Abstract
Borsley and Stephens (1989/this issue) argue that the analysis of Breton agreement developed by Stump (1984) is untenable for two reasons: first, they argue that the fundamental empirical generalization which his analysis is designed to capture (the ‘Complementarity Principle’) is invalid; second, they argue that contrary to the assumptions underlying Stump's analysis, S cannot be a barrier to government in Breton. Here, Borsley and Stephens' claims are evaluated: it is shown that contrary to their first claim, the Complementarity Principle is a valid generalization for most if not all varieties of Breton; and while the truth of their second claim is acknowledged, it is nevertheless shown that the two principal claims embodied in the 1984 analysis can be maintained in a simple revision of that analysis. The revised account is shown to be fully consistent with the evidence cited by Borsley and Stephens, and is contrasted with the alternative analysis of Breton agreement proposed by Hendrick (1988).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Borsley, Robert D. and Janig Stephens: 1989/this issue, ‘Agreement and the Position of Subjects in Breton’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 7, 407–427.
Chomsky, Noam: 1982a, Lectures on Government and Binding: The Pisa Lectures (2nd revised edition), Foris, Dordrecht.
—: 1982b, Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government and Binding, MIT Press, Cambridge.
—: 1986, Barriers, MIT Press, Cambridge.
Denez, Per: 1972, Brezhoneg... buan hag aes, Omnivox, Paris.
—: 1980, Geriadur Brezhoneg Douarnenez: 1. Pesked, 2. Laboused, Mouladurioù Hor Yezh, Lesneven.
Hardie, D. W. F.: 1948, A Handbook of Modern Breton (Armorican), University of Wales Press, Cardiff.
Hemon, Roparz: 1975a, Grammaire bretonne, Al Liamm, Brest.
—: 1975b, A Historical Morphology and Syntax of Breton, The Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, Dublin.
Hendrick, Randall: 1988, Anaphora in Celtic and Universal Grammar, Kluwer, Dordrecht.
Kervella, F.: 1947, Yezhadur bras ar brezhoneg (1976 reprint), Al Liamm, Brest.
—: 1978, Untitled, Hor Yezh 119, 3–29.
Le Clerc, Louis: 1911, Grammaire bretonne du dialecte de Tréguier, Prud'homme, Saint-Brieuc.
Le Gléau, René: 1973, Syntaxe du breton moderne (1710–1972), Editions La Baule, La Baule.
McCloskey, James and Kenneth Hale: 1984, ‘On the Syntax of Person-Number Inflection in Modern Irish’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 1, 487–533.
Press, Ian: 1986, A Grammar of Modern Breton, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.
Sproat, Richard: 1985, ‘Welsh Syntax and VSO Structure’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 3, 173–216.
Stump, Gregory T.: 1984, ‘Agreement vs. Incorporation in Breton’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 2, 289–348.
Trépos, Pierre: n.d. [1968], Grammaire bretonne (1980 reprint), Ouest France, Rennes.
Urien, Jean-Yves, and Per Denez: 1977/78; 1979/80, ‘Essai d'analyse sémiologique du mot verbal et du syntagme verbal en breton contemporain’, Studia Celtica 12/13, 259–90; 14/15, 290–312.
Vallée, F.: 1926, La langue bretonne en 40 leçons (7th edition), Librairie Prud'homme, Saint-Brieuc.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
I would like to thank R. Ar C'halan, Y. B. Kelvenneg, Gw. Le Menn, G. Ihuellou, and the staff of Skol Ober for their help; I alone, however, am responsible for the facts and interpretations presented here.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Stump, G.T. Further remarks on Breton agreement. Nat Lang Linguist Theory 7, 429–471 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00208104
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00208104