Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mixed agreement, the person feature, and the index/concord distinction

  • Published:
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In mixed agreement, different agreement targets show different values for the same controller. This paper offers an explanation for the existence of mixed agreement that accounts for the following Polite Plural Generalization: universally, any second person ‘polite plural’ pronouns (e.g. French vous), used honorifically for a single addressee, control syntactic (plural) agreement on all person targets, while non-person-agreeing targets such as predicate adjectives vary across languages, between syntactic and semantic number agreement. Following Wechsler and Zlatić (The Many Faces of Agreement, CSLI Publications, 2003), person features exist only as features of referential indices (Index phi features), never as grammatical head features of the sort that are involved in adjective-noun concord (Concord phi features). Mixed agreement arises if the ‘polite plural’ or other pronominal controller is underspecified for Concord phi features. But a pronoun has a referential Index, which is necessarily marked with phi features, so any Index agreement targets will appear in the second person plural form. A diachronic explanation is offered for this bifurcation of agreement targets into Index and Concord targets: the former descend from incorporated pronouns while the latter have other sources.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Apresjan, Juri D. 1974. Regular polysemy. Linguistics 142: 5–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avram, Mioara. 1986. Gramatica pentru toti [Grammar for all]. Bucharest: Editura Academiei Republicii Socialiste România.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, Mark C. 1996. The polysynthesis parameter. London: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, Mark C. 2008. The syntax of agreement and concord. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, Mark C. 2011. When agreement is for number and gender but not person. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 29(4), this issue

  • Baumgardner, Robert J. 1982. Sociolinguistic aspects of Persian pronouns of address: A macro/micro analysis. PhD dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.

  • Benveniste, Emile. 1966. Relationships of person in the verb. In Problems in general linguistics, 195–204. Coral Gables: University of Miami Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bopp, Franz. 1842. Vergleichende Grammatik des Sanskrit, Zend, Griechischen, Lateinischen, Litthauischen, Altslawischen, Gothischen und Deutschen [Comparative grammar of Sanskrit, Zend, Greek, Latin, Lithuanian, Old Slavonic, Gothic and German]. Berlin: F. Dümmler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bresnan, Joan. 2001. Lexical functional syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bresnan, Joan, and Sam A. Mchombo. 1987. Topic, pronoun, and agreement in Chichewa. Language 63: 741–782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comrie, Bernard. 1975. Polite plurals and predicate agreement. Language 51: 406–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Copestake, Ann. 1995. The representation of group denoting nouns in a lexical knowledge base. In Computational lexical semantics, eds. Patrick Saint-Dizier and Evelyn Viegas, 207–231. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Copestake, Ann, and Ted Briscoe. 1995. Semi-productive polysemy and sense extension. Journal of Semantics 12: 15–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coppock, Elizabeth. 2009. The logical and empirical foundations of Baker’s Paradox. PhD dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.

  • Coppock, Elizabeth, and Stephen Wechsler. 2011. Person restrictions and the dualist hypothesis. Paper presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America.

  • Corbett, Greville. 1979. The agreement hierarchy. Journal of Linguistics 15: 203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbett, Greville. 1983. Hierarchies, targets and controllers: Agreement patterns in Slavic. London: Croom Helm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbett, Greville. 1991. Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbett, Greville. 2000. Number. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbett, Greville. 2006. Agreement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalrymple, Mary. 2001. Lexical functional grammar. San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danon, Gabi. 2009a. Quantified noun phrases in Hebrew: Features and agreement. Presentation handout. Ben-Gurion University, June 16.

  • Danon, Gabi. 2009b. Agreement with quantified nominals: Implications for feature theory. Paper presented at Colloque de Syntaxe et Sémantique à Paris (CSSP 2009), September, 2009.

  • Davies, H. John. 1981. Kobon (Lingua Descriptive Studies). Vol. 3, Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • den Dikken, Marcel. 2001. “Pluringulars”, pronouns and quirky agreement. The Linguistic Review 18: 19–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dončeva-Mareva, Liljana. 1978. Sǎglasuveaneto na učtivoto Vie sǎs skazuemoto v bǎlgarskija i ruskija ezik ot kvantitativno gledište. Sǎpostavitelno ezikoznanie 3: 70–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enger, Hans-Olav. 2004. Scandinavian pancake sentences as semantic agreement. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 27: 5–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faarlund, Jan Terje. 1977. Embedded clause reduction and Scandinavian gender agreement. Journal of Linguistics 13: 239–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, Charles A. 1991. Individual and social in language change: Diachronic changes in politeness agreement in forms of address. In The influence of language on culture and thought: Essays in honor of Joshua A. Fishman’s sixty-fifth birthday, eds. Robert L. Cooper and Bernard Spolsky, 183–197. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Givón, Talmy. 1976. Topic, pronoun and grammatical agreement. In Subject and topic, ed. Charles Li, 149–188. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, Joseph H. 1978. How does a language acquire gender markers. In Universals of human language, Vol. 3: Word structure, ed. Joseph H. Greenberg, 47–82. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grinevald, Colette, and Frank Seifart. 2004. Noun classes in African and Amazonian languages: Towards a comparison. Linguistic Typology 8: 243–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahm, Hyun-Jong. 2006. Uniform or mixed agreement due to the personal pronouns. Paper presented at the Midwest Slavic Conference.

  • Hahm, Hyun-Jong. 2009. Persian number agreement and politeness. Paper presented at Texas Linguistics Society XII. November, 2009.

