Abstract
Animacy influences the patterns of subject-verb agreement marking in many languages, including Persian and Inari Saami. In Persian, animate plural subjects trigger plural agreement on the verb, whereas inanimate subjects may or may not trigger agreement. The variation is governed by factors such as personification, agency and distributivity. In Inari Saami, verbs fully agree with human subjects and verbs partially agree with inanimate subjects. Verbs may or may not agree with subjects referring to animals. We argue that the intricate interaction between biological animacy and grammatical agreement in these two languages warrants careful consideration of the tripartite distinction between biological animacy in the world, our conceptualization of animacy and formal animacy features in the grammar.
References
Judith Aissen. Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 21(3):435–483, 2003.Search in Google Scholar
Stephen R. Anderson. A-Morphous Morphology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992.10.1017/CBO9780511586262Search in Google Scholar
Misha Becker. The Acquisition of Syntactic Structure: Animacy and thematic alignment. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2014.10.1017/CBO9781139022033Search in Google Scholar
J. Kathryn Bock and Richard K. Warren. Conceptual accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence formulation. Cognition, 21: 47–67, 1985.10.1016/0010-0277(85)90023-XSearch in Google Scholar
Joan Bresnan, Shipra Dingare, and Christopher D. Manning. Soft constraints mirror hard constraints: Voice and person in English and Lummi. In Miriam Butt and Tracy Holloway King, editors, Proceedings of the LFG01 Conference, On–line proceedings, Stanford, CA, 2001. CSLI Publications.Search in Google Scholar
Joan Bresnan, Ash Asudeh, Ida Toivonen, and Stephen Wechsler. Lexical-Functional Syntax, Second edition. Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken, NJ, 2016.10.1002/9781119105664Search in Google Scholar
Herbert H Clark. Some structural properties of simple active and passive sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 4(5):365–370, 1965.10.1016/S0022-5371(65)80073-1Search in Google Scholar
Bernard Comrie. Language Universals and Linguistic Typology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 1981.Search in Google Scholar
William Croft. Typology and Universals. Cambrige University Press, Cambridge, 1990.Search in Google Scholar
Östen Dahl. Animacy and egophoricity: Grammar, ontology and phylogeny. Lingua, 118:141–150, 2008.Search in Google Scholar
Mary Dalrymple. Lexical Functional Grammar. Syntax and Semantics 34. Academic Press, New York, NY, 2001.10.1163/9781849500104Search in Google Scholar
Helen de Hoop and Peter de Swart. Shifting animacy. Theoretical Linguistics, 44(1–2):1–24, 2018.10.1515/tl-2018-0001Search in Google Scholar
Aazamosadat Feizmohammadpour. Optional subject-verb agreement in Persian. PhD thesis, University of Florida, 2013.Search in Google Scholar
Fernanda Ferreira. Choice of passive voice is affected by verb type and animacy. Journal of Memory and Language, 33:715–736, 1994.10.1006/jmla.1994.1034Search in Google Scholar
Rafaella Folli and Heidi Harley. Teleology and animacy in external arguments. Lingua, 118(2):190–202, 2008.10.1016/j.lingua.2007.02.004Search in Google Scholar
William Frawley. Linguistic Semantics. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1992.Search in Google Scholar
Rochel Gelman, Frank Durgin, and Lisa Kaufman. Distinguishing between animates and inanimates: Not by motion alone. In Dan Sperber, David Premack, and Ann James Premack, editors, Causal cognition: A multidisciplinary debate, pages 1–26. Clarendon, Oxford, 1995.Search in Google Scholar
Jila Ghomeshi. Plural marking, indefiniteness, and the noun phrase. Studia Linguistica, 57(2):47–74, 2003.10.1111/1467-9582.00099Search in Google Scholar
Jila Ghomeshi. Markedness and bare nouns in Persian. In Simin Karimi, Vida Samiian, and Donald Stilo, editors, Aspects of Iranian Linguistics, pages 85–111. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle upon Tyne, 2008.Search in Google Scholar
Margaret Harris. Noun animacy and the passive voice: A developmental approach. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 30:495–504, 1978.Search in Google Scholar
Forogh Hashabeiky. The usage of singular verbs for inanimate plural subjects in Persian. Orientalia Suecana, pages 77–101, 2007.Search in Google Scholar
Eloise Jelinek and Richard Demers. Predicates and pronominal arguments in Straits Salish. Language, 70:697–736, 1983.10.2307/416325Search in Google Scholar
