{"id":15973,"date":"2023-11-20T06:08:00","date_gmt":"2023-11-20T11:08:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/whamit.mit.edu\/?p=15973"},"modified":"2023-11-20T09:09:34","modified_gmt":"2023-11-20T14:09:34","slug":"syntax-square-11-21-christopher-legerme-mit-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/2023\/11\/20\/syntax-square-11-21-christopher-legerme-mit-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Syntax Square 11\/21 - Christopher Legerme (MIT)"},"content":{"rendered":"

Speaker: <\/strong> Christopher Legerme (MIT)

\nTitle: <\/strong>Pronominal Copulas and Defective T(ense) in Haitian Creole
\nTime: <\/strong>Tuesday, November 21st, 1pm - 2pm

\nLocation: <\/strong>32-D461

\n
\n<\/p>\n

Hi, I will be presenting some of my ongoing work on the morphosyntax of copular clauses in Haitian Creole (HC), focusing on the puzzling distribution\u00a0the word se<\/i><\/b>\u00a0<\/i>(glosses ranging from \u0093FOC\u0094, \u0093COP\u0094, or \u0093SE\u0094),<\/i>\u00a0which behaves like a pronominal copula though has resisted a unifying account of its multifunctional properties and sparked much debate among linguists\u00a0on a range of syntactic, morphological, and semantic issues (DeGraff 1992, 1995, Kihm 1993, 2018, D\u00e9prez & Vinet 1997, D\u00e9prez 2003). The gist of the puzzle is as follows:\u00a0<\/p>\n

Puzzle 1<\/b>: Why does\u00a0se<\/i><\/b>\u00a0occur adjacent negation or tense\/aspect \u0093markers\u0094 such as te<\/i>\u00a0\u0093PST\u0094 (let’s call them N(eg)T(esne)A(aspect) auxiliaries, cf. DeGraff 1992: 29-36) in some contexts but not others? For example, exclusively\u00a0<\/i>se<\/i><\/b>\u00a0can be used for the present-tense matrix copular clause (1a), and it cannot surface with NTA auxiliaries such as te <\/i><\/b>(nor with non-property-denoting lexical predicates). Notwithstanding, in\u00a0<\/i>se<\/i><\/b>-clefts (\u0093it-clefts\u0094) se <\/i><\/b>appears to be in the position where we expect the subject (before the NTA auxiliary).<\/p>\n

(1) a. Saika *(se) yon dokt\u00e8\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Saika SE\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0a\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0doctor\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Saika is a doctor<\/p>\n

b. \u00a0Saika\u00a0 (*se) te\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0(*se)\u00a0 \u00a0 yon dokt\u00e8\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0Saika\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0SE\u00a0 PAST\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0SE\u00a0 a\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 doctor\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Saika was a doctor\u00a0<\/p>\n

c. Se\u00a0 \u00a0te\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0medikaman mwen (ke)\u00a0 Saika (te)\u00a0 \u00a0preskri\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 SE\u00a0 PST medicine\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 my\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0that Saika PST prescribe\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 It was my medicine that Saika prescribed\u00a0<\/p>\n

Puzzle 2<\/b>: While se<\/i><\/b> <\/i>is generally <\/i>obligatory before DPs (1a), why isn\u0092t this so for clauses with wh<\/i>-moved DP subjects, especially when the subject is a\u00a0wh-<\/i>word (DeGraff 1992: 122-123; D\u00e9prez & Vinet 1997: 221)?\u00a0<\/p>\n

(2) a. Se Saikai\u00a0 \u00a0 <\/sub>ki\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 ti\u00a0 <\/sub>(se)\u00a0 \u00a0yon\u00a0 \u00a0dokt\u00e8\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 SE\u00a0 Saika\u00a0 COMP\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0SE\u00a0 \u00a0a\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0doctor\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 It is Saika who is a doctor\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 b.\u00a0 kimoun\u00a0 \u00a0 ki\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0(??se)\u00a0 yon dokt\u00e8?\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 who\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 COMP\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0SE\u00a0 \u00a0a\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0doctor<\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Who is a doctor?<\/p>\n

Se<\/i><\/b>\u00a0<\/i>has been analyzed as an\u00a0A-bound resumptive pronoun (DeGraff 1992), the head of PREDP\/vP<\/i>\/ASPP (D\u00e9prez 2003), and an allomorph of a lexical verb meaning “BE” (Kihm 2018).\u00a0It is likely that se<\/i><\/b>\u00a0is somewhere along a developmental cline from (demonstrative) pronoun to copula, which is a well-documented phenomenon crosslinguistically (Van Gelderen 2011; see D\u00e9prez 2003: 153 for the relevant HC facts). I will explore the possibility that se<\/i><\/b>\u00a0<\/i>is base generated in a position canonically above NTA auxiliaries but below the subject DP (basically, T). se<\/i>-clefts like (1b) must have\u00a0an expletive subject. Meanwhile, TPs headed by se<\/i>\u00a0have EPP or unvalued nominal features that agree with the matrix subject in Spec,TP when possible (Jurczyk 2021). On the other hand, CPs headed by\u00a0ki <\/i>must have\u00a0identical\u00a0features with those on T which in (2b) would be\u00a0EPP, u<\/i>?, and\u00a0u<\/i>wh. <\/b>The complementizer ki <\/i>surfaces because the wh-<\/i>subject has\u00a0fully agreed<\/b>\u00a0with both T and C (Takahashi & <\/i>Gra?anin-Yuksek 2008).\u00a0This\u00a0might explain\u00a0why the use of se<\/i><\/b>\u00a0in (2b) is especially\u00a0awkward for speakers. In fact, I propose that form se<\/i><\/b> <\/i>strongly prefers to surface\u00a0when it is able to fully agree with its subject<\/b>. Partial agreement with the subject leads to a null spellout of T, similarly to the ki\/ke alternation of C (Takahashi & <\/i>Gra?anin-Yuksek 2008). The co-occurrence of se<\/i><\/b>\u00a0with NTA auxiliaries, lexical predicates, or any combinations thereof is\u00a0ruled\u00a0out for similar reasons as when it would occur adjacent ki<\/i>. se <\/i><\/b>can only partially agree with the subject (if at all) when an (u<\/i>?-bearing) NTA auxiliary is generated.<\/div>\n
The distribution of se<\/i><\/b> in HC shows some striking similarities with pronominal copulas in other languages such as Polish to<\/i><\/b>\u00a0”to be” (Citko 2008, Bondaruk 2019,\u00a0 Jurczyk 2021) which have also been shown to be a particular instance of T with unvalued nominal features. Where to <\/i><\/b>and se<\/i><\/b>\u00a0differ, however (e.g., the demonstrative meaning and the availability of double copula constructions with Polish to<\/i><\/b>) will better inform how we should treat se<\/i><\/b>.\u00a0Along with crosslinguistic data on pronominal copulas, I\u0092ll consider evidence from embedded and specificational copular constructions to evaluate previous analyses characterizing\u00a0<\/i>se<\/i><\/b>\u00a0<\/i>as either a verb or pronoun, preferring instead to treat it as a functional head\u00a0with nominal properties\u00a0along the inflectional cline of HC.<\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/div>\n
Cheers!<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Speaker: Christopher Legerme (MIT) Title: Pronominal Copulas and Defective T(ense) in Haitian Creole Time: Tuesday, November 21st, 1pm - 2pm Location: 32-D461 Hi, I will be presenting some of my ongoing work on the morphosyntax of copular clauses in Haitian Creole (HC), focusing on the puzzling distribution\u00a0the word se\u00a0(glosses ranging from \u0093FOC\u0094, \u0093COP\u0094, or \u0093SE\u0094),\u00a0which […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":26,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-15973","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-announcements"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15973","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\/26"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=15973"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15973\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":15987,"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15973\/revisions\/15987"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15973"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15973"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15973"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}