Abstract
The paper aims at accounting for the fact that Russian that-clauses can
be “doubled” by a demonstrative if it carries oblique case but cannot if
it carries accusative case unless it receives focus stress. I assume
(following several previous accounts) that clauses are headed by a
silent determiner that in certain environments “blocks” the occurrence
of the overt determiner and that this is a more economical option in
the sense of Minimalist framework. The environments where
“blocking” fails to apply are those where the silent determiner is ruled
out due to independent principles leaving thus no basis for comparison.
Specifically, I assume that the silent determiner is deficient in
phi- (and possibly other) features necessary for convergence.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Acta linguistica petropolitana. Trudy Instituta lingvisticheskikh issledovanii. T. VI. chast' 3 [Institute for Linguistic Research Working Papers. Vol.6. P.3]: Materialy Sed’moj Konferencii po tipologii i grammatike dlja molodyx issledovatelej [Proceedings of the 7th Conference on Typology and Grammar for Young Researches]. |
| Editors | N. N. Kazansky |
| Place of Publication | St. Petersburg |
| Publisher | Nauka |
| Pages | 81-84 |
| Number of pages | 4 |
| Publication status | Published - 4 Nov 2010 |