Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T16:01:02.219Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Kayne's model of Case and Finnish nominal phrases

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2008

Pauli Brattico
Pauli Brattico*
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science and Information Systems, University of Jyväskylä, 40014Finlandpajubrat@jyu.fi
Get access

Abstract

The standard view concerning Case assignment or valuation is that Case is valued to determiner phrases (DPs) in syntax. Recently, Kayne has proposed an alternative model, in which Case is valued to lexical elements rather than to phrases. This article cites several facts from Finnish in support of this model. A detailed Kaynean model of Case is developed. According to this model, abstract Case is valued to lexical elements by the highest ranking c-commanding Case assigner when each phase (CP, vP) is sealed, where ranking is based on a particular Case Hierarchy and a simple notion of locality. Configurations in which Case is seemingly assigned under a spec–head relation are provided with an alternative interpretation.

Keywords

CaseCase concordCase distributionCase valuationFinnishFinnish syntaxMinimalismNominalizationNumerals
Type
Research Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 31 , Special Issue 2: The syntax of nominals and noun phrases , December 2008 , pp. 135 - 160
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Babby, Leonard H. 1987. Case, prequantifiers, and discontinuous agreement in Russian. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 5, 91–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2006. Case checking vs. Case assignment and the case of adverbial NPs. Linguistic Inquiry 37, 522–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brattico, Pauli. 2005. A category-free model of Finnish derivational morphology. SKY Journal of Linguistics 18, 7–6.Google Scholar
Brattico, Pauli & Huhmarniemi, Saara. 2006. Finnish negation, the EPP, and the valuation theory of morphosyntax. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 29.1, 5–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brattico, Pauli & Leinonen, Alina. In press. Nominalization and Case distribution. Syntax.Google Scholar
Carstens, Vicki. 2000. Concord in Minimalist theory. Linguistic Inquiry 31, 319–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding: The Pisa Lectures. Berlin & New York: Mouton.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by Phase. In Kenstowicz, Michael (ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2006. Approaching UG from below. Ms, MIT.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, Harald, Eisenbeiss, Sonja & Vainikka, Anne. 1994. The seeds of structure – A structural analysis of the acquisition of Case marking. In Hoekstra, Teun & Schwartz, Bonnie (eds.), Language Acquisition Studies in Generative Grammar, 85–118. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franks, Steven. 1995. Parameters of Slavic Morphosyntax. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franks, Steven. 2002. A Jakobsonian feature based analysis of the Slavic numeric quantifier genitive. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 10, 141–181.Google Scholar
Huhmarniemi, Saara. In preparation. DP-internal A-bar movement in Finnish. Ms., University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
Kayne, Richard. 1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kayne, Richard. 2005. Movement and Silence. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [The relevant chapter originally published as Richard Kayne. 2002. On some prepositions that look DP-internal: English of and French de. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 1, 71–115.]Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1972. Explanation in phonology. In Peters, Stanley (ed.), Goals of Linguistic Theory, 189–227. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1998. Partitive case and aspect. In DeGroot, Casper & Tommola, Hannu (eds.), Aspect Bound: A Voyage in the Realm of Germanic, Slavic and Finno-Ugric Aspectology, 153–176. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 1997. No escape from syntax: Don't try morphological analysis in the privacy of your lexicon. In Dimitriadis, Alexis & Siegel, Laura (eds.), 21st Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium (Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 4), 201–225.Google Scholar
Nelson, Diane. 1998. Grammatical Case Assignment in Finnish. London: Garland.Google Scholar
Przepiórkowski, Adam. 1996. Case assignment in Polish: Towards an HPSG analysis. In Grover, Claire & Vallduví, Enric (eds.), Studies in HPSG (Edinburgh Working Papers in Cognitive Science 12), 191–228. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Rappaport, Gilbert C. 2001. Case syncretism, features, and the morphosyntax of Polish numeral phrases. In Bański, Piotr & Przepiórkowski, Adam (eds.), Generative Linguistics in Poland 5, 123–137. Warsaw: Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya. 2006. Interface Strategies: Optimal and Costly Computations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rijkhoff, Jan. 2002. The Noun Phrase. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritter, Elizabeth. 1991. Two functional categories in noun phrases: Evidence from Modern Hebrew. In Rothstein, Susan (ed.), Perspectives on Phrase Structure: Heads and Licensing (Syntax and Semantics 25), 37–62. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salo, Pauli. 2003. Causatives and the Empty Lexicon: A Minimalist Perspective. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
Stowell, Tim. 1981. Origins of Phrase Structure. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Vainikka, Anne. 1989. Deriving Syntactic Representations in Finnish. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Vainikka, Anne. 1993. Three structural cases in Finnish. In Holmberg, Anders & Nikanne, Urpo (eds.), Case and Other Topics in Finnish Syntax, 129–159. Holland: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Vainikka, Anne. 2003. Postverbal case realization in Finnish. In Nelson, Diane & Manninen, Satu (eds.), Generative Approaches to Finnish and Saami Linguistics, 235–266. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Vainikka, Anne & Levy, Yonata. 1999. Empty subjects in Hebrew and Finnish, Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 17, 613–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vilkuna, Maria. 2000. Suomen kielen lauseoppia. Helsinki: Edita.Google Scholar
Wechsler, Stephen & Zlatić, Larisa. 2001. Case realization and identity. Lingua 111, 539–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yip, Moira, Maling, Joan & Jackendoff, Ray. 1987. Case in tiers. Language 63, 217–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar