Advanced

Case cancellation or KP-extraction?

Holmer, Arthur LU (1997) In Working Papers, Lund University, Dept. of Linguistics 46.
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to show how it is possible to derive the advantages of the subject choice view of passivization (Holmer 1996a, 1996b) without necessarily resorting to the somewhat unconventional (and, in traditional terms, illicit) concept of Case Cancellation. Instead, I adopt two proposals made by Bittner & Hale 1996 with respect to Case-marking and the structure of Case-marked nominals, which together neatly capture the intuitive difference between nominative and non-nominative Case, and show that the Case Cancellation I have proposed in earlier work is, in fact, only apparent. Moreover, it is exactly this structural difference between nominative and other cases which makes the subject choice account of passivization... (More)
The purpose of this paper is to show how it is possible to derive the advantages of the subject choice view of passivization (Holmer 1996a, 1996b) without necessarily resorting to the somewhat unconventional (and, in traditional terms, illicit) concept of Case Cancellation. Instead, I adopt two proposals made by Bittner & Hale 1996 with respect to Case-marking and the structure of Case-marked nominals, which together neatly capture the intuitive difference between nominative and non-nominative Case, and show that the Case Cancellation I have proposed in earlier work is, in fact, only apparent. Moreover, it is exactly this structural difference between nominative and other cases which makes the subject choice account of passivization functionally straightforward, structurally motivated and, last, but by no means least, compatible with the traditional view that chains may not be doubly Casemarked. At this stage an important point should be made: this analysis is not made in the spirit of Bittner & Hale 1996, it does not follow the general direction

they suggest, and it makes no reference to many of the concepts they incorporate

in their model. I am following the general line in Holmer 1996a, 1996b.

However, some of the suggestions I make here are directly influenced by concepts

presented in Bittner & Hale. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Working Paper
publication status
published
subject
in
Working Papers, Lund University, Dept. of Linguistics
volume
46
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
69e00b76-6eb2-4ed0-9097-de3368c1b635 (old id 528766)
alternative location
http://www.ling.lu.se/disseminations/pdf/46/Holmer.pdf
date added to LUP
2007-09-27 16:35:36
date last changed
2016-04-16 11:26:07
@misc{69e00b76-6eb2-4ed0-9097-de3368c1b635,
  abstract     = {The purpose of this paper is to show how it is possible to derive the advantages of the subject choice view of passivization (Holmer 1996a, 1996b) without necessarily resorting to the somewhat unconventional (and, in traditional terms, illicit) concept of Case Cancellation. Instead, I adopt two proposals made by Bittner &amp; Hale 1996 with respect to Case-marking and the structure of Case-marked nominals, which together neatly capture the intuitive difference between nominative and non-nominative Case, and show that the Case Cancellation I have proposed in earlier work is, in fact, only apparent. Moreover, it is exactly this structural difference between nominative and other cases which makes the subject choice account of passivization functionally straightforward, structurally motivated and, last, but by no means least, compatible with the traditional view that chains may not be doubly Casemarked. At this stage an important point should be made: this analysis is not made in the spirit of Bittner &amp; Hale 1996, it does not follow the general direction<br/><br>
they suggest, and it makes no reference to many of the concepts they incorporate<br/><br>
in their model. I am following the general line in Holmer 1996a, 1996b.<br/><br>
However, some of the suggestions I make here are directly influenced by concepts<br/><br>
presented in Bittner &amp; Hale.},
  author       = {Holmer, Arthur},
  language     = {eng},
  series       = {Working Papers, Lund University, Dept. of Linguistics},
  title        = {Case cancellation or KP-extraction?},
  volume       = {46},
  year         = {1997},
}