246 Sebastian Kempgen

Szabo, S. (2007) Kirmes, Jahrmarkt und Valbfest im Spiegel historischer Postkarten. Ein kulturgeschichtlü.:her Streifzug. Hlldesl1elffi LUU!.

Seferovi6, A., ~uijak, Lv. (2005) Zadar na slUrim ruzgleJnicamu. Autor teksta j bibliografijc A. Seferovic, urednik Zv. Suljak. 7adar-Rijeka.

Teodorov-Balan, A. (1924) Borha za savremenen pravopis (1912-1923). Prinos kiim istorUa­tu Yll1 biilgarskUa pravopis. Sofija.

Troebst, Stefan (1999) Getrübte Wahrnehmung: das deutsche Bulgarien-Bild vom Kaiserreich bis heute. Südoste uropa-Mitteilungen 39, 4, 343-350.

Trocbst, Stefan (2003) Von den "Preußen des Balkans" zum "vergessenen Volk": Das deut­sche Bulgarien-Bild. In: Europa Regional I L 3, 120 125.

Resume

The article presents Bulgarian postcards from the first half ofthe 20th century as a source far the history of the ianguage. The postcards - or rather the text prin­ted on the picture side - allow a very interesting insight into the state of ßulgari­an in the decades after the liberation from the Ottoman yoke. They show quite a few mistakes by the typesetters but also how mueh variation Bulgarian exhibited in tlelds such as orthography, spel1ing, morphoiogy, and in the iexicon. Tnis va­riation in thc Buigarian Ianguage in the first half of the 20th ecntur/ could not be retlcctcd in pre~structuralist grammars frorn the time, and socialist grammars in the second half of the 20th century largely neglected the state of the language in thc preceding decades.

Peter Kosta

Quantification ofNPsffiPs in Slavic·

n. fntroduction

Quantification of Nominal pnrases in Slavic is the most analyzed but also still the most controversial point of discussion in both traditional descriptive and generative studies. In my paper I shall try to give a short overview of the puzzle conccrning first of all the problems of case and number assignment and agreement in numeral and Numerativ constructions. Secondly, I shall try to give the solution to some problems so far unresolved. In the last part of my article, a brief surnmary ofthe results will be given.

1. Short overview orthe problem

Quantifieu nominal phrases in Russian and other Slavic languagcs include numeral phrases (such as odin, dva, tri, sorok, pjat 'desjat '... pervyj, woro}) , different kind of quantifiers (such as kaidy), vse, nekotorye, kto-to, eto-nibud', maio, mnogo, mnoiestvu, menSinstvu.... ) but also other quantifying expressions (e.g., numeratives and container constructions such as stakon, ko.§elek, korobocka, kilowarnrna. liter... ). Crucially, the syntactic distribution of quantified numerative and numeral phrases depends on the semantics of countability of NPs (cf. Krifka 1989). Unlike muss nouns, individual items can bc quantified in number. Mass nouns, on the other hand, need always a combination or a numeral and a numerative (e.g. srakan etc.) to become countablc ilerns, cf:

(1) - Hy OOUH QJ1CTOH. - OOUH. Ilpo,n:aBeu.: HarmBaeT - Ell.J,e CTaKaHQJ1K nO)Ka..'lyMcTa. O.n;J1H CmaKaH'-lUK HaneMTe c CJ1pOrrOM nO)KanYMCTa; /l,ea CiilGKQHtfUKQ tiucmt]u ,n:aHTe; On;JIII CmaKQH C CI1pOnO!\1 11 6e3 CMpona. OiJUH cTaKaH; /lea nO)KarryMcTa CmaKaH'-lUKa. OiJUH nO)KaJlYMCTa; //,ea HaIvi; j]etz. CTaKaH; CTaKaH1.J1.fK. 130dUY.lku. [Pa3rOBOp npH nOK)'ITKe

ra:mpOBaHI-IOI1 BO,n:hI // PycCKaJI pa3rOBOpHIDI peQh: TeKcThI I AKa.u.eMJ1~

R8yK l,Cl,P, HHCTI1TyT pyccKoro ~3hIKa IABT.-COCT. 1. A. lJapJ1HOBa, E.

• This article is dedicated to Prof. Dr. Gerd Freidhof with deep passion and gratitude for all he has done for Slavic studies in Germany and elsewhere. A more elaborated version of this paper I gave as invited speaker at the SLS 2 conference at ZAS, Berlin in August 2007. I took profit in discussing this paper with Steven Franks, l'arald"1 araidsen, Manfred KrifKa, Anton Zimmerling, Uwe Junghanns, Guglielmo Cinguc. Lilia Schürcks, Iljana Kräpova, Pctr Biskup, Pavcl Caha, Ilse Zimmermann and many others. All flaws and Ch()rtf'l1tc qrp minI' Thf" ~rti('lf" Ro<:kovif nOOR) annearecl onlv after the final cut and could not be considered ~~ymore.

·ii

.~ I

248 Peler Kosla

t\ '1AUf'rr<:>o Tl A U"<:ln<:lu<:lIT'7p P R U"n<:lrUrTl..Ur;n,rHHl P T-l 11IMnuPR ~ ~-~~ _.&."-",, , "" _&&_ - ...,-, .6-10 _ • ......r-- ·- -.--., _. -_. ---r·--­

OTO. pe.LJ:. E. A. 3eMCKa5l, J1. A. KallaHa,Ll,3e. - M.: Hayr<a, 1978] (all italics = P.K.)

A cemral problem for the analysis o[ quantified (nurneral) expressions in Russian concerns the case and number assignment and agreement. In his book Parameters 0/ Slavic Morphosyntax (N.Y.lOxford 1995), Steven Franks mentions the following problems: "Numeral phrases display many unusual and mysterious morphosyntactic properties, among which are that (1) the numeral sometimes govems the nominal material following it and sometimes agrees in case with it, and (2) the numeral phrase sometimes induces subject-verb agreelnent and sometimes docs not." (93). Tllis contrast bet\"veen !lzomogenous and hererogenous NPslDPs itsel f is not difficult to formulate but it is very difficult to demonstrate that the range of variation encountered in (2) vs. (3) follows from general principles of the theory:

(2) Ha.LJ:o cKa3aTb, 'HO :}mu 06e ]w)a1LU 6ydym Bb1I10m15lTbC5I opKecTPoM "Bo.i1ra-6::IH)]," H B C.llC,lJ,)tOI..UCM CC30HC, KOTOphIH )')Ke npaKTH'IeCKU CcPOpMl1pOBaH. IhHHI-rcy cI>HlIIepy HaCTOJThKO npYrrmIHYJTC51 Harn ropOlI, '!TO OH npl1e,Ll,eT CID1Ia eII.J;e pa3. KpOMe Hero, o)J(l11IaeTC5I eII.J;e MHO,)lCecm()(J

20cmeu Yr3 1IpyrYrx CTPaH. TaK, BOKT5I6pe "BoJIra-63H.LJ:" 6Y1IeT 6blcmYl'zamb

C 'i-emblpbJl1ff O.MepUKOHCKUMU oMY1b/!{QHmaJI1U: CapaToB nocemJlm mpu

dupuJicepa U OdUl-i mpy6att. IAHaCT3CI15I 1ymm3. 3uaKoMcTBO C Ml1pOBoI-i MY3bIKOfi // "EoraTefi" (CaparoB), 2003.05.22]

(3) TIPOJKH.'I3 OHa POBHhiTvi c~eTOM munb Rem, YTo6bI 1 5l"HHap5l" 1998 r. 06pamu.mbC51 CKpOMHbllvlU nflmblO py6/l5LMU. KCTauI, 0 nRmu py6/lflX ­

TOlJHee, 0 5-py6JleBoH KynIOpc. [!\.1apl-lHa I01IKeOWL lliTb TbIC5I1f "O.LJ:HOH 6j'rY1a)KKoI1!·" paRO. ..;AJo. l1Jlmb ~ry}}6.;'1eil ()opOZ().. // "BeQepH5f,,-,Q Ka3aHb'\

2003.01.10]

Descriptively speaking, thc gencral rule is the follO\ving, cf.: (4)

(4) Assigment 0/case in quantified (numeral) phrases in Russian

(Decriptive Generalization=DG1):

"When the nominai phrase as a whole stands in a position to which the syntax assigns a direct case (nominative or accusative), the numeral acts like a nominal head of the phrase, assigning the genitive case to the quantified nOlln (and its moditiers) as if it were a complement. O\\(hen this same phrase stands in a position assigned an oblique case, the quantified noun acts like the head of the phrase, with the numeral faIling in line with lile ulilC:l 111uuiuC:l~ i1l Cle,HA,iue, Wi~~, c:ru.~ '1Uu.u~;::,-,~ u~~.-." (~~:.;,;,;:~:~

2002:329).

Quantification ofNPslDPs in Slavic 249

Example (2) demonstrates, that in Russian this descriptive generalization is tme Ieven far the lower numerals 2-4 (so called Paucal) where the numerals ()ee '2' arzd nipu '3' stai'Zd in subJ·ect position and assi6'n the case genitive singular 10

the quantified nouns as if it were their complements. The further context of example (2) shows that the Jower numerai '-iemhlpe '4; standing in an obiique case position agrees in case and number with the further nominal material: Bblcmynamb c '-iemblpbM51 aMepUKaHCKUJt;tu My3blKaHmaMU.

The sarne generalization (4) is true for the contrast between the highcr nllmerals ('5' and higher) in direct case position vs. oblique position under (3): the quantified nominal phrases embedded in the oblique positions of an [vP

06paTlITbC51 [NP CKpOMHhIMU nflmblO py6,nfl./HU l], and in the oblique position of a [PP 0 [l"'lP tlRttlU py6/lflXJ], agrees in case ana number with thc noun and ulht:r nominal material (adjective). In a direct case position; ho\vever, a numeral assigns the genitive singular (lower numerals) ar the genitivc plural (higher numerals) to the nominal complemem, exactly like other quantifiers do (cf fIlso the example 2 with the collective quantifier MHO)KeCTBO 'an amount (of)', in: Oifmn:aeTC5I erne MHO)KCCTBO rOCTe}! H3 1IpyrI1x crpaH). We give some further examplcs ofthe numeral nflmbfirst in oblique and then in direct case positions:

(5) Oblique case positions of higher numcrals (> 115lmb '5 ~):

(0 Genitive:

CA_H-<DPAITL(l-lCKO, 7 MaH. (CrreUKopp. TACC). 7 Ma5I B CUH­et>paHl.(I1CKO COCT05IJIOCb COBeII.J;aHue npe1ICTaBI1TeJIeH nRmu 1Iep)KaB, Ha KOTOpOM bblJIO peilleHo H33Ha1fHTb nO.llKOMI1CCl1fO ,aJI5I paCCMOTpemUf rrpe1IJIO)KeHI1H 0 nonpaBKax, npe1ICTaBJIeHHhIX CTpaHaMI1, He npl1HI1MaBIllI1MH j'1-IaCTI1H B KOHepepeHu,1111 B ~M6apToH-OKce.

fIo.LJ:KOMHCCI1Yr npe1IJ10)KeHO npe.LJ:CTaBHTb KaK MO)KHO CKopee oT4eT MI1HI1CTPaM I1HOCTpaHHhlx .LJ:en nflmU L{ep)KaB. Ha 3TOM COBemaHI1I1 COBeTcKRH C0103 npe.LJ:CTaBJI5IJI TOB. MOJIOTOB, COe.LJ:UHeHHhle lIlTaTbl ­Crernml1yc, COe1II1HeHHOe KOpOJleHCTBo - 3TTJ111, KnTati - BeJImii-iITOH­Ky, <I>paHu,l1lO - bR)J.O. [CoBeII.J;aHYre npeL{CTaBI1TeJIeH illlTI1 ,LI,ep)KaB B CaH­cI>paHu,I1CKO 11 ,,'l'HxooKeaHCKa5I 3Be31Ia", i 945.05. i 0]

(ii) Dative

B 1779 rD1IY 6blJIl1 npOBe.LJ:eHbl I13bICKaTeJIbHble pa60Tbl, 11 HalJaJ/OCb erD CTpOl-UeJlbCTBO. llHcTa5I KJII04eBa5I BOL{a )J.OJI)KHa 6bIJIa caMOTeKOM npuiITu B rop01I 113 MbITI1II.J;. f1YTb MbITl1ml1HCKOH B01Ibl JIe)KaJ/ MYrMO ceJIa AJIeKCeeBcKoro, lJepe3 KanaH4eBCKoe none, CyxapeBKy K Tpy6HOH nJI0II.J;aL{R, r1Ie 6blJI ßbICTpoeH cneu,YraJIbHblH BO)J.oeM. Yb Hero lJl1CTM B01Ia DO 4yryHHbIM TPyoaM UTllpaBJI}fJIa~h K nxrnu fJuuuPUJUUjJttbtM tPulmtuHUJIIl.

