Jamie Douglas - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Papers by Jamie Douglas

Some Mayan languages are syntactically ergative, i.e. they prohibit straightforward A'-extraction... more Some Mayan languages are syntactically ergative, i.e. they prohibit straightforward A'-extraction of transitive ergative subjects (Polinsky 2016). Observe (1) from Q'anjob'al (Coon et al. 2014). (1) Q'anjob'al (S = intransitive subject; O = transitive object; A = transitive subject) a. Maktxel i max way-i t i ? 1 S-extraction who ASP sleep-ITV 'Who slept?' *We thank Doña Rosario de Chocojay for her patience in providing the Tz'utujiil judgements, as well as (alphabetically)

History happens only once. This seems to set up an impenetrable barrier for social sciences, like... more History happens only once. This seems to set up an impenetrable barrier for social sciences, like historical linguistics, that concern themselves with change over time. We have the historical record to go on with no convincing way to generate alternative histories that could be used for hypothesis testing. Nevertheless, it is of some interest to ask whether what we see in the historical record is due to particular forces or whether the time series we see could be the result of random drift. In this paper, I will spell out some simple principles of random drift that can be used to construct null hypotheses against which we can study particular cases of language change. The study of random drift allows us to sharpen our analyses of language change and develop more constrained theories of language variation and change.

Language Science Press eBooks, Aug 5, 2020

Language Science Press eBooks, Oct 12, 2020

English Language and Linguistics, Mar 8, 2018

, UCL), and the Non-Finite Subjects Conference (1 st April 2016, University of Nantes) for their ... more , UCL), and the Non-Finite Subjects Conference (1 st April 2016, University of Nantes) for their encouragement, questions and comments on earlier versions of this work. I would also like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their detailed and constructive criticism, which has significantly improved and clarified my thinking on this topic. I gratefully acknowledge the funding from the AHRC (grant number 04271) and the ERC (Rethinking Comparative Syntax, grant number 269752).

Glossa, Jun 26, 2017

This article proposes a unified analysis of the that-trace and anti-that-trace effects in English... more This article proposes a unified analysis of the that-trace and anti-that-trace effects in English. Unification of these two seemingly diametrically opposed effects remains an outstanding problem. It is argued that complement and relative clauses in English exhibit systematic variation in terms of how articulated their C-domains are. This, combined with Spec-to-Spec Anti-Locality, leads to a novel analysis of the anti-that-trace and that-trace effects. The analysis has interesting theoretical implications for phase theory and the mechanics of successive cyclicity, particularly concerning the position of the phase escape hatch, which is claimed to be the specifier of the complement of the phase head, and not the specifier of the phase head as in standard phase theory.

Glossa, Oct 17, 2018

This paper focuses on subject extraction in Māori, the indigenous Polynesian language of New Zeal... more This paper focuses on subject extraction in Māori, the indigenous Polynesian language of New Zealand. Māori has a range of verbal and non-verbal predicate constructions. I argue that, whilst subject topicalisation is generally permitted in all constructions, subject questioning is restricted (see Bauer 1993; 1997). More specifically, I claim that subject questioning is permitted in verbal and prepositional predicate constructions, but prohibited in nominal predicate constructions, all else being equal (see also de Lacy 1999). I adopt and defend a cleft analysis of questions according to which the questioned constituent is the matrix predicate phrase and the matrix subject is a headless relative clause (Bauer 1991; 1993; 1997). I propose that the restriction on subject questioning results from intervention in this headless relative clause. I argue that the C head probes for a nominal feature rather than a traditional Aʹ-feature. Consequently, nominal predicate phrases intervene with Aʹ-movement of the subject, whilst verbal and prepositional predicate phrases do not. My analysis suggests that Aʹ-movement is generally triggered using nominal features in Māori. I discuss this proposal from an emergentist perspective, i.e. one where formal features are not innately pre-specified but rather emerge during language acquisition guided by the Third Factor cognitive bias to "

