Advanced Search
DSpace@MIT

Case in Uyghur and beyond

Research and Teaching Output of the MIT Community

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisor David Pesetsky. en_US
dc.contributor.author Asarina, Alevtina en_US
dc.contributor.other Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy. en_US
dc.coverage.spatial a-cc--- a------ en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2012-01-30T17:02:31Z
dc.date.available 2012-01-30T17:02:31Z
dc.date.copyright 2011 en_US
dc.date.issued 2011 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/68910
dc.description Thesis (Ph. D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy, 2011. en_US
dc.description Cataloged from PDF version of thesis. en_US
dc.description Includes bibliographical references (p. 239-249). en_US
dc.description.abstract The focus of this dissertation is the syntax and morphology of case, and how case interacts with A-movement and agreement. In chapter 1, I argue on the basis of novel data from Uyghur that noun phrases bearing structural case can still be eligible for raising. I show that raising in Uyghur is EPP-driven, and does not trigger overt agreement. Thus, we must either conclude that pure EPP movement does not depend on Agree (cf. Richards 2009, a.o.), or abandon the Activity Condition proposed by Chomsky (1998, 2001). I suggest that phenomena that have been attributed to the Activity Condition can be reanalyzed by means of other principles, such as the Phase Impenetrability Condition (Chomsky 1998, 2001). In chapter 2 (based on joint work with Jeremy Hartman), I argue in favor of Chomsky's (2001) weak version of the Phase Impenetrability Condition, and against Chomsky's (1998) stronger version of the Phase Impenetrability Condition more commonly assumed. The argument is based on case assignment and agreement in n Uyghur genitive subject constructions. I furthermore suggest that adopting Chomsky's (2001) version of the Phase Impenetrability Condition makes the concept of a weak phase head unnecessary (cf. Richards 2009). In chapter 3, I propose that quirky case in Faroese is not assigned immediately when a noun phrase enters the derivation. Rather, Faroese quirky case depends on a higher functional projection. This helps explain why quirky case-marked noun phrases in Faroese can trigger number agreement and dependent case licensing, and why quirky case can fail to be assigned in Faroese passive and raising constructions. In chapter 4, 1 present the results of a study of multiple case assignment in Russian Right Node Raising constructions. I show that the morphological system can rule out multiple case assignment when no systematically syncretic form is available, and propose a way of extending Distributed Morphology to capture this phenomenon. en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibility by Alevtina (Alya) Asarina. en_US
dc.format.extent 249 p. en_US
dc.language.iso eng en_US
dc.publisher Massachusetts Institute of Technology en_US
dc.rights M.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.uri http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582 en_US
dc.subject Linguistics and Philosophy. en_US
dc.title Case in Uyghur and beyond en_US
dc.type Thesis en_US
dc.description.degree Ph.D. en_US
dc.contributor.department Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy. en_US
dc.identifier.oclc 773612788 en_US


Files in this item

Name Size Format Description
773612788.pdf 1.624Mb PDF Preview, non-printable (open to all)
773612788-MIT.pdf 1.643Mb PDF Full printable version (MIT only)

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

MIT-Mirage