Browsing by Author "Jurczyk, Rafał"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Item
    Abandoning the EPP-feature in Polish dual copula clauses by redefining the predication relation
    (Wydawnictwo KUL, 2021) Jurczyk, Rafał
    This paper questions the logic behind the presence and the working of the EPP-feature in Polish dual copula clauses (henceforth, DCCs) with the pronominal copula to, the verbal copula być ‘to be’, and two nominative 3rd person DPs, as represented in Bondaruk (2019). The criticism follows from: (i) – Chomsky’s (2000, 2001) downward Agree operation; (ii) – the view that the predicator encodes the predication relation between the pre-copular subject and the post-copular predicate; (iii) – selective multiple Agree, whereby the satisfaction of the EPP- and uφ-features is divorced. Adopting (i)–(iii), Bondaruk’s scrutiny allows either the pre- or the post-copular DP to occupy SpecTP, thereby accounting for DCCs’ agreement and configurational patterns, but, simultaneously, suffering from theoretical shortcomings it creates. We argue for a simpler satisfaction of the subject requirement which does not rely on the troublesome EPP-feature, but is motivated formally by the relation between T and the higher DP. We derive this requirement by following Zeiljstra’s (2012) upward Agree which only takes place once interpretable features c-command uninterpretable features, and Rothstein’s (2004) approach which is based on a neo-Davidsonian event semantics and which argues that be and its complement form a complex predicate, separated from the pre-copular DP both semantically and syntactically.
  • Item
    Post-verbal agreement and obligatory presence of particle to in Polish dual copula clauses
    (Wydawnictwo KUL, 2024) Jurczyk, Rafał
    This paper addresses the obligatory particle to in Polish dual copula clauses (DCCs) with post-verbal agreement and two 3rd person nominative expressions with φ-feature(s) mismatch. It argues that to must be present because the syntax cannot successfully establish the φ-Agree relation between T and the post-verbal nominative expression (NPNOM2). Two crucial premises are adopted. One is Zeiljstra’s (2012) Upward Agree which requires i-features to c-command u-features and, hence, necessitates the closest NPNOM to T to SpecTP-move. The other is Vangsnes’s (2002) obligatory TP identification by the Tense- (provided by T) and φ-features (provided by NPNOM controlling agreement) to anchor the subject to the eventuality denoted by the complex predicate Pred’ [be NPNOM2] (Jurczyk 2021). The examination shows that T-NPNOM2 φ-Agree in DCCs under consideration cannot be established as SpecTP-movement of NPNOM2 is illegitimate; NPNOM2 if formally and syntactically part of Pred’ and is also farther from T than NPNOM1, the pre-verbal nominal expression. Consequently, T’s φ-features remain unvalued, which makes TP formally unidentified. However, since some of T’s NPNOM2-specified features are specified as those on NPNOM1, T attracts NPNOM1 to value them whereas features bearing NPNOM2’s specification get valued as default and lexicalised as the least-marked form in terms of feature specification (following Szucsich 2007), i.e., to[i-neut]. It is thus concluded that the obligatory presence of to is a means of formally identifying TP in case any of T’s NPNOM2-specified φ-features cannot be successfully valued by the T-NPNOM2 Agree relation.