Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorDavid Pesetsky.en_US
dc.contributor.authorCoon, Jessicaen_US
dc.contributor.otherMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-04-25T15:54:15Z
dc.date.available2011-04-25T15:54:15Z
dc.date.copyright2010en_US
dc.date.issued2010en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/62409
dc.descriptionThesis (Ph. D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy, 2010.en_US
dc.descriptionCataloged from PDF version of thesis.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (p. 251-264).en_US
dc.description.abstractThe central claim of this dissertation is that aspect-based split ergativity does not mark a split in how Case is assigned, but rather, a split in sentence structure. Specifically, I argue that the contexts in which we find the appearance of a nonergative pattern in an otherwise ergative language-namely, the nonperfective aspects-involve an intransitive aspectual matrix verb and a subordinated lexical verb. In other words, the nonperfective forms show a dissociation between the syntactic predicate and the stem carrying the lexical verb stem. This proposal builds on the proposal of Basque split ergativity in Laka 2006, and extends it to other languages. I begin with an analysis of split person marking patterns in Chol, a Mayan language of southern Mexico. I argue that the appearance of split ergativity in the language follows naturally from the fact that the progressive and the imperfective morphemes are verbs, while the perfective morpheme is not. Ergative-patterning perfective constructions are thus monoclausal, while progressives and imperfectives involve an aspectual matrix verb and a nominalized embedded clause. The fact that the nonperfective morphemes are verbs, combined with independent properties of Chol grammar, results in the appearance of a split. Next, focusing on Chol, I survey aspect splits in a variety of unrelated languages and offer an explanation for the following universal: in a language with an aspectual split, the perfective aspect will always retain an ergative pattern (Dixon 1979). Following Laka's (2006) proposal for Basque, I suggest that the cross-linguistic tendency for imperfective aspects to pattern with locative constructions is responsible for the biclausality which causes the appearance of a nonergative pattern. Building on Demirdache and Uribe-Etxebarria's (2000) prepositional account of spatiotemporal relations, I propose that the perfective is never periphrastic (and thus never involves a split) because there is no preposition in natural language that correctly captures the relation of the assertion time to the event time denoted by the perfective aspect; instead, perfective is the default aspect. The proposal here thus accounts both for the appearance of aspect-based split ergativity without the need for special rules of Case assignment, and also provides an explanation for why we find the splits in certain aspects and not others.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Jessica Coon.en_US
dc.format.extent264 p.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsM.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582en_US
dc.subjectLinguistics and Philosophy.en_US
dc.titleComplementation in Chol (Mayan) : a theory of split ergativity :en_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreePh.D.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Linguistics and Philosophy
dc.identifier.oclc710848873en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record