984, Parametric Syntax: Case Studies in Semitic and Romance Languages, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  10. Bresnan, Joan: 1982, The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  11. Bresnan, Joan and Sam Mchombo: 1987, ‘Topic, Pronoun, and Agreement in Chichewa’, Language 63, 741–782.Google Scholar
  12. Chomsky, Noam: 1980, ‘On Binding’, Linguistic Inquiry 11, 1–46.Google Scholar
  13. —: 1981, Lectures on Government and Binding, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  14. —: 1986a, Barriers, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  15. —: 1986b, Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use, Praeger, New York.Google Scholar
  16. Chung, Sandra: 1976, ‘An Object-Creating Rule in Bahasa Indonesia’, Linguistic Inquiry 7, 1–37.Google Scholar
  17. Czepluch, H.: 1982, ‘Case Theory and the Dative Construction’, The Linguistic Review 2, 1–38.Google Scholar
  18. Foley, William and Robert Van Valin: 1984, Functional Syntax and Universal Grammar, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  19. Jackendoff, Ray: 1987, ‘The Status of Thematic Relations in Linguistic Theory’, Linguistic Inquiry 18, 369–412.Google Scholar
  20. Jackendoff, Ray and Peter Culicover: 1971, ‘A Reconsideration of Dative Movements’, Foundations of Language 7, 397–412.Google Scholar
  21. Johnson, Kyle: 1987, ‘Clausal Gerunds, the ECP, and Government’, unpublished ms. UCLA.Google Scholar
  22. Kayne, Richard: 1984, Connectedness and Binary Branching, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  23. Kimenyi, Alexandre: 1980, A Relational Grammar of Kinyarwanda, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  24. Kisseberth, Charles and Mohammad Abasheikh: 1977, ‘The Object Relationship in ChiMwi:ni, a Bantu Language’, in P. Cole and J. Sadock (eds.), Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 8: Grammatical Relations, Academic Press, New York, pp. 179–218.Google Scholar
  25. Lieber, Rochelle: 1980, On the Organization of the Lexicon, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  26. Marantz, Alec: 1982, ‘Affixation and the Syntax of Applied Verb Constructions’, in Proceedings of the First West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, Stanford University, pp. 330–340.Google Scholar
  27. —: 1984, On the Nature of Grammatical Relations, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  28. Marlett, Steve: 1986, ‘Syntactic Levels and Multiattachment in Sierra Popoluca’, IJAL 52, 359–87.Google Scholar
  29. Mchombo, Sam: 1986, ‘The Nonexistence of Verb Object Agreement in Bantu’, unpublished ms., San Jose State University.Google Scholar
  30. Merlan, Francesca: 1976, ‘Noun Incorporation and Discourse Reference in Modern Nahuatl’, IJAL 42, 177–191.Google Scholar
  31. Mithun, Marianne: 1984, ‘The Evolution of Noun Incorporation’, Language 60, 845–895.Google Scholar
  32. Mtenje, A.: 1984, ‘An Autosegmental Analysis of Chichewa Vowel Harmony’, unpublished ms., University College, London.Google Scholar
  33. Oerhle, Richard: 1975, The Grammatical Status of the English Dative Alternation, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  34. Perlmutter, David (ed.): 1983, Studies in Relational Grammar 1, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  35. Perlmutter, David and Carol Rosen (eds.): 1984, Studies in Relational Grammar 2, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  36. Ramamurti, G. V.: 1931, A Manual of the So:ra: (or Savara) Language, Government Press, Madras.Google Scholar
  37. Rizzi, Luigi: 1986, ‘Null Objects in Italian and the Theory of pro’, Linguistic Inquiry 17, 501–557.Google Scholar
  38. Rosen, Carol: 1984, ‘The Interface between Semantic Roles and Initial Grammatical Relations’, in D. Perlmutter and C. Rosen (eds.), Studies in Relational Grammar 2, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 38–77.Google Scholar
  39. Sapir, Edward: 1922, ‘The Takelma Languages of Southwestern Oregon’, in Franz Boaz (ed.), Handbook of American Indian Languages (BAE Bulletin 40) 2, pp. 1–296.Google Scholar
  40. Seiter, William: 1980, Studies in Niuean Syntax, Garland, New York.Google Scholar
  41. Stowell, Timothy: 1981, Origins of Phrase Structure, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  42. Sylla, Y.: 1979, Grammatical Relations and Fula Syntax, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, UCLA.Google Scholar
  43. Travis, Lisa: 1984, Parameters and Effects of Word Order Variation, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  44. Trithart, Lee: 1977, Relational Grammar and Chichewa Subjectivization, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, UCLA, distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington.Google Scholar
  45. Williams, Edwin: 1984, ‘Grammatical Relations’, Linguistic Inquiry 15, 639–674.Google Scholar
  46. Williams, Marianne Mithun: 1976, A Grammar of Tuscarora, Garland, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark Baker
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations