Agree and Epp in Bantu
Agree and Epp in Bantu
复制标题
同意并在班图埃普
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2005
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Vicki Carstens
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Vicki Carstens
C语言在其Spec中同意一个算子的φ-特征，但在许多班图语言中不同意一个算子的φ-特征。尽管如此，我认为最接近的基于C命令的帐户（Chomsky 2000）上级Spec-head协议分析，原因有二。首先，功能评估下最接近的c命令允许一个统一的治疗班图算子协议和西日耳曼语的补语协议与科目。其次，本文解释了班图语A′-移位结构中主语必须处于原位的一个共同要求：一个被提升到Spec，TP的主语将介入C的φ-特征和外部Spec，vP中必须重视它们的算子之间。像wh-移位一样，主语提升在班图语中总是与一致性相一致;我认为班图语不可解释的φ-特征具有EPP特征。这些都是不同的经典EPP的T，我认为，基于口头协议的要求，使每一个班图语的屈折类别的说明。我表明，主格检查是独立的协议和EPP在班图。
C agrees in the φ-features of an operator in its Spec but not one in situ in many Bantu languages. Despite this I argue that a closest c-command based account (Chomsky 2000) is superior to a Spec–head agreement analysis, for two reasons. First, feature-valuation under closest c-command permits a unified treatment of Bantu operator agreement and West Germanic complementizer agreement with subjects. Second, it explains a common requirement that subjects be in situin Bantu A′-movement constructions: a subject raised to Spec, TP would intervene between C’s φ-features and the operator in outer Spec, vP that must value them. Like wh-movement, subject raising always coincides with agreement in Bantu; I propose that Bantu uninterpretable φ-features have EPP features. These are distinct from the classical EPP of T which, I argue, underlies a verbal agreement requirement giving every Bantu inflectional category a specifier. I show that nominative Case-checking is independent of both agreement and EPP in Bantu.