Language Science Press, May 13, 2020

Glossa: a journal of general linguistics

This paper focuses on subject extraction in Māori, the indigenous Polynesian language of New Zeal... more This paper focuses on subject extraction in Māori, the indigenous Polynesian language of New Zealand. Māori has a range of verbal and non-verbal predicate constructions. I argue that, whilst subject topicalisation is generally permitted in all constructions, subject questioning is restricted (see Bauer 1993; 1997). More specifically, I claim that subject questioning is permitted in verbal and prepositional predicate constructions, but prohibited in nominal predicate constructions, all else being equal (see also de Lacy 1999). I adopt and defend a cleft analysis of questions according to which the questioned constituent is the matrix predicate phrase and the matrix subject is a headless relative clause (Bauer 1991; 1993; 1997). I propose that the restriction on subject questioning results from intervention in this headless relative clause. I argue that the C head probes for a nominal feature rather than a traditional Aʹ-feature. Consequently, nominal predicate phrases intervene with ...

This chapter is concerned with the syntactic size of finite and infinitival relative<br> cl... more This chapter is concerned with the syntactic size of finite and infinitival relative<br> clauses in English. I claim that these fall into three (or even four) distinct<br> structural sizes. Assuming a cartographic descriptive framework, I provide evidence<br> for this claim from novel observations concerning the (un)availability of adverbial<br> and argument fronting in the different types of relative clause (following<br> Haegeman 2012). Specifically, some relative clauses permit both adverbial and argument<br> fronting, some permit adverbial fronting only, whilst others do not permit<br> fronting at all. Additional support for my claim comes from three instances of categorial<br> distinctness effect (in the sense of Richards 2010), which I argue instantiate a<br> distinctness effect between elements in SpecTopP and SpecFocP.

English Language and Linguistics, 2018

This article focuses on a novel English construction involving control and infinitival relatives.... more This article focuses on a novel English construction involving control and infinitival relatives. Examples such as this is John's book to read have a head noun (book) modified by an infinitival relative clause (to read) and a prenominal possessor (John's). I argue that there is a control relation between the prenominal possessor and the PRO subject of the infinitival relative. I show that this control relation bears the structural hallmarks of obligatory control whilst at the same time permitting PRO to be interpreted as arbitrary. I discuss these empirical facts in the context of a syntactic, Agree-based theory of control.

Volume 2, 2017

This article proposes a unified analysis of the that-trace and anti-that-trace effects in English... more This article proposes a unified analysis of the that-trace and anti-that-trace effects in English. Unification of these two seemingly diametrically opposed effects remains an outstanding problem. It is argued that complement and relative clauses in English exhibit systematic variation in terms of how articulated their C-domains are. This, combined with Spec-to-Spec Anti-Locality, leads to a novel analysis of the anti-that-trace and that-trace effects. The analysis has interesting theoretical implications for phase theory and the mechanics of successive cyclicity, particularly concerning the position of the phase escape hatch, which is claimed to be the specifier of the complement of the phase head, and not the specifier of the phase head as in standard phase theory.

This paper focuses on subject extraction in Māori, the indigenous Polynesian language of New Zeal... more This paper focuses on subject extraction in Māori, the indigenous Polynesian language of New Zealand. Māori has a range of verbal and non-verbal predicate constructions. I argue that, whilst subject topicalisation is generally permitted in all constructions, subject questioning is restricted (see Bauer 1993, 1997). More specifically, I claim that subject questioning is permitted in verbal and prepositional predicate constructions, but prohibited in nominal predicate constructions, all else being equal (see also de Lacy 1999). I adopt and defend a cleft analysis of questions according to which the questioned constituent is the matrix predicate phrase and the matrix subject is a headless relative clause (Bauer 1991, 1993, 1997). I propose that the restriction on subject questioning results from intervention in this headless relative clause. I argue that the C head probes for a nominal feature rather than a traditional A'-feature. Consequently, nominal predicate phrases intervene w...

