Agreement In Relative Clauses

Resi, Rossella. 2011. The position of relative rates in German. Lingue e Linguaggio 1. 87-118. “My mother” is already a clearly defined name, so the second sentence becomes a non-restrictive reference rate, put by commas on both sides. Restrictive relative rates can be reduced to two types. Bobaljik, Jonathan and Susi Verbrand. 2005. The area of the agreement. Natural language and language theory 23. 809-865. DOI: doi.org/10.1007/s11049-004-3792-4.

Demirdache, Hamida. 1991. Summative chains in restrictive families, non-restrictive structures and dislocation. Doctoral thesis. Cambridge, MA: MIT. In this article, we examine the concordance between the relative pronoun and the head noun in RRCs and NRCs in Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian (BCS) and argue that the differences in matching patterns that exist in the two types of relative sentences can only be explained if rrCs and NRCs differ in their own syntax. In particular, we focus on three hybrid nouns in BCS: d (j)eca1 `Kinder`, braća `Brothers` and gospoda `Adel`, which are morphologically singular, but which denote semantically plural (Corbett 2006, a.o.). When a hybrid is at the head of a DRR, two patterns of concordance between the head noun and the relative pronoun are preserved, depending on the case where the relative phenomenon occurs (Changer and Zlatić 2000): in nominative and battery, the relative pronoun reflects the morphological characteristics of the noun (Singular); in other cases, it may correspond either to the morphological characteristics (singular) or to the semantic characteristics (plural) of the head noun. In contrast, the relative pronoun of an NRC, cited by a hybrid noun, may reflect a number of characteristics of the head noun (morphological or semantic) along the entire line (Alsina and Arsenijević 2012a, b).

We take the fact that compliance is a phenomenon that has phonological consequences to emphasize that it is not an ALL process. On the contrary, it must be made at a point in the derivation that precedes the call for tenders (Chomsky 2000; 2001).2 In this case, different convergence patterns, the hybrid names in the RCRs and the RSSs, show that the structures of the two types of relative rates must differ sufficiently to take into account the differences observed before the level of the ISPs. This in turn runs counter to the analysis of the differences between CPR and RSS in (i) above. The proposed analysis takes into account the distribution of compliance models between BCS CRPs and nominative and battery DRR, as well as the internal DRR asymmetry between nominative and accusative, on the one hand, and all other cases, on the other. By explaining the asymmetries in the phonologically realized correspondence between RRCs and NRCs, our paper also distinguishes two families of DNA analyses, in favor of those in which NRCs reach the DP layer in close syntax and those where they arrive only at LFs. The possible objectives of the agreement for PR in RRCs are presented in Figure 1. The observations presented in this paper can also be taken into account in the analysis of De Vries (2002; 2006) presented in Figure 5. . .