BO.LJ:a TeKJIa B MOCKBy no KHpnYr1fHOH rarrcpee, IllHpl1Ha R BbICOTa KOTOpOH )l,OCHfraJIa O;{HorO MeTpa. LI.Ba)J(llbl BO.J.OnpOBOL{ nepeCCKaJI 5IY3Y: O.LJ:I1H pa3

250 Peter KO.l'ta

!TO 4yryHHoti TPy6e. Y}ImKeliHofi no JJ,Hy peKI1, a BTOpOH pa3 - no

CneWIaJIbHOMY aKBeJJ,yK)'. Ero 11 cerOJJ,WI MO)f(HO BHJl.eTh B paiiOHe

ObIBlllero ceJla POCTOKHHO, cnpaBa OT npOCrreKT<l rVhlpa. [KeM' cpa60TaH

BOJJ;OrrpOBOJJ; // "BeqepWUI MocKBa", 2002.] 1.] 4]

(l"ii) Instrumental

YpOKJ1 apamKHpoBKW COJIHue B CTaKaHax Mapl10 TIacxaY:Jp, yqeHI1K r3pl1

JIYH<l, TI CTIoen K01'.1f]O'H'!!!,!-H1 Haf'JLHllHO OOK31hTRaeT, HaCKOJlbKO oprarrwufO

MO)f(HO rrO.llllepKHyTb 60raTcTBo UBeTa, I1CrrOJIb1Y5I np03paYTIOCTb 11

JIerKOCTb BcrrOMOraTeJlbHbIX MaTepl1aJIOB. 1. Mapl10 rrpl1rOTOBI1Jl 6mo,U0 C

nRmblO O()UHtJKOBbl.MU cmaKQHC/.;'vlU, HarrOJlHeHHbIMI1 Bo,Uoii. 2. CTaKaHQI1Kl1

060paQl1BaIOTC5I KycKaMu epJl113eJII1Ha, KOHUbI KOTOpbIX 3aKpeUJI}HOTC5I

c1'en.frep01\1.. 3.. Ka)Knt)MY C()c:y,~y CBOH Ußel~OK: )KeJ1TbIe p03bl,

nmcoqmny, )/(eJITble KaJIJIbI, )f(eJIT)'I{) l'ep6epy, pOManIKy VI uen03lfIO.

KOMJ103Hli,I1>:i. OCHOBaHa Ha IIeCKOJlhKHX rpyrmax, Ka)K)]:YlO 113 KOTOPbfX

xapaKTepu3yeT 'iHCTOTa JIlfHI1H, rrp03pa'iHOCTb <ilaKryphI, 5fCHOCTb q,OPMbI.

[YpOIGI apamfG-IpOBKl1: COf!H!.V:" B CTaKaHax // "JIaHLHIIa<pTHbIH ,Ul13aHH",

2001]

B CB5I3H C 3aKpbITHeM Man1311Ha npellJ!araeM OhfBllIHC B yrroTpe6JleHlfH

rrpHcTeHHble MeTaJIJIl1'ieCKHe rrep<PopHpoBaHHhIe CTeJIJIa)f(11 ,UJI.5I ToproBoro

1~la. 1. CTeJlJlalK ceporo UBeTa IIIHPI-lHoH 1M, BhICOTOH 2,3M.

YKoMwleKTosaH fZJllnb}(} nORK(UHU fJIYOJiHOti dO.5aBcfM. UeIIü - $90, KOJll1'4'eCTBO - 4UlT. 2. CTeJIJla)l( ceporo ll,BeTa lllHpl1HOH ] M, BblCOTOM 2,3M

C InDfmeil nOJIKOH rJIY6.vfHOH O;5M. YKOMIIJleKTOUaH CBeTOBbIMH KopoGaMH,

KplO4KaMH .n:JI5I pa3BeWI1Bamrn TOBapa H rrOJIOqKaMH Pa3JlHYHOH <P0PMbI.

UeHa - $ 80, KOJIH'ieCTBO - 12IIIT. [3JIeKTpoHHoe 06b5IBJIeHHe (2004)]

(iv) Prepositive

31'0 o6peTeHHe 6hIJIO Ha4anOM c06CTBeHIIO 4eJIOBeQeCKOrO

cyw;ecTBOBaHl15I, rroToMy TaK HHTepeCIIO, Kor~a OHO CJIY'H1JIOl:b. H eme. CerOJJ;HSI QeJIOBeQeC1'BO roBOpHT 1'0 JlI1 Ha nJlmu, mo JlU Ha wecmu

mblCRl./ax Jl3bIK06. A 41'0 6bIJlO B Ha4aJle? ÜJJ;I1H JIH KopeHb y Bcero

5I3bIKOBoro paJHo06paJl1S1 lfJIl1 l1X 6bIJIO MHoro? B rry6JIHKyeMoH Hl1)1(e

«fJIaBHOH TeMe» npe,UCTaBJIeHbI caMble pa3Hble rro)..\xoJJ;bI K rrp06JIeMe: 01'

reHeTHKI1 H 3TOJIOrHH .n:o HOBeHwlfx MeToJJ.oB JlI1HfBHCTHKI1. [BHa4aJJe

OhLTIO cnOBO. Korna? !/ «3HaH!1e - cvma», N~8, 2003]

(6) Direct case positions ofhigher numerals (> nJlmb '5 '):

(i) Nominative

I1HJJ,oHe3HSI. 12 o KT5I6pSl 2004 rOJJ,a IIpl1 BbIITOJIHeHHI1 rrOJIeTa B

ueHTpaJlbHOH ropHcToH yaCTI1 M51Te)l{Hoi1 IlPOBI1HU,HH A 4ex (] 850 KM

3ünü,llHee r. J],:>KaKapTa) nOTepnen K31'aCTpoePY MHorou.eJleBOn BCpTOJJeT

Quantijication ofNPslDPs in Slavic 251

DenJI 205 HaUl10HaJJhHbIX BoeHHo-B03.uyWHbIX CI1JI. ll02U6Jlu 60ceMb

'iell06eK, cpeou HUX nRmb 8blC:UKunUCmUfjjII::HHOl.A ürj;iiij€pv6 ü cd;,;;;

ZpaJICdaHCKUu l./UHOBHUK. 0 nplfl1l1HaX KaTacrpO<pbI He co06w;aeTC5I.

Manaibllil. 10 H0516p5I 2004 ro,Ua npl1 BhInOJIHeHHH rpeHHpoRolfHoro

rrOJiCTa 6Jm3 3sna6a3hl KyaHTaH nOTepneJI aBapHIO TaK1'H4ecKHH

HCTpe6HTeJIb Ml1f-29 Hau.HOHaJIhHbIX BBC. TII1JIOT cyMeJI

KaTarryJIbTHpOBaTbC5f H 6JIarOrrOJIyQHO rrpH3eMJlHJIC51 B 30 KM 01' aBHa6a3hI.

[TIp0I1ClIIeCTBI151 I! ,.3apy6e)J<Hoe BoeHHoe 0003peHI1C", 2004.11.29]

3TO rrO l ITI1 B ,UBa paJa 60JIbllie, 'ieM 6bIJIO nperr.ycMorpeHo 3anaHl1eM.

napTH5I 30BeT Hac Ha 60PbOY 3a HOHbfe ycrrexlf B rrp0I13BO.llCTHe npo.uyKToB

Ce.TlbcKoro x03Hi:fc1'Ra. He nO)KaJIeeM ClfJI, 41'06bI C 4eCTbID peUHlTb 3a.n:aQl1,

KOTopble rrOCTaBHJl nepeJJ; HaMI1 .n:eKa6pbCKI1M fLrIeHyM IJ,<:HI pWlhHoro KO!'.1!1TeTa !!apTHJ-L B "')Ti-1 }l,HVi fice n5lmb nO.RC8uO!.(eCli:Z.fX 6pU:?Qr) KOJIX03a

YCI1JIlfJll1 rronrOTOBKy K ceBy. Ha JlOJISI BbIBe3eHO 200 1'OHH HaB03a. CeH'Iac

cJKc,iJ,HeBHO HaB03a BLI303HTC51 B ~na pa:m 60.'!bwe, Qt'M 3TO OhlJlO paHhlTTe.

[5. OpJfOB. 50eBaJf rrporpaMMa 11 "CeRepHhIH KOJIX03HHK", 1958.12.251

TIo BI1He Bpa'ieH - OHH :Horo 11 He CKphIBaJIl1 . .LJ:0 CI1X HOp, :mKpblB fJla:3ä, 5.i

SI-DKy, KaK MYQaeTC.51 MOi:{ MaJlbIIII. B rrOCJ1enHJfe CBOU 4aCbI OH cnUI

CMOTPeTb Ha MeHll COBceMllpyrHM, KaKHM-TO OCMhICJIeHHhIM B3r.JISI,UOM.

llpoUiJ/O nJlmb !lern. 51 C Tpy,UOM BhIXO,Ul1JIa H3 ,llerrpeCCHI1. PeUIHJIaCb Ha

ßTOpylO 6epeMeHHOCTb, HO MCH5I IIOCTOSlHHO rrpec.nenOBalJ CTpax. flO:HOMy

OlfeHh r-.moro BpeMeR}! .5! rrpc)ßo,LI.l'ma B HHCTHTyTC aKyruepc1'Ba a

rreJJ;HarpHH. 3a .n;eHb ,UO pOJJ;OB MeHR )J(JJ;aJI HOBbIM Yß.ap: B Moeß KpOBH

06Hapy:>f<:I1Jll1 BI1PYC rerraTYITa C. Ero 3aHeCJIlf BO BpeM5I Ml1HI1-0nepaUHii

rro COXpaHeHl1lO 6epeMeHHOCTI1. [XOQy ycrreTh BbIpaCTl1Th CbIHa //

ApryMeHTbI 11 epaKTbI, 200] .06.06]

(ii) Accusative

He nOJ!YllHJI «poMaHHoro» .GyKepa, eCTb maHC CTaTb J1Y4WI1M B )l(aHpe

paCCKa3a, 3a 3TO rrpeMHeH HMeHl1 lOpU5I Ka3aKOBa HaIpa)K,Ll,CieT ~(HüBhiH

MHP». A )f(ypHaJJ «3HaM5I» H H3.llaTeJIbCTBO «3KCMO» HarpanHJII1 JIy4WyIO

rrOBeCTb rrpowe,UlIIero ro,Ua. EID OKa3aJIaCb ony6JIHKOBaHHa5I B )l(ypHaJIe

«KoHTI1HeHT» nOBeCTb Cepre5I .Ga6aJfHa «.Ge3 B03BpaTa». fl06e,UHTeJlb

nO!lY'iWl nJlmb mblCJllJ aMepUKaHcKux derLe:JICHblX eduHulf. <DHHaJIHCTbI )I{e,

cpe,U11 KOTOpbIX, QTO lfH1'epecHo, 6bIJI 11 AH,UpeH LI.MI1TPl-IeB C nOBeCTbID

«)J;opora 06paTHO)}, He,UaBHO rrOJlY4HBllil1H rrpeMl1lO AnOJIJIOHa

fpHTopbeBa, a TaIOKe OJIbra CJlaBHI1KOBa, AH,llpeii feJIaCHMOB, <I:>al1Ha

fpHH6epr, AHHa MaTBeeBa lf3 EKaTepl1H6ypra, rrOJIY4HJ1H B Ka4eCTBe

YTellleHI15I rro IT5ITbl:OT l{OJIJlapoB. YQpe;:I.HJ111 rrpeMHlO B Kouu.e 2001 fOJJ,a­

oJJ;HoBpeMeHHo c 6e3BpeMeHH0I1 KOWIHHOH «f\HTHoYKepaJ> - 11 Hi:1.1tldJU1

HMCHeM rryllIKHHcKoro rrepCOHaJKa, He6e3bI3BeC1'HOro aBTopa «nOBeC1'eH

rroKoMHoro HHaHa TIe1'pOBH'Ia .Ge,lKJ1Haj>. fJlaBHbIH peJJ,aKTOp «3HaMeHI1»

252 Peter Kasta

J1YiTCpü.l)'pIr~r~ :q~::T~:Y.: H~T2..'llo~ !1B~HC'!3R 3RI'vft:'Tf,.{n::l, 4TO nOReCTh - '}TO )f(aHp, CKOTOpOrO Half11HanaCb pyccKa51 JUUepaTypa, a «DOBeCTJ1 OenKHIIa» CTarU1 IIO)J)Il1HHhTM OTKpblTl1eM pyCCKOM np03bI. «DP11 3TOM IIOBeCTb ­HaI160Jlee 3naCTI1~HbIH l1 IIO ceH ,n;eHb aKTyanbHhIH )f(aHp cOBpeMeHHoll POCCI1MCKOH np03bJ», - .uooaBliJla OHa. [lfMeHeM CKpOMHoro rryIllKIHlCKOro JUHepaTopa // «KynbTypa», 2002.03.25J

(iii) Position in Passive with a Nurneral in Nominative and Nurnerativ in Genitive PI

UBeTacTbIll rraBJ1I1HHH XBOCT Bcer,n;a rrpHBO.LT,51T KaK npl1Mep I1p:l1BJleKaIDw:ei1 oKpacKH: rrepeJUfBoM nepbes CaMUbJ cTapalOTc.lI rrp!1RJ1e4b K ce6e BH11MaH11e oco6eH )f(eHCKOro DOJIa. Map110H DeTpH 113 OKc<!>op)1a BrrepBble 'JU,L(yrvi3JlaCb: a 3aQervi rraB.;rr:Hllh.H1\1 ca~\'1Ka~v1 oco6o KpaCHBh!H ~X:BO(:T

y rrapTHepa? OHa oT06paJIa BoceMb caMbIX 51pK11X XBOCTOB B DapKe Bl1rrCHeH.IJ. H Ka)K)10My BbI,uana )1J151 C'-IaCTJlI1HOM MJ13HI1 4eTblpex CaMOqeIC B pe3ynbTaTe I1X ceMeHHoll )f(li3HM 6blJlO npoU36eoeHo nJlmb cornefl flUlj, 113

KOTOphlX fjblJlynUJIUCb B I1HKy6aTopc mpucma munbOeCRJ11 na6JlUHJlm,

Ha6mo)J,eHIUI 33 MaJIblWaMI1 rroK~naJ1I1, 4TO caMhle pa3BHThle n )f(I1BY4I1e pO,L(11.;lHCh OT naBJ1HHOB C Ha1160Jlee 51pKMM 11 KpynHhIM pl1CyHKOM Ha XBOCTe. TaK lfTO KypO~KH He oum6alOTC5I! [3a~eM naBnMHy XBOCT? 11 «3HaHHe - CI1JIa», NS!10, 20031

(iv) Object Position with a Genitive of Negation of a lügher Numerai (with Unaccusatives)

«HeY)f(TO He YJ1bIOHeTC5I'?» - ,IJ;yMaJI 51. JtI B.upyr :>ap)KaJI, COBeprneHHaJI J101I1a,n;h, 3TO OH ,n;o <d1H,n;IOKa» )100paJIC5I. B 06meM, 51 B11)f()', lfTO He

npouUlo u n5lmu Jlern Moell OTCI1)lKn, a KHH)f(K11, pO)f(,n;eHM5I KOTOphIX 51 bhIJ1 CBI1)J,eTenb, Y)f(e 113,n;aHhI! Y,n;I1BI1TeJIbHa5I orrepaTHBHocTh. 11, HaKOHeIJ,-TO, npl1llIJ1a <PaIOMCKa51 KHl-DKKa. KaK TaM, )1apCTBeHHa5I-TO Hall:DMCb HaYJ1Häe'l C>I? Ara. [TOJIiri:H ~aLilI3J1h. rr}fCL~yfa 113 3aKJ1fOQeHM5r (1966--1 970)]

(v) S1Jhjpr:! Position in negated existential sentences with Genitive 0/

Negation

11n11 "BTopoe p0)f()J,eHHe"? A? KaK Bhl .AyMaeTe? AH, .;lIO.;ll1, aA, -lKlJ1H, 3alfI1pMKaJI paMOnI1. .. A CMOTpI1Te-Ka, Be)lb HerrnOXa5l: apmpMeTI1Ka IIony~aeTC5I: Hern maKUX n5lmu Jlern, KOTophle He )KaJIh 6bIJ10 bbl OrrycTI1Th! )Xa, eme o)J,Ha "Ha.urrHch" rr05IBI1J1aCb - "Ha,n;rr11ch Ha DJ1aCTI1HKe "TeMHa5i HO~b". 24/Il KaKI1e nelfaJIbHhle HOBOCTI1 B TBoeM rrocne,n;HeM rrI1CbMe, JlaplIK. [IOm1ii f-T1,aHI13Jlh. OHCbMa H3 1aKJlJO'-IeHI151 (I 966--1970)]

Since most of the cxamples discussed in the generative literature are allke, we tried to confirm the data \vith real material taken from the Russian National Corpus.

Quantificatian afNPslDPs in Slavic 25J

2. The proposals lor the ana~vsis 01numeral phrases

This section tries to refine the analysis of "heterogeneous" vs. "homogenous" morphosyntax of numeral expressions making use of recent syntactic developments, namely the emergence of the case-assigning mechanism AGREE. The key insight is taken from Gilbert Rappaport's approach on case assignment (2002), refined and enriched by the mechanism of interpretability and valuation of features from the reeent studies on the Syntax of Valuation and the interpretability u[ Featüres developed b:y David Pcsctsky 'lnd Esther Torrego, UMass/Boston (2004)1.