Some Mayan languages are syntactically ergative, i.e. they prohibit straightforward A'-extraction... more Some Mayan languages are syntactically ergative, i.e. they prohibit straightforward A'-extraction of transitive ergative subjects (Polinsky 2016). Observe (1) from Q'anjob'al (Coon et al. 2014). (1) Q'anjob'al (S = intransitive subject; O = transitive object; A = transitive subject) a. Maktxel i max way-i t i ? 1 S-extraction who ASP sleep-ITV 'Who slept?' *We thank Doña Rosario de Chocojay for her patience in providing the Tz'utujiil judgements, as well as (alphabetically)

History happens only once. This seems to set up an impenetrable barrier for social sciences, like... more History happens only once. This seems to set up an impenetrable barrier for social sciences, like historical linguistics, that concern themselves with change over time. We have the historical record to go on with no convincing way to generate alternative histories that could be used for hypothesis testing. Nevertheless, it is of some interest to ask whether what we see in the historical record is due to particular forces or whether the time series we see could be the result of random drift. In this paper, I will spell out some simple principles of random drift that can be used to construct null hypotheses against which we can study particular cases of language change. The study of random drift allows us to sharpen our analyses of language change and develop more constrained theories of language variation and change.

Language Science Press eBooks, Aug 5, 2020

Language Science Press eBooks, Oct 12, 2020

English Language and Linguistics, Mar 8, 2018

, UCL), and the Non-Finite Subjects Conference (1 st April 2016, University of Nantes) for their ... more , UCL), and the Non-Finite Subjects Conference (1 st April 2016, University of Nantes) for their encouragement, questions and comments on earlier versions of this work. I would also like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their detailed and constructive criticism, which has significantly improved and clarified my thinking on this topic. I gratefully acknowledge the funding from the AHRC (grant number 04271) and the ERC (Rethinking Comparative Syntax, grant number 269752).

Glossa, Jun 26, 2017

This article proposes a unified analysis of the that-trace and anti-that-trace effects in English... more This article proposes a unified analysis of the that-trace and anti-that-trace effects in English. Unification of these two seemingly diametrically opposed effects remains an outstanding problem. It is argued that complement and relative clauses in English exhibit systematic variation in terms of how articulated their C-domains are. This, combined with Spec-to-Spec Anti-Locality, leads to a novel analysis of the anti-that-trace and that-trace effects. The analysis has interesting theoretical implications for phase theory and the mechanics of successive cyclicity, particularly concerning the position of the phase escape hatch, which is claimed to be the specifier of the complement of the phase head, and not the specifier of the phase head as in standard phase theory.

Glossa, Oct 17, 2018

This paper focuses on subject extraction in Māori, the indigenous Polynesian language of New Zeal... more This paper focuses on subject extraction in Māori, the indigenous Polynesian language of New Zealand. Māori has a range of verbal and non-verbal predicate constructions. I argue that, whilst subject topicalisation is generally permitted in all constructions, subject questioning is restricted (see Bauer 1993; 1997). More specifically, I claim that subject questioning is permitted in verbal and prepositional predicate constructions, but prohibited in nominal predicate constructions, all else being equal (see also de Lacy 1999). I adopt and defend a cleft analysis of questions according to which the questioned constituent is the matrix predicate phrase and the matrix subject is a headless relative clause (Bauer 1991; 1993; 1997). I propose that the restriction on subject questioning results from intervention in this headless relative clause. I argue that the C head probes for a nominal feature rather than a traditional Aʹ-feature. Consequently, nominal predicate phrases intervene with Aʹ-movement of the subject, whilst verbal and prepositional predicate phrases do not. My analysis suggests that Aʹ-movement is generally triggered using nominal features in Māori. I discuss this proposal from an emergentist perspective, i.e. one where formal features are not innately pre-specified but rather emerge during language acquisition guided by the Third Factor cognitive bias to "

