[LAGRAM] Albert Ze Ebanga / Léa Nash (UMR7023)

Date: 
Lundi 14 Mars 2016 - 10:00
Lieu détaillé: 

UPS Pouchet

Description: 

10:00-10:45 Albert Ze Ebanga (UMR 7023 Paris 8 & CNRS)
Déplacement obligatoire vs. déplacement optionnel en boulou (Résumé, pdf 25KB)

10:50-12:00 Léa Nash (UMR 7023 Paris 8 & CNRS) Person Split is Syntactic

Résumés

Albert Ze Ebanga (UMR 7023 Paris 8 & CNRS)
Déplacement obligatoire vs. déplacement optionnel en boulou (Résumé, pdf 25KB)

Léa Nash (UMR 7023 Paris 8 & CNRS) Person Split is Syntactic

Many ergative languages exhibit splits based on nominal type of main arguments. The most typical manifestation of such a split involves marking 3rd person arguments (pronouns and full DPs) according to the ergative case-schema (ERG on transitive subjects, NOM on intransitive subjects) and 1st and 2nd person according to the nominative case-alignment (NOM on all subjects). 

A number of questions arise with respect to this phenomenon. 

Is the case-shift due to different syntactic structures underlying configurations with 3rd person arguments vs 1/2 person arguments ? Is person split a more superficial phenomenon that has no structural source? Is the ergative morphological marking incompatible with certain feature specifications of 1st and 2nd arguments? Can person split receive a unitary explanation in languages where it is manifested?

I explore person split in Georgian and show that it is not a morphological phenomenon. 1/2p arguments are assigned the ergative case on par with 3p arguments. However, 1/2p and 3p arguments do not share the same internal structure. While their nominal part is structured alike, 1/2p arguments include a head Pers, the locus of feature bundles which define 1st and 2nd persons in the grammar. Pers is a clitic in Georgian and incorporates into T. The ergative case marking appears on the nominal part of the constituent below Pers. Full personal pronouns are not the spell-out of Pers but function as demonstratives in PersP.