Ronald M. Kaplan and Joan Bresnan. Lexical-functional grammar: A formal system for grammatical representation. In Joan Bresnan, editor, The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations, pages 173–281. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1982.Search in Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. ‘Elsewhere’ in Phonology. In A Festschrift for Morris Halle, ed. by Stephen Anderson and Paul Kiparsky, 93-106. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1973Search in Google Scholar
Seppo Kittilä, Katja Västi, and Jussi Ylikoski. Introduction to case, animacy and semantic roles. In Case, Animacy and Semantic Roles, pages 1–26. John Benjamins, Amsterdam and Philadelphia, 2011.10.1075/tsl.99.01kitSearch in Google Scholar
Ahmad R. Lotfi. Agreement in Persian. Linguistik Online, 29:123–141, 2006.10.13092/lo.29.560Search in Google Scholar
John Mace. Teach Yourself Modern Persian. The English Universities Press, London, 1962.Search in Google Scholar
Shahrzaf Mahootian. Persian. Routledge, London and New York, 1997.Search in Google Scholar
Britttany Dael McLaughlin. Animacy in morphosyntactic variation. PhD thesis, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 2014.Search in Google Scholar
Louise McNally. Existential sentences. In C. Maienborn, K. von Hausinger, and P. Portner, editors, Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, pages 1829–1848. De Gruyter, Berlin, 2011.Search in Google Scholar
Robin Melnick. Plurality Cues and Non-Agreement in English Existentials. PhD thesis, San Jose State University, San Jose, 1994.Search in Google Scholar
Javier Ormazabal and Juan Romero. The object agreement constraint. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 25:315–347, 2007.10.1007/s11049-006-9010-9Search in Google Scholar
Gilliam Ramchand. Verb Meaning and the Lexicon: A first-phase syntax. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008.10.1017/CBO9780511486319Search in Google Scholar
Elizabeth Ritter. Featuring animacy. Nordlyd, 41(1):103–124, 2014.10.7557/12.3315Search in Google Scholar
Fritz Rosen. Persian Grammar: A short grammar, dialogues and extracts from Nasir-Eddin Shah’s diaries, Tales, etc. and a vocabulary. Routledge, New Delhi, 1898. Reprinted in 1979.Search in Google Scholar
Anousha Sedighi. Animacy: The overlooked feature in Persian. In Proceedings of the 2004 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association, Winnipeg Meeting, 2006.Search in Google Scholar
Anna Siewierska. Person. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004.10.1017/CBO9780511812729Search in Google Scholar
Michael Silverstein. Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In Richard Dixon, editor, Grammatical Categories in Australian Languages, pages 112–172. Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, Canberra, 1976.Search in Google Scholar
Neal Snider and Annie Zaenen. Animacy and syntactic structure: Fronted NPs in english. In Miriam Butt, Mary Dalrymple, and Tracy Holloway King, editors, Intelligent Linguistic Architectures: Variations on themes by Ronald M. Kaplan, pages 323–338. CSLI Publications, Stanford, 2006.Search in Google Scholar
Ida Toivonen. Verbal agreement in Inari Saami. In Ida Toivonen and Diane Nelson, editors, Saami Linguistics, Current issues in Linguistic Theory 288, pages 227–258. John Benjamins, Amsterdam and Philadelphia, 2007a.10.1075/cilt.288.09toiSearch in Google Scholar
Ida Toivonen. Microvariation in Inari Saami. In Antti Aikio and Jussi Ylikoski, editors, Sámit, sánit, sátnehámit: A Festschrift for Pekka Sammallahti, pages 363–374. Suomalais-ugrilainen seura, Helsinki, 2007b.Search in Google Scholar
Patrice Tremoulet and Jacob Feldman. Perception of animacy from the motion of a single object. Perception, 29(8):943–51, 2000.10.1068/p3101Search in Google Scholar
Mutsumi Yamamoto. Animacy and Reference: A Cognitive Approach to Corpus Linguistics. John Benjamins, Amsterdam and Philadelphia, 1999.10.1075/slcs.46Search in Google Scholar
Annie Zaenen, Jean Carletta, Gregory Garretson, Joan Bresnan, Andrew Koontz-Garboden, Tatiana Nikitina, Mary C. O’Connor, andSearch in Google Scholar
Tom Wasow. Animacy encoding in English: Why and how. In Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL’04), Workshop on Discourse Annotation, pages 118–125, Barcelona, 2004.Search in Google Scholar
© 2019 Shiva Bayanati et al., published by De Gruyter Open
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Public License.