Language Science Press, May 13, 2020

Glossa: a journal of general linguistics

This paper focuses on subject extraction in Māori, the indigenous Polynesian language of New Zeal... more This paper focuses on subject extraction in Māori, the indigenous Polynesian language of New Zealand. Māori has a range of verbal and non-verbal predicate constructions. I argue that, whilst subject topicalisation is generally permitted in all constructions, subject questioning is restricted (see Bauer 1993; 1997). More specifically, I claim that subject questioning is permitted in verbal and prepositional predicate constructions, but prohibited in nominal predicate constructions, all else being equal (see also de Lacy 1999). I adopt and defend a cleft analysis of questions according to which the questioned constituent is the matrix predicate phrase and the matrix subject is a headless relative clause (Bauer 1991; 1993; 1997). I propose that the restriction on subject questioning results from intervention in this headless relative clause. I argue that the C head probes for a nominal feature rather than a traditional Aʹ-feature. Consequently, nominal predicate phrases intervene with ...

This chapter is concerned with the syntactic size of finite and infinitival relative<br> cl... more This chapter is concerned with the syntactic size of finite and infinitival relative<br> clauses in English. I claim that these fall into three (or even four) distinct<br> structural sizes. Assuming a cartographic descriptive framework, I provide evidence<br> for this claim from novel observations concerning the (un)availability of adverbial<br> and argument fronting in the different types of relative clause (following<br> Haegeman 2012). Specifically, some relative clauses permit both adverbial and argument<br> fronting, some permit adverbial fronting only, whilst others do not permit<br> fronting at all. Additional support for my claim comes from three instances of categorial<br> distinctness effect (in the sense of Richards 2010), which I argue instantiate a<br> distinctness effect between elements in SpecTopP and SpecFocP.

English Language and Linguistics, 2018

This article focuses on a novel English construction involving control and infinitival relatives.... more This article focuses on a novel English construction involving control and infinitival relatives. Examples such as this is John's book to read have a head noun (book) modified by an infinitival relative clause (to read) and a prenominal possessor (John's). I argue that there is a control relation between the prenominal possessor and the PRO subject of the infinitival relative. I show that this control relation bears the structural hallmarks of obligatory control whilst at the same time permitting PRO to be interpreted as arbitrary. I discuss these empirical facts in the context of a syntactic, Agree-based theory of control.

Volume 2, 2017

This article proposes a unified analysis of the that-trace and anti-that-trace effects in English... more This article proposes a unified analysis of the that-trace and anti-that-trace effects in English. Unification of these two seemingly diametrically opposed effects remains an outstanding problem. It is argued that complement and relative clauses in English exhibit systematic variation in terms of how articulated their C-domains are. This, combined with Spec-to-Spec Anti-Locality, leads to a novel analysis of the anti-that-trace and that-trace effects. The analysis has interesting theoretical implications for phase theory and the mechanics of successive cyclicity, particularly concerning the position of the phase escape hatch, which is claimed to be the specifier of the complement of the phase head, and not the specifier of the phase head as in standard phase theory.

This paper focuses on subject extraction in Māori, the indigenous Polynesian language of New Zeal... more This paper focuses on subject extraction in Māori, the indigenous Polynesian language of New Zealand. Māori has a range of verbal and non-verbal predicate constructions. I argue that, whilst subject topicalisation is generally permitted in all constructions, subject questioning is restricted (see Bauer 1993, 1997). More specifically, I claim that subject questioning is permitted in verbal and prepositional predicate constructions, but prohibited in nominal predicate constructions, all else being equal (see also de Lacy 1999). I adopt and defend a cleft analysis of questions according to which the questioned constituent is the matrix predicate phrase and the matrix subject is a headless relative clause (Bauer 1991, 1993, 1997). I propose that the restriction on subject questioning results from intervention in this headless relative clause. I argue that the C head probes for a nominal feature rather than a traditional A'-feature. Consequently, nominal predicate phrases intervene w...