{"id":15259,"date":"2023-01-17T06:05:06","date_gmt":"2023-01-17T11:05:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/whamit.mit.edu\/?p=15259"},"modified":"2023-01-13T18:18:47","modified_gmt":"2023-01-13T23:18:47","slug":"grishin-published-in-glossa","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/2023\/01\/17\/grishin-published-in-glossa\/","title":{"rendered":"Grishin published in Glossa"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>We are delighted to announce the publication in Glossa of (dissertating student) <a href=\"https:\/\/www.petergrishin.com\/\">Peter Grishin&#8217;s<\/a> paper &#8220;Omnivorous third person agreement in Algonquian&#8221;.\u00a0 Congratulations Peter!! Here&#8217;s the abstract:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>I argue that third person is not underspecified: there must be a distinct third person feature. I add to the existing body of morphological arguments for this conclusion (Nevins 2007; Trommer 2008, a.o.) a syntactic argument: I show that there is omnivorous third person agreement in Algonquian languages. I focus here on two, Blackfoot (Plains Algonquian) and Plains Cree (Central Algonquian), demonstrating that they have an agreement suffix (the peripheral suffix, analyzed as a probe in C) that indexes the number, animacy, and obviation of the structurally-highest third person argument, skipping over first and second person if it has to. I argue that alternative analyses of this agreement pattern in terms of animacy, obviation, and the categorial feature [D] do not work; thus, third person must be specified even in the syntax (contra Preminger 2019).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>Glossa is an open-access journal so everyone can access the paper here: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.glossa-journal.org\/article\/id\/8874\/\">https:\/\/www.glossa-journal.org\/article\/id\/8874\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>We are delighted to announce the publication in Glossa of (dissertating student) Peter Grishin&#8217;s paper &#8220;Omnivorous third person agreement in Algonquian&#8221;.\u00a0 Congratulations Peter!! Here&#8217;s the abstract: I argue that third person is not underspecified: there must be a distinct third person feature. I add to the existing body of morphological arguments for this conclusion (Nevins [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":33,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-15259","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-announcements"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15259","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/33"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=15259"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15259\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":15260,"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15259\/revisions\/15260"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15259"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15259"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15259"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}