Appendix: on Variety of the mixture of Sex–Matter Combinations
Fuchs, Z., Polinsky, M., and Scontras, G. (2015). The newest differential signal out-of number and you will gender inside the Foreign-language. Linguist. Rev. thirty-two, 703–737.
Hartsuiker, R., Schriefers, H., Bock, K., and you may Kikstra, G. Yards. (2003). Morphophonological influences toward framework out-of subject-verb contract. Mem. Cogn. 29, 1316–1326.
Heycock, C., and you can Zamparelli, Roentgen. (2005). Friends and you can associates: plurality, dexterity, together with design off DP. Nat. Lang. 13, 201–270.
Hinojosa, J., Martin-Loeches, Yards., Casado, P., Munoz, F., and you may Rubia https://kissbrides.com/uruguay-women/soca/, F. (2003). Similarities and you may differences between phrase structure and you may morphosyntactic violations during the Language: a meeting-associated potentials research. Lang. Cogn. Process. 18, 113–142.
Igoa, J. Yards., Garcia-Albea, J. Elizabeth., and you may Sanches-Casas, Roentgen. (1999). Gender-amount dissociation for the phrase development into the Foreign language. Ital. J. Linguist. eleven, 163–196.
Krstev, C., and you will Vitas, D. (2005). “Corpus. and you may Lexicon – Shared Incompletness,” inside the Procedures of your own Corpus Linguistics Appointment, eds P. Danielsson and you can M. Wagenmakers, Liverpool.
Malko, Good., and you can Slioussar, Letter. (2013). “Appeal problems inside the intercourse agreement: Evidence away from Russian,” when you look at the Procedures Specialized Ways to Slavic Linguistics: The 3rd Indiana Conference, eds S. Franks, ainsi que al. (Ann Arbor: Michigan College Drive), 162–175.
). “Past conjunct arrangement inside the Slovenian,” into the Proceedings of Certified Remedies for Slavic linguistics 2006, eds Rpton, Yards. Goledzinowska, and you may You. Savchenko (Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Courses), 210-227.
Mitic, We., and you can Arsenijevic, B. (2019). Structural ambiguity and you may optionality off contract designs from inside the Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian conjunct arrangement. An effective J. Gen. Linguist. 4:six.
Nevins, A., Dillon, B., Malhotra, S., and you will Phillips, C. (2007). The newest character of feature-number and show-type in control Hindi verb contract abuses. Mind Res. 1164, 81–94.
Puskar, Z., and you will Murphy, An excellent. (2015). “Closest conjunct contract within the serbo-croatian: a guideline-buying account,” inside Information on InfL. Linguistische Arbeitsberichte (LAB), Vol. 92, eds An excellent. Assmann, S. Financial, D. Georgi, T. Klein, P. Weisser, and you may Age. Zimmermann (Leipzig: Universitat Leipzig), 441–482.
Vigliocco, Grams., Butterworth, B., and you will Garrett, Meters. F. (1996). Subject-verb arrangement when you look at the Foreign-language and you may English: differences in the new role off conceptual constraints. Cognition 61, 261–298.
Semant
Willer-Gold, J., Arsenijevic, B., Batinic, Meters., Becker, Meters., Cordalija, N., Kresic, Meters., et al. (2018). When linearity prevails more ladder from inside the syntax. PNAS 115, 495–five hundred. doi: /pnas.1712729115
The fresh new five rationally you are able to combinations as well as their features was depicted in (21)
Willer-Silver, J., Arsenijevic, B., Batinic, Meters., Cordalija, Letter., Kresic, Yards., Leko, Letter., ainsi que al. (2016). Morphosyntactic production of dexterity agreement when you look at the South Slavic–a relative studies. J. Slavic Linguist. 24, 187–224.
This part clarifies specific tech issues about your options manufactured in the appearance of all of our try out, into the white of special properties off South carolina morphology. It is aimed mainly for these seeking the fresh new theoretic and you will detailed linguistic, unlike psycholinguistic regions of the study.
In our fresh framework, i’ve capitalized on the simple fact that inside the Sc NSg nouns avoid in both -elizabeth or in -o, which the plural results in -an effective, if you find yourself meanwhile FSg nouns bring about -a, and their plural forms end up in -e. It yields a great entered, yet , partial syncretism.
The blend of NSg and FPl allows for the forming of restricted pairs ranging from good syncretic and you will a low-syncretic set of nouns, as mixture of NPl and FSg allows for only one chance, that is syncretic.
We made use of restricted sets as in (20a) inside our vital stimulus. The brand new picked choice, yet not, allows a couple of sub-solutions, depending on which gender–number integration arrives as the earliest, and you can hence because the past conjunct. It was based on another equivalent planning.
The fresh verb bears the new endings: -o to own NSg, -a towards NPl and FSg, or -elizabeth having FPl – i.elizabeth., you can identify NSg from FPl into the verb. This means that, apart from the unambiguously standard male finish -i, when an excellent verb in -age was introduced, we had been certain that it was FPl, of course an effective verb from inside the -o was put, i know that it was NSg. Yet not, when an excellent verb when you look at the -a had been introduced – it absolutely was uncertain whether it try plural, agreeing into the gender on earliest conjunct (NPl), otherwise it actually was just one and you can conformed inside gender into history conjunct (FSg).