In:Advances in the Syntax of DPs: Structure, agreement, and case
Edited by Anna Bondaruk, Gréte Dalmi and Alexander Grosu
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 217] 2014
► pp. 61–94
Polish equatives as symmetrical structures
Published online: 14 October 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.217.03bon
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.217.03bon
The chapter focuses on the syntactic structure of true equatives in Polish, i.e. those sentences that contain two proper names or two pronouns flanking the pronominal copula
to
. These clauses differ considerably from both predicational and specificational sentences as regards verbal agreement and the Person-Case Constraint (PCC). Arguments are offered to prove that the two differences Polish equatives exhibit can be accounted for by positing a special symmetrical structure for this type of copular clause. The analysis is a modified version of Pereltsvaig’s (2001, 2007) proposal, based on Moro (2006) as well as Chomsky (2013). It relies on movement of one of the DPs from within a symmetrical structure to break up the initial symmetry which is triggered by the the need to label the symmetrical structure.
References (56)
Anagnostopoulou, Elena. 2003. The Syntax of Ditransitives: Evidence from Clitics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Błaszczak, Joanna. 2007. Phase Syntax: The Polish Genitive of Negation. Habilitation dissertation, University of Potsdam.
Błaszczak, Joanna & Geist, Ljudmila. 2000. Kopulasätze mit den pronominalen Elementen to/ėto in Polnischen und Russischen. In Copular and AUX – Constructions[ZAS Papers in Linguistics 16], Ewald Lang (ed.), 115–139. Berlin: Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft.
Bondaruk, Anna. 2012. Person–Case Constraint effects in Polish copular constructions. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 59(1-2): 49–84.
. 2013a. Interplay of feature inheritance and information structure in Polish inverse copular sentences. In
Formal Description of Slavic Languages: The Ninth Conference
.
Proceedings of FDSL 9,
Göttingen 2011 [Linguistik International 28], Uwe Junghanns, Dorothee Fehrmann, Denisa Lenertová & Hagen Pitsch (eds), 37–65,Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
. 2013b. Copular Clauses in English and Polish. Structure, Derivation and Interpretation. Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL.
Bonet, Eulàlia. 1991. Morphology after Syntax: Pronominal Clitics in Romance. PhD dissertation, MIT.
. 1994. The Person-Case Constraint: A morphological approach. In The Morphology-Syntax connection[MITWPL 22], Heidi Harley & Colin Phillips (eds), 33–52. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Chierchia, Gennaro. 1984. Topics in the Syntax and Semantics of Infinitives and Gerunds. PhD dissertation, Amherst, University of Massachusetts.
. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Step by Step. Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik, Roger Martin, David Michaels & Juan Uriagereka (eds), 89–155. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale. A Life in Language, Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), 1–52. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
. 2008. On phases. In Foundational Issues in Linguistic Theory. Essays in Honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud, Robert Freidin, Carlos P. Otero & Maria Luisa Zubizarreta (eds), 134–166. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Citko, Barbara. 2008. Small clauses reconsidered: Not so small and not all alike. Lingua 118: 261–295.
den Dikken, Marcel. 2006. Relators as Linkers. The Syntax of Predication, Predicate Inversion and Copulas [Linguistic Inquiry Monographs]. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Geist, Ljudmila. 2008. Predication and equation in copular sentences in Russian vs. English. InExistence, Syntax and Semantics, Ileana Comorovski & Klaus von Heusinger (eds), 79–105. Dordrecht: Springer.
. 2000. Locality and extended projection. In Lexical Specification and Insertion [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 197], Peter Coopmans, Martin Everaert & Jane Grimshaw (eds) 115–133. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hentschel, Gerd. 2001. On the perspectivisation of noun phrases in copula sentences, mainly in Polish: (Y) to (jest) X and similar phenomena. In Studies on the Syntax and Semantics of Slavonic Languages, Viktor S. Chrakovskij, Maciej Grochowski & Gerd Hentschel (eds), 161–213.Oldenburg: Bibliotheks- und Informationssystem der Universität Oldenburg.
Heycock, Caroline & Kroch, Anthony. 1999. Pseudocleft connectedness: Implications for the LF interface level. Linguistic Inquiry 30: 365–397.
Hiraiwa, Ken. 2002. Multiple Agree. Paper presented at the 25th GLOW Workshop: Tools in Linguistic Theory, Utrecht Institute of Linguistics.
Jiménez-Fernández, Ángel & Spyropoulos, Vassilios. 2013. Feature inheritance, VP phases and the information structure of small clauses. Studia Linguistica 67(2): 185–224.
Lavine, James & Freidin, Robert. 2002. The subject of defective T(ense) in Slavic. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 10: 253–289.
Mikkelsen, Line. 2005. Copular Clauses. Specification, Predication and Equation [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 85]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Moro, Andrea. 1990.
There-raising: Principles across levels. Paper presented at the 13th Generative Linguistics in the Old World (GLOW) Colloquium, Cambridge.
. 1997. The Raising of Predicates. Predicative Noun Phrases and the Theory of Clause Structure. Cambridge: CUP.
Müller, Gereon. 1998. Incomplete Category Fronting: A Derivational Approach to Remnant Movement in German. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Ott, Denis. 2011. Local Instability: The Syntax of Split Topics. PhD dissertation, Harvard University.
. 2012. Local Instability: Split Topicalization and Quantifier Float in German. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Partee, Barbara. 1987. Noun phrase interpretation and type shifting principles. In Studies in Discourse Representation Theory and the Theory of Generalized Quantifiers, Jeroen Groenendijk, Dick de Jongh & Martin Stokhof (eds), 115–143. Dordrecht: Walter de Gruyter.
. 1998. Copula inversion puzzles in English and Russian. In Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Seattle Meeting 1998, Katarzyna Dziwirek, Herbert Coats & Cynthia Vakareliyska (eds), 361–395. Ann Arbor MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.
Pereltsvaig, Asya. 2001. On the Nature of Intra-clausal Relations. PhD dissertation, McGill University.
Rezac, Milan. 2008. The syntax of eccentric agreement: The Person Case Constraint and absolutive displacement in Basque. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26: 61–106.
. 2005. Person-Case effect in Tagalog and the nature of long-distance extraction. In
Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Conference of the Austronesian Formal Linguistics Association
[UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics 12], Jeffrey Heinz & Dimitrios Ntelitheos (eds), 383–394. Los Angeles CA: UCLA Department of Linguistics.
Richards, Marc. 2008. Defective Agree, Case alternations and the prominence of person. In Scales [Linguitische Arbeits Berichte 86], Marc Richards & Andrej L. Malchukov (eds), 137–161. Leipzig: Universität Leipzig.
Rivero, Maria Luisa. 2004. Spanish quirky subjects, person restrictions and the Person-Case Constraint. Linguistic Inquiry 35(3): 494–502.
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of Grammar, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Shlonsky, Ur. 2000. Subject positions and copular constructions. In Interface Strategies, Hans Bennis, Martin Everaert & Eric Reuland (eds), 325–347. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Slioussar, Natalia. 2007. Grammar and Information Structure. A Study with Reference to Russian. Utrecht: LOT Publications.
Wiśniewski, Marek. 1990. Formalnogramatyczny opis leksemów to. 2. Słowo to w funkcji spójnika, partykuły, czasownika niewłaściwego (The formal and grammatical description of lexemes to. 2. The word to in the function of conjunction, particle and improper verb). Acta Universitatis Nicolai Copernici Filologia polska XXXI(192): 91–119.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
