-
9. Coordinate Structures
- The MIT Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
9 Coordinate Structures 9.1 The Basic Law A coordination of two or more DPs with different person values raises the question of the principles assigning a person value to the coordinate node dominating them. What is arguably the basic law governing the assignment of person values in conjunctive coordination was in essence already determined in traditional work, as in (1). (1) Curme 1931, 557 “When a pronoun refers to two or more antecedents of different persons, the first person has precedence over the second and third, and the second person precedence over the third: ‘You and I divided it between us.’ ‘You and he divided it between you.’” That is, when a conjunctive coordination involves a 1st person DP conjunct, the whole is 1st person; when it involves no 1st person DP conjunct but does involve a 2nd person conjunct, the whole is 2nd person; otherwise, the whole is 3rd person. Since Curme 1931, such a law has, in essence, been advanced numeroustimesinthelinguisticliterature(see,e.g.,Grevisse1969,414;Zwicky 1977; Corbett 1983, 175–176, and 2006, 240; Karttunen 1984; Sag et al. 1985; Dalrymple and Kaplan 2000; Dalrymple 2001; Sag 2003).1 Claims for the validity of such a principle are not limited to accounts of English. For example, Hale (1973) has advanced a parallel condition for the Australian aboriginal language Warlpiri. Starting from a feature analysis of person based (irrelevantly for present concerns) on the two binary person features I and II, with 1st person analyzed as [+I, −II], 2nd person as [−I, +II], and 3rd person as [−I, −II], Hale offers the following conditions for person assignment in coordinate cases: 106 Chapter 9 (2) Hale 1973, 323 “In the case of conjoined noun phrases, the dominant NP node acquires person and number features from the conjoined NP nodes under it according to principles which might be stated very roughly as in (33) . . . : (33) PERSON (a) If [+I] is present among the conjoined NPs, the dominating NP is [+I] (b) If [+II] is present among the conjoined NPs, the dominating NP is [+II] (c) If only minus values of person features are present among the conjoined NPs, the dominating NP is [−I, −II].” Evidently, Hale’s (33) is to be understood in such a way that if (a) holds, it bleeds appeal to (b) so that the combination of 1st and 2nd person conjuncts yields a 1st person mother node. Most interestingly from the point of view of the universality of the generalizations at issue, Hahm (2006, 7) indicates that parallel principles hold in American Sign Language. Conclusions about the assignment of person (and other ϕ-feature) values to coordinate DPs are justified essentially by the way coordinate DPs enter into agreement relations of various sorts. In English, the principles just referred to are basically relevant only to pronominal antecedence, because verb agreement does not distinguish person in plural cases. So: (3) a. That twin and I/Fred/you are both lawyers. b. That twin and I are both proud of ourselves/*themselves/*yourselves. c. That twin and Fred are both proud of *ourselves/themselves/ *yourselves. d. That twin and you are both proud of *ourselves/*themselves/ yourselves. But in French, verb agreement also supports the conclusion that coordinations of conjuncts of differing persons yield contrastive verbal agreements. (4) a. J’ai l’impression que cette femme et lui sont des pervers I have the impression that that woman and he are.3pl of.the perverts parce que . . . because ‘I have the impression that that woman and he are perverts because . . .’ (www.camoin.com/ . . . /je-ne-trouve-pas-de-centre-d-appui-en-moit4016 .html) [52.90.181.205] Project MUSE (2024-03-19 13:59 GMT) Coordinate Structures 107 b. Ce type et moi sommes particulièrement compatibles that guy and I are.1pl particularly compatible musicalement . . . musically ‘That guy and I are particularly compatible musically . . .’ (www.lechoix.fr/ . . . /dirty-projectors-stillness-is-the-move-nouveau/) c. Mais attends un peu, ce type et toi êtes ennemis. but wait a little that guy and you are.2pl enemies ‘But wait a moment, that guy and you are enemies.’ (forum.ageofseadogs.com/index.php?topic=2456.0) d. Vous et moi sommes d’accord, à la base, M. Asselin. you and I are.1pl in agreement to the base Mr. Asselin ‘You and I are in agreement, fundamentally, Mr. Asselin.’ (carnets.opossum.ca/mario/archives/2006/03/lecole_finlanda.html) Interchanging the forms of the copula—sont, sommes, êtes—in these...