2.1 Babb]/}s Arzaly'sis cifil\!umeral Phrases in l?l,issian

Babby (1987: 100) has called the morphological pattern displayed under the DG I Iunder (4) and illustrated in (2) vs. (3) and (5) vs. (6) as heterogeneous vs. homngenous numeral Phrases (NumP). One possible approach to the problem I would be to assurne that the difference in morphosyntax illustrated in (2, 5) vs. (3, 6) transparently reflects a difference in syntactic structure: the numeral is the head when the numeral phrase is in a position assigned a direct case (e.g. Nominative or Accüsativc), while tbc quantified noun is thc head in a position assigned an oblique casc ~e.g. Genitive, Dative, Instrumental and Prepositivc). Babby has convincingly rejected such an approach, arguing that the quantified noun is the head ur a numerai phrase in all symactic contexts (1987: 105-112). He has correspondingly developed a thcory or case marking which accoums for the observed contrast. When such phrases occur in a nominative or accusative position, the quantifier induces genitive (Ihis phenomenon is known as the genitive of quantification, henceforth GEN(Q». The numeral phrases, here repeated as (7) in nominative case and as (8) in accusative case, are called lzeterogeneous:

(7) TIorl16nH 60Ce.Mb li-eJI06CK, Cpelll1 HHX n5lmb

Died PERF 3PL eight N()M people (It-,[\;PL, al110ng them !!'/e NUfvi

6blCOKonOCmU6JleHHblX OcjJUlWP06

Officers in high positions GENPL

qnHOBHMK. administrator

(8) TI06e)1I1Tenh nOJ1yqnn nflmb

The wiImer received fivc Ace

OeHeJICHblX eOUHUlj monetary units GENPI

H O,n;UH rpa)f(llaHCKHH iind one town

mbIC5llf. aMepUKaliCKUX

thousand GENPL American

iI

1 David Pesetsky & Esther Torrego (200-l): The Syntax ofValuation and the Interpretability Iof Features, in: hUp://web.miLeuullingüistics/peopk facült: p-:setskylPesetsky_Torrego _Ab'Tee_paper.pdf I

J I

255 254 Peter Kosra

'vVc ~aJi sec: th~t thi" i'.l!e is iDdependeDt nf thf' <;~m:mtics of the sentence. because it applies even in derived structures, e.g. in Passivcs (9), Unaccusatives (! 0) and in existential negated sentences (i i), in which ihe original position was a structural (direct) case position (of subject or object):

(9) B pe3YJIbTaTe l1X ceMeMHoM )f(l13Hl1 6blllO npoU36eCJeHo rmmb corneN JlUlj, 113

KOTOphIX 6blflynwLLlcb B I1HKy6aTope mpucma nJlmbdecJlm na611UHJlm.

(10) B o6ll~eM, 5i BYiiKY, 'HO He npOUi.!iQ u rum,u /lem Moerr OTCH}l){M. a KH!1)KKK

po)lcneHI15i KOTOphlX }\ 6bIJI CBl1neTeJIb, y)l(C H3naHbI!

(11) Hem rnaKUX n51mu Rem, KOTopbIe He )l(aJIb 6b1J10 6bI orrycTl1Th!

In contrast to the heterogeneous pattern, a quantitied NP in an oblique case position appeal S entirely in thc üppropri3te case. The hornogeYlpnus pattern is illustrated in (12) through (14):

(12) MapI-w npI1TOTOBI1JI 6mo)l0 c n51mblO oouHaK06blJl1U CmaKaHaMU,

HanomlCHHbL"1-tU BO,il.OM.

(13) YrcoMITJreKTOBaH nJlmblO nO/llmMU rJIy6HHoi-! dO.5ancrM.

(14) vb Hero QHCTaH BO;J,a TIO cryrYHHblM TpyoaM OTTIpaSJ15UmCb j{ rUUr1U

6odop(J36oPHblNI cjJoHlnaHaM.

ßecause it is an idiosyncratlc iexical property of these W(Ji cis that thcy take a complement In an oblique case?, ßabby n:fers to this phenomcnon as lexicai case. On the basis or an analysis of numeral phrases in Russian, Babby (1987, and elsewhere) develops the following descriptive generalization (DG2) in (15):

(15) DG2 on lexically vs. conjigurationally assigned case Lexical cüse (licensed by the lexical properties of an individual lexical item) supersedes Configurational case (licensed by syntactic context abstractcd av,ray fram the individual lexical item present).

The syntaclic case hierarchy in (16) places the GEN(Q) between lexical case and NOMJACC:

(16) Syntactic Case Hierarchy (Babby 1987:116; cf. also Franks 1995: 95; Rappaport 2002:330)

Lexical Case > GEN (Q) > NOM I ACC

While the Syntactic Case Hierarchy indeed gets the required results, merely stipulating such a hierarchy lacks explanatory force. Babby therefore suggests

The cxamplcs discussed in Franks (1995 :95) are (l) a. Ci tat' [NP IQP pjaf 1 [N' interesnyx knig 11, (i) b. pro [i-.JP [QP pjat' j fN' interesnyx !c'1ig J] VS. (2) a. vladet' [NP lQP pjat'jllJ [N' intcrcsnymi knigami 11 VS. b. s [NP IQP pjafju ] (N' interesnymi knigami 11.

Quantijication ofNPslDPs in Slavic

that the three-place hierarchy in (16) can be reduced to two-places, as in (16'), if GEN (Q) is taken to be a pureiy structurai case: (his argumt,;lIli:1l1Ull lS bas(d Oll

thc ohservation that the adnominal genitive is also a structural case. As Steven Franks (1995:95, [n. 5) points out this suggestion is not convincing sinee virtually any noün ca11 take a genitive object, \vhereas on!y certain verbs and prepositions can take an accusative one. The revised version of ( 16) would then be (16'):

(16') S}'rifactic Case l-fierarcl1}J (re1Jis(!d):

Lexical Case > Configurational Case (after Franks 1995 :95)

The operative principle here is one of locality - NOM I ACC cannot percolatc down to N' since it is already genitive by vi/tue of heing in the domain of qU3ntifier, but oblique case can since it is assigncd earlier in the derivation, before N' has had a chance to receive GEN(Q).

The hierarchy in (16') is justified by a principle 01' !exica! satisfaction (Babby 1985) which requires that lexical properties be satisfied at every level (while configürational case need not be). In addition, Babby notes that the GEN (Q) is a contigurational case, but it supersedes the assignment of the equally configurational subject nominative and object accusative under iocality: sinee GEN (Q) applies within thc numeral phrase, it is assigned before the clause­level cases (NOfv1 ! ACe) are. The numeral stmlds outside the scope of its own casc assignment, so that it is assigned dired case on the basis 01' its dause~level

configuration. The result is heterogeneous morphosyntax (7) through (8). We c:an see that this configurational case assignment involves even unaccusatives (7) and passives (9) whose external arguments are derived intcrnal objects. Oblique cases, in contrast, are lexical, and thus prevail over thc configurational GEN (Q). The result is homogeneous morphosyntax (l2}-(14).

