Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-j4x9h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-05T17:35:29.213Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Agreement, Shells, and Focus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2026

Andrew Simpson  and
Zoe Wu
Andrew Simpson*
Affiliation:
School of Oriental and African Studies, University of Southern California
Zoe Wu*
Affiliation:
School of Oriental and African Studies, University of Southern California
*
Simpson, SOAS, University of London, Russell Sq, London WCIH 0XG, England [as4@soas.ac.uk]
Wu, Dept. of East Asian Languages and Cultures, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, THH226A Los Angeles, CA 90089-0357 [xiuzhiwu@usc.edu]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This article reconsiders the development and licensing of agreement as a syntactic projection and argues for a productive developmental relation between agreement and the category of focus. The authors suggest that focus projections are initially selected by a variety of functional heads with real semantic content. Over time however such selected focus frequently decays into a simple concord shell, and when this occurs, the lower half of the shell becomes a simple agreement projection parasitically licensed by the higher functional head, which does have a genuine semantic value.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 78 , Issue 2 , June 2002 , pp. 287 - 313
Copyright
Copyright © 2002 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bresnan, Joan, and Mchombo, Sam. 1987. Topic, pronoun and agreement in Chichewa. Language 63. 741–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brody, Michael. 2000. Mirror theory: Syntactic representation in perfect syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 31:29–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1998. Minimalist enquiries. MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 15, Cambridge, MA; MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1999. Derivation by phase. MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 18, Cambridge, MA; MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, D.T. 1955. An introduction to Tswana grammar. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1980. Morphology and word order reconstruction: Problems and prospects. Historical morphology, ed. by Fisiak, Jacek, 83–96. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Cornillon, Jeanne. 1998. A case for A’-expletive-associate chains. West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics 16. 97–112.Google Scholar
Fu, Jingqi. 1994. On deriving Chinese derived nominais: Evidence for V-to-N raising. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts dissertation.Google Scholar
Gamillscheg, Ernst. 1957. Historische französische syntax. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Giusti, Giuliana. 1997. The catégorial status of determiners. The new comparative syntax, ed. by Haegeman, Liliane, 60–85. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1976. Topic, pronoun and grammatical agreement. Subject and topic, ed. by Li, Charles, 149–88. London/New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph. 1978. How does a language acquire agreement markers? Universais of human language, ed. by Greenberg, Joseph, Ferguson, Charles and Moravcsik, Edith, 3:47–82. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul, and Traugott, Elizabeth. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Huang, C.-T. James. 1982. Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Hundius, Harold, and Kölver, Ulrike. (1983) Syntax and semantics of numeral classifiers in Thai. Studies in Language 7. 165–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kayne, Richard. 1994. The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kayne, Richard. 2000. Parameters and universais. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kayne, Richard. 2001. Pronouns and their antecedents. New York: New York University, MS.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward. 1985. Relative clauses. Language typology and syntactic description, vol. 2: Complex constructions, ed. by Shopen, Timothy, 141–70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Koopman, Hilda. 1999. The syntax of specifiers and heads. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Larson, Richard. 1988. On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry 19. 335–91.Google Scholar
Montes Giraldo, Jose de. 1974. El habla del Choco: notas breves. Thesaurus 29. 409–28.Google Scholar
Murasugi, Keiko. 2000. An antisymmetry analysis of Japanese relative clauses. The syntax of relative clauses, ed. by Alexiadou, Artemis, Law, Paul, Meinunger, André and Wilder, Chris, 231–63. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ouhalla, Jamal. 1999. Relative clauses and genitives in Afro-Asiatic. London: Queen Mary and Westfield College, University of London, ms.Google Scholar
Pollock, Jean Yves. 1989. Verb movement, universal grammar and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20. 365–424.Google Scholar
Price, Glanville. 1971. The French language: Present and past. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Radford, Andrew. 1997. Syntactic theory and the structure of English: A minimalist approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. rCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rickard, Peter. 1983. A history of the French language. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. Elements of grammar, ed. by Haegeman, Liliane, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Schwegler, Armin. 1988. Word order changes in predicate negation strategies in Romance languages. Diachronica 5. 21–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwegler, Armin. 1990. Analyticity and syntheticity: A diachronic perspective with special reference to Romance languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segopolou, Bernard. 2000. The agreement system of Bantu with particular reference to Setswana. London: School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, ms.Google Scholar
Silva-Villar, Luis, and Gutiérrez-Rexach, Javier. 2001. Demonstratives in a feature- based theory of syntax. The minimalist parameter, ed. by Alexandrova, Galina and Amaudova, Olga, 325–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Simpson, Andrew. 1997. On the status of modifying DE and the structure of the Chinese DP. Paper presented at the UCI Conference on formal Chinese linguistics. Now forthcoming in: On the formal way to Chinese languages, ed. by Tang, Sze-Wing and Chen-Sheng, Luther Liu, Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Simpson, Andrew. 2001a. Definiteness agreement and the Chinese DP. Language & Linguistics 2. 125–56.Google Scholar
Simpson, Andrew. 2001b. Focus, presupposition and light predicate raising in East and Southeast Asian languages. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 10. 89–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, Andrew, and Wu, Zoe. 2002. IP-raising, tone sandhi and the creation of particles: Evidence for cyclic spell-out. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 11.1.67–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soh, Hooi Ling. 2001. The syntax and semantics of phonological phrasing in Shanghai and Hokkien. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 10. 37–80.Google Scholar
Spencer, Andrew. 1991. Morphological theory. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sportiche, Dominique. 1995. Clitic constructions. Phrase structure and the lexicon, ed. by Rooryck, Johan and Zaring, Laurie, 213–76. Dordrecht, Kluwer.Google Scholar
Uriagereka, Juan. 1995. Aspects of the syntax of clitic placement in western Romance. Linguistic Inquiry 26. 79–123.Google Scholar
Vergnaud, Jean-Roger. 1985. Dépendances et niveaux de représentation en syntaxe. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vergnaud, Jean-Roger, and Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa. 1992. The definite determiner and the inalienable constructions in French and in English. Linguistic Inquiry 23. 595–652.Google Scholar
Vincent, Nigel. 1997. The emergence of the D-system in Romance. Parameters of morpho- syntactic change, ed. by Kemenade, Ans van and Vincent, Nigel, 149–69. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, Janis. 1987. An indefiniteness restriction for relative clauses in Lhakota. The representation of (in)definiteness. ed. by Reuland, Eric and Meulen, Alice ter, 150–75, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Winters, Margaret. 1987. Innovations in French negation: A cognitive grammar account. Diachronica 4. 27–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, Zoe. 2000. Grammaticalization and the development of functional categories in Mandarin Chinese. Los Angeles: University of Southern California dissertation.Google Scholar
Zanuttini, Raffaela. 1997. Negation and clausal structure: a comparative study of Romance languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhuangzi, . Cited according to Zhuangzi yinde (A concordance to Chuang Tzu), Harvard- Yenching Institute Sinological Index Series, Supplement No. 20. Peiping: Yenching University Press, 1947.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa. 1998. Prosody, focus, and word order. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar