Feature interpretability and the positions of 2nd person possessives in Brazilian Portuguese

Interpretability and valuation of φ-features (Chomsky, 2001; Pesetsky and Torrego, 2007) have played a central role in the investigation of language universals. With regard to that, in standard Brazilian Portuguese (BP), as well as in other Romance languages, possessives have uninterpretable number...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Bruna Karla Pereira
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Universidade de São Paulo 2016-12-01
Series:Filologia e Linguística Portuguesa
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.revistas.usp.br/flp/article/view/117112
id doaj-4e8ce10cf701467cba05c2c60f02fe97
record_format Article
spelling doaj-4e8ce10cf701467cba05c2c60f02fe972020-11-25T00:00:49ZengUniversidade de São PauloFilologia e Linguística Portuguesa2176-94192176-94192016-12-01182199229http://dx.doi.org/10.11606/issn.2176-9419.v18i2p199-229Feature interpretability and the positions of 2nd person possessives in Brazilian PortugueseBruna Karla Pereira0Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri, Diamantina, Minas Gerais, BrazilInterpretability and valuation of φ-features (Chomsky, 2001; Pesetsky and Torrego, 2007) have played a central role in the investigation of language universals. With regard to that, in standard Brazilian Portuguese (BP), as well as in other Romance languages, possessives have uninterpretable number features, which are valued via nominal agreement. However, dialects of BP, especially the one spoken in Minas Gerais, have shown that 2nd person possessives, in postnominal position, do not have number agreement with the noun. In order to account for these facts, I will argue that, in this grammar, number features on 2nd person possessives are reanalyzed as being: (i) associated with the person (rather than the noun) and (ii) interpretable. From the first postulation, ‘seu’ is expected to be the possessive for 2nd person singular, and ‘seus’ for 2nd person plural. From the second postulation, no number concord is expected to be triggered on the possessive. In addition, based on Danon (2011) and Norris (2014), I will argue that cardinals divide BP DPs into two domains in that phrases located above NumP are marked with the plural morpheme, while phrases below it are unmarked. In this sense, because prenominal possessives precede cardinals (NumP), they must be marked with the plural morpheme for nominal agreement; whereas postnominal possessives, which follow NumP, must be unmarked. Free from the plural marking associated with nominal agreement, postnominal 2nd person possessives favor the reanalysis of the morpheme ‘-s’ as indicating the number associated with person features.http://www.revistas.usp.br/flp/article/view/1171122nd person possessivesDP ConcordNumber featuresSyntactic positionCardinalsNumP
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Bruna Karla Pereira
spellingShingle Bruna Karla Pereira
Feature interpretability and the positions of 2nd person possessives in Brazilian Portuguese
Filologia e Linguística Portuguesa
2nd person possessives
DP Concord
Number features
Syntactic position
Cardinals
NumP
author_facet Bruna Karla Pereira
author_sort Bruna Karla Pereira
title Feature interpretability and the positions of 2nd person possessives in Brazilian Portuguese
title_short Feature interpretability and the positions of 2nd person possessives in Brazilian Portuguese
title_full Feature interpretability and the positions of 2nd person possessives in Brazilian Portuguese
title_fullStr Feature interpretability and the positions of 2nd person possessives in Brazilian Portuguese
title_full_unstemmed Feature interpretability and the positions of 2nd person possessives in Brazilian Portuguese
title_sort feature interpretability and the positions of 2nd person possessives in brazilian portuguese
publisher Universidade de São Paulo
series Filologia e Linguística Portuguesa
issn 2176-9419
2176-9419
publishDate 2016-12-01
description Interpretability and valuation of φ-features (Chomsky, 2001; Pesetsky and Torrego, 2007) have played a central role in the investigation of language universals. With regard to that, in standard Brazilian Portuguese (BP), as well as in other Romance languages, possessives have uninterpretable number features, which are valued via nominal agreement. However, dialects of BP, especially the one spoken in Minas Gerais, have shown that 2nd person possessives, in postnominal position, do not have number agreement with the noun. In order to account for these facts, I will argue that, in this grammar, number features on 2nd person possessives are reanalyzed as being: (i) associated with the person (rather than the noun) and (ii) interpretable. From the first postulation, ‘seu’ is expected to be the possessive for 2nd person singular, and ‘seus’ for 2nd person plural. From the second postulation, no number concord is expected to be triggered on the possessive. In addition, based on Danon (2011) and Norris (2014), I will argue that cardinals divide BP DPs into two domains in that phrases located above NumP are marked with the plural morpheme, while phrases below it are unmarked. In this sense, because prenominal possessives precede cardinals (NumP), they must be marked with the plural morpheme for nominal agreement; whereas postnominal possessives, which follow NumP, must be unmarked. Free from the plural marking associated with nominal agreement, postnominal 2nd person possessives favor the reanalysis of the morpheme ‘-s’ as indicating the number associated with person features.
topic 2nd person possessives
DP Concord
Number features
Syntactic position
Cardinals
NumP
url http://www.revistas.usp.br/flp/article/view/117112
work_keys_str_mv AT brunakarlapereira featureinterpretabilityandthepositionsof2ndpersonpossessivesinbrazilianportuguese
_version_ 1725443191550771200