2.2 Franks' proposal on Numeral Phrases and Quantijied Structures in

Russian, Serbo-Croatian, Pohsh and other Siavic languages

Crucial to the operation of hierarchical structure tor the NPs in Russian is the idea that case is first assigned by an external govemor to NP and is only subsequently "percolated down to all available lexical and phrasal categories in the phrase" (Babby 1987:91). Steven Franks regards this view as "cssentially correct" (1995 :94) assuming further refinements of the theory due to the data in Serbo-Croatian, ;\s opposed to Russian, where the GEN (Q) is a structural (configurational) case, in Serbo-Croatian the GEN (Q) must obviously be considered an inherent (lexical) case. In Serbo-Croatian, most quantified phrases exhibit the hetero~eneous case pattern, regardless of syntactic context. This is illustrated in (17) [Franks 1995 :97 (6a-h)J a.-h.:

256 Peter Kosta

r Il1!lX r _~f 1 r 'r~;;n.., 11(11) a. kupiii ~IllU LNP LQP l-'\..L] LNP '''-''J'6<AJJ

bought(m pI) AUX( 1pI) five books(gen pI)

b. za [Npmax [QP osam] [NP dana]] in eight days(gen pI)

c. sa [NplllJ.' kw petJ [NI' djevojaka]] with five girls(gen pI)

maxd. Turska se nalazi na [Np kwoba] [NP ova kontinenta]J

Turkey KEFL ioeales on bOIn lhesc(pauc) continents(pauc) e. izmedu lNP m,LX kw dva] lNP zla]]

between two evils(pauc) f. bojao sam se LNpmax füp pet] [NP IjudiJ]

feared(msg) Aux(lsg) REFL five people(genpl) g. u toku LN1'!r!a-: rQP tri] [NP posh.:Jnje godinen

in course three 1ast(pauc) years(pauc) h. v1asnik [Nprna.x [QP pet] [N' malih kuca jJ

owner five small(genp1) houses (genpi) 'the owner offive small houses' (Franks 1995: 97; ex. (6) a-h)

Since the QP assigns case GEN (Q) not only after lex.icai or functional heads that assign accusative (configuraLional 01' struetural case), as in (17a, b) but also after those that require specific oblique case, as in (17c-h), the syntactic case hicrarchy in ( 16') sccms not to be universa!Iy true. Franks tries to resolve the contradiction stipulating that these NPs "must be in these cases. This fo!lO\vs from the theta-theretic view that they bear specific inherent cases. Moreover, the fact that these quantified phrases are cased - even if no element within them actually shows it morphologically - implies that they must be NPs." (Franks 1995:97). Another detail concenüng the analysis or quantified NPs constitutes the pU7Zling problem 0/ subject-verb agreement. The core mystery posed by Russian quantificational structures is demonstrated under (18):

(18) a. pjat' krasivyx devusek prisli five beautiful(gen pi) giris (gen pI) arriveu(pi)

b. priSlo pjat' krasivyx devusek arrived(nsg) five beautiful(gen pI) girls(gen pI)

Pesetsky (1982) contends that when plural agreement obtains, as in (18a), the quantified phrase is a subject Nt>, but \vhen the dcfault neuter singular form appears, the quantified phrase is actually a QP internal to the verb phrase. The structure (S-structure) of(l8ab) would be as in Franks (1995: 106~ ex. 28ab):

(19) a. Lcp lNp:NOM pJat KfaSlVYX uevu~e~llVP PI;;~; LNP '-'~~~

b. [0) [NP e ] rVI' prislo [op pjat' krasivyx devusekm ~~~~

257Quantification 0/NPslDPs in Slavic

Assuming that the verb prijti 'to arrive' is unaccusative, the surface originates in object position of the internal argument. Unaccusative verbs are supertlcially intransitive verbs \vhose surface subjects are D-structure objectsJ

. More generally, they have a VP-mternai argument but lack an external one. Ir the interna! argument is an NP but the verb does not assign case, then movernent to subject position ensues that the NP can receive nominative case in order to circumvent the Case Filter. This renders unaccusative verbs identical at S­structure to ordinary intransitive (i.e. "unergative") verbs. Thus, when pjat' krasivyx devusek 'five beautiful girls' is an NP and requires case, as in (19a), it must move to subject position, but when it is a QP, which does not bear case, it remains in situ within YP. According to Pesetsky, this explains why the unmarked word order is subject verb in (19a), but verb-sübjcct in (19b). This dichotomy we can tlnd in other quantified NPs (cf. Madariaga 2007:267­281) in Russian and the East Slavic languages but neither in English nor in any other S!avic !a.l1guage.

The fact that numeral phrases in Serbo-Croatian may appear in oblique NP positions and still exhibit GEN (Q) l:ase rnarking, as shown ündcr Steven Franks' analysis in (18c-h), indicates that they must themselves be NPs in this language. As such, they should potentially he ahle to bear any ohlique case. although, as we have seen under Franks' analysis, this need not be reflected morphologicaHy, since percolatiOIl of the oblique case dOw11 from l'",'Pmax is biocked by GEN (Q), which Franks has argued is an inherent case in Serbo­Croatian. The on1y necessary modification to Babby's system that Franks makes is to "aliow both the inherent obiique casc and GEN (Q) to be satisfied in the same structure, the one on Npmax, the other on NP." (Franks 1995:113). For Franks quantified phrases in Serbo-Croatian are always l\TPs, hence they must always undergo NP movement from the Spec-YP (or Spec-vP) position to the Spec-TP (or IP) position for case reasons. Whether or not they subsequently undergo QR (quantifier raising) is not dictated by any principle of va, beyond those deriving the intended reading in accordance with the semantic requirements of the predicate. In Russian, on the other hand, the situation is not so straighttorward. Nothing seems to prevem a QP either from raising to the position of Spec-IP or to remain in situ. Since QPs lack case features, raising to the VP-specifier position should never be motivated by case considerations. The result for this analysis can be seen under (20ab):

.\ As tor Unaccusativily, we advise lhe reader lo I Iarvcs (2002), (2003) and (2006). Cf also Kosta (in print) and Harves (in print).