  • Hahm, Hyun-Jong. 2010. A cross-linguistic study of syntactic and semantic agreement: Polite plural pronouns and other issues. PhD dissertation, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX.

  • Head, Brian F.. 1978. Respect degrees in pronominal reference. In Universals of human language, Vol. 3: Word structure, ed. Joseph H. Greenberg, 151–212. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johannessen, Janne Bondi. 1996. Partial agreement and coordination. Linguistic Inquiry 27: 661–676.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johannessen, Janne Bondi. 1998. Coordination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, Ronald M. 1995. The formal architecture of lexical-functional grammar. In Formal issues in Lexical-Functional Grammar, eds. Mary Dalrymple, Ronald M. Kaplan, John T. Maxwell, and Annie Zaenen, 7–27. Stanford: CSLI Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, Ronald M., and Joan Bresnan. 1982. Lexical-functional grammar: A formal system for grammatical representation. In The mental representation of grammatical relations, ed. Joan Bresnan, 173–281. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kathol, Andreas. 1999. Agreement and the syntax-morphology interface in HPSG. In Studies in contemporary phrase structure grammar, eds. Robert Levine and Georgia Green, 223–274. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, Tracy H., and Mary Dalrymple. 2004. Determiner agreement and noun conjunction. Journal of Linguistics 40: 69–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kjaerulff, Uffe B., and Anders L. Madsen. 2007. Bayesian networks and influence diagrams: A guide to construction and analysis. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lascarides, Alex, Ted Briscoe, Nicholas Asher, and Ann Copestake. 1995. Order independent and persistent typed default unification. Linguistics and Philosophy 19: 1–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann, Christian. 1982. Universal and typological aspects of agreement. In Das sprachliche Erfassen von Gegenständen II: Die Techniken und ihre zusammenhang in Einzelsprachen [The acquisition of linguistic objects II: The techniques and their relationship in individual languages], eds. Hans-Jakob Seiler and Franz J. Stachowiak, 201–267. Tübingen: Narr.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luraghi, Silvia. 2011. The origin of the Proto-Indo-European gender system: Typological considerations. Folia Linguistica 45.2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning, Christopher D. 2003. Probabilistic syntax. In Probabilistic linguistics, eds. Rens Bod, Jennifer Hay, and Stefanie Jannedy, Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mithun, Marianne. 2003. Pronouns and agreement: The information status of pronominal affixes. Transactions of the Philological Society 101: 235–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunberg, Geoffrey. 1995. Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 12: 109–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearl, Judea. 1988. Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems: Networks of plausible inference. Los Altos: Morgan Kauffmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pesetsky, David, and Esther Torrego. 2007. The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features. In Phrasal and clausal architecture: Syntactic derivation and interpretation. In honor of Joseph E. Emonds, eds. Simin Karimi, Vida Samiian, Wendy K. Wilkins, and Joseph E. Emonds, 262–294. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollard, Carl, and Ivan Sag. 1992. Anaphors in English and the scope of binding theory. Linguistic Inquiry 23: 261–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollard, Carl, and Ivan Sag. 1994. Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Stanford and Chicago: CSLI Publications and University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pustejovsky, James. 1995. The generative lexicon. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reesink, Ger P.. 1987. Structures and their functions in Usan: A Papuan language of Papua New Guinea. Elmsford: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid, Nicholas. 1997. Class and classifier in Ngan’gityemerri. In Nominal classification in aboriginal Australia, eds. Mark Harvey and Nicholas Reid, 165–228. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samarin, William J.. 1966. The Gbaya language: Grammar, texts, and vocabularies. University of California publications in linguistics, vol. 44, Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seifart, Frank. 2009. Multidimensional typology and Miraña class markers. In New challenges in typology: Transcending the borders and refining the distinctions, eds. Patience Epps and Alexandre Arkhipov, 365–385. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Vinokurova, Nikolaeva. 2005. Lexical categories and argument structure: A study with reference to Sakha. PhD dissertation, University of Utrecht.

  • Wald, Benji. 1979. The development of the Swahili object marker: A study of the interaction of syntax and discourse. In Discourse and syntax, ed. Talmy Givón, vol. 12, 505–524.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wechsler, Stephen. 2004. Number as person. In Empirical issues in syntax and semantics 5, eds. Olivier Bonami and Patricia Cabredo Hofherr, 255–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wechsler, Stephen. 2005. Markedness and meaning in agreement. In LFG 2005. Bergen, Norway.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wechsler, Stephen. 2008. Elsewhere in gender resolution. In The nature of the word: Essays in honor of Paul Kiparsky, eds. Kristin Hanson and Sharon Inkelas, 567–586. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wechsler, Stephen, and Hyun-Jong Hahm. 2011. Polite plurals and adjective agreement. Morphology 21.1:247–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wechsler, Stephen, and Larisa Zlatić. 2000. A theory of agreement and its application to Serbo-Croatian. Language 76: 799–832.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wechsler, Stephen, and Larisa Zlatić. 2003. The many faces of agreement. Stanford: CSLI Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Linguistics Department, University of Texas, 1 University Station B5100, Austin, TX, 78712-0198, USA

    Stephen Wechsler

Authors
  1. Stephen Wechsler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen Wechsler.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wechsler, S. Mixed agreement, the person feature, and the index/concord distinction. Nat Lang Linguist Theory 29, 999–1031 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-011-9149-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-011-9149-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation