The present chapter discusses agreement in Slavic languages. Slavic languages are interesting because of their canonical subject-verb agreement, which offers a direct insight into this core syntactic relation (syntactic agreement). Additionally, Slavic languages feature well-documented agreement alternations, which suggest involvement of other language components in agreement (semantic and discourse agreement). Finally, strictly local agreement, often devoid of alternations, operating inside the nominal phrase commands theoretical interest.

This chapter examines reference in planned, deliberated language production. Using evidence from examples of institutional writing (writing text in academic, professional, and social settings), the effects of the written mode of production on referential choice, including evidence from keystroke logging methods which give us insight into revisions during the writing process. In comparison with spontaneous discourse, we demonstrate how the relatively low frequency of pronominal reference that is typical of spontaneous discourse is replaced with more complex referential expressions. We also consider whether referential choice is a feature of genre as we examine the referential profiles of different text types. The chapter concludes that referring expressions in prepared discourse tend to be more frequently information rich and consequently, the modification and qualification zones of the noun phrase are more active in this type of discourse.

This chapter provides a cognitive-functional description of the lexicogrammar of referring expressions and explains the grammatical realisation of referring, including the functional elements of the noun phrase and the structures that serve to realise them. Perspectives from cognitive grammar are prioritised, since referring expressions are first and foremost cognitive in nature. Given that they are also designed to serve a social purpose, the grammatical description presented in this chapter draws on various functional frameworks to reflect how its use also meets the needs of the addressee. This chapter serves as a basis for the linguistic terms relevant to lexical referring expressions, thereby providing a vocabulary for talking about various aspects of these expressions.

Expands the discussion of coordinate structures started in the previous chapter to another kind to syntactic ambiguity involving a prepositional phrase in the title of the Princeton University introductory linguistics course: Introduction to Language and Linguistics. On one interpretation, the left conjunct is only Language; while on the other, it is Introduction to Language. Each interpretation corresponds to a unique hierarchical structure. To determine why one interpretation is more appropriate than the other, it is necessary to consider the meaning of the words language and linguistics, including how they relate. This leads to a basic discussion of what a language is and what language is from the perspective of modern linguistics. This chapter wraps up the analysis of coordinate structures with a discussion of the use and misuse of coordinate structures in writing. It demonstrates how coordinate structures can be a source of ambiguity, redundancy, and vagueness—all hallmarks of poor writing.