Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Agreement and Its Failures$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Omer Preminger

Print publication date: 2014

Print ISBN-13: 9780262027403

Published to MIT Press Scholarship Online: January 2015

DOI: 10.7551/mitpress/9780262027403.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM MIT PRESS SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.mitpress.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright The MIT Press, 2017. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in MITSO for personal use (for details see http://www.mitpress.universitypressscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 18 December 2017

. Derivational Time-Bombs: Inadequate for Deriving the Obligatoriness of φ-Agreement

. Derivational Time-Bombs: Inadequate for Deriving the Obligatoriness of φ-Agreement

Chapter:
(p.85) 5. Derivational Time-Bombs: Inadequate for Deriving the Obligatoriness of φ-Agreement
Source:
Agreement and Its Failures
Author(s):

Omer Preminger

Publisher:
The MIT Press
DOI:10.7551/mitpress/9780262027403.003.0005

Building on the results of previous chapters, this chapter puts forth the central argument against derivational time-bombs (including, but not limited to, Chomsky's 2000, 2001 ‘uninterpretable features’) as a way of deriving the obligatoriness of phi-feature agreement. The argument is presented in two forms, one based on number agreement in Kichean Agent-Focus, and one based on person agreement in the same construction. The final section sketches two alternatives which, unlike the derivational time-bombs model, are able to account for the facts at hand. One is based on the notion of obligatory operations, and the other on the notion of violable constraints (as in Optimality Theory; McCarthy & Prince 1995, Prince & Smolensky 1993). The appendix to this chapter provides a brief historical survey of how syntactic theory came to regard ‘uninterpretable features’ as having anything to do with the obligatoriness of phi-feature agreement, in the first place. It also offers a roadmap for how we might selectively undo this component of contemporary syntactic theory, while retaining the other, beneficial developments that came with it.

Keywords:   syntax, agreement, obligatoriness, derivational time-bombs, uninterpretable features, obligatory operations, violable constraints, Last Resort

MIT Press Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.