258 Peter Kosta

II"\{'\\ ~

~LU) a. rr h IP

/A

"'., /A NP/\ l' NP/\ '" I'

/A~ 6 / /'\

\ e 1 VP pjat' celovek J VP

/.A.~ / ..A \ QP* V' N-rp* V' A f"\ !

/ ", I " I

I ~ / """ U \1 _.pjat' cclo\,rck \i-0" ei • -1. ..

Fmnks (1995: 119)

2.3 Gi/bert Rappapurt 's feauture based proposat

How earl \ve aecolmt for the differences between the homogeneous and the hetcrogeneous paradigm in minimalist terms? The first minimalist accounl within the domain of Slavic languages has been made by Gilbert Rappaport tür Russian (Rappapürt 2002) ä.I1U for Polish (Rappaport 2003h). Let us first reconsider the Rüssian case. "Higher munerals" are detined as those which are associated with the alternation of homogeneous fuld hcterogeneous morpho­syntax describ~d above, without affecting the grammatica] number of the quantitied noun. First of all, Rappaport agrees with Babby that the oblique cases (associated with homogeneous morphosyntax) are lexieal, and the direct cases (associated with heterogeneous morphosyntax) are configurational. \Vhat are the mechanismus of the respective müdes of case assignmenL in thc Minimal ist program? Lexical case (calIed "inherent case" by Chomsky) is associated with the particular argument-selection properties of a governing lexical item and thüs with the assignment of a semantic role. Consequently, it is properly located in the lexlcon. The Ivlinimaii::.Lview cf syntax rcjccts X-bar theory (indlloing stipulated distinctions among levels of projections) and is based on a single bottom-up cycle which subsequently (and cyclically) creates syntactic structure via the merger of lexical items, applies operations to this part of structure and then sends the resuit to further syntactic operations and finally to the C-I (former LF) and A-P-systems (türmer PF). Lexical case can most simply bc viewed as a matter of sclection, a condition on merger: a lexical item is lexically specified as combining with a category with a particular case feature. A noun, for example, may 111 prim;ipie UC ll1Ub~": n ;~~, u :.:,;~;~:::~~=,. :::;:'2::~':'~ ""I11P FM {'~C:::P nr not A Quantifier by definition, on the eontrary, cannot be merged with a lexically specified value for case. Onl1' a noun with a specified case feature may be selected by the appropriate lexical item. After merger, t.l}ere is nothing more to

Quantijication ufNPslDPs in Slavic 259

say. For example, the Russian verb vosxz"s(;at 'sja "to be emhrallcd with" is Identiiied in the iexicon as (;ulIluiu.iug, üiiIy w'ith Ci phrus.: mGrk~d '.'.'ith the instrumental ease. 111e mechanism of configurational case assigment (c.alled "structural" by Chomsky) is different: it is completely divorced from the assignment of a semantie role. It is based on the symaetic operation Agree, which implements case assignment and predicate agreement (Chomsky 2000; 2001a; 200Ib). The following simplilied definition is suffieient ror lhe purposes needed:

(21) AGREE

a. Two categories Agree iff all of the following conditions are satisfied: 1. one of the categories c-corrlmand the ether; ii. there is at least one matching feature shared by the two

categories; and iii. each of the categories is active (i.e., it contains a feature without

a value) b. When two categories Agree:

i. the value of any valued matching feature is copied anto an uIlvalued counterpart; and

ii. scmanticaJly unintcrpretab!e features in the Agreeing c.ategories are deleted from the syntactic derivation and passed on to Phonological Form. (Rappapart 2002:333)

For example, in the standard situation of establishing predicate agreernent, the subject nominal phrase contains valued features for. e.g., person and number, and an unvalued case feature (rendering it active); tht: Tense node representing predicate agreement contains unvalued features for person and number (rendering it active). The !Wo categories l:an Agree because they contain matching features (person and nurnber), and ünvalü(~d features become valued: T is assigned values for person and number copied from the subject, and (nominative) ease is assigned to tht: subject noun. Unintcrpretable features such as agreement features in T and ease on the noun are Iater removed from the syntactie derivation because the)' are irrelev8.nt for further operations and interpretation, but they are passed on to PF, because they will eventually find formal expression. Agree is also the mechanism of noun-phrase-intemal eoncord, whereby modifiers receivc casc, number, and gender features from the noun that they modify.

Let us return to numeral phrases and consider a concrete example:

(22) I106e;UUeJlb nonyr·lWl QMepUKaHCKue {Tl... ...... \ .. ,. '~r'\'9""\ ('"\,.,. ,.o.r-p;"prH_bb'M -PT J+Arrl

....---- American\~"~J

OeHeJICHbZe eOU!-tul/u. monetary units[-ACCI+ FE~1, I PL]

261 260 Peter Kosta

VII Lln= appi,JaC,h tc ~cr:f:g~r2.Ü0!'!::!.! C~':'I:' m:.lrkine, just outlined, the direct o~ject

Wl1epUKaHCKue deHeJICltble eduHut{U "American currency" has an unvalued case feature, but valued features for gender (feminine) and number (plural). Following Minimalist assumptions, a transitive verb phrase is headed by v (small v), which assigns the accusativc to thc object noun phrase the way T assigns the nominative to the subject phrase: v has unvalued gender and number features, and assigns rhe accusative on the application of the operation Agree. The conditions unuer vvhich i\.grec is satisfied in this exarnple (with unvalued features, both v and the complement phrase are active, and they have matchlng features), are the following: the gender and number features of e()uHul1u 'units' are copied 011to v, and the accusative case is asslgned to the noun. The assignement of configurational is optional, making positions in which it is assigend ciigilJle tür the Gcniti"'vTe cf t~egation a!ld (Jther qüantified existential nominal structures. When a higher numeraI is added inlo tIle stmcture of Mergcr, the noun takes the GEN (Q) instead of accusative:

(23) [106e,n:I1TeJIb TIOJlyY:IUI nflmb mblC51l{ aMepUKaHCKUX

f";" ~nThe wlnuer received LI.\"o ,1\('(' thousmHl GLNI'L American oeHe.JK:H bi.X. t?OW-iUlj

monetary units GEl"PI

If the numeral is the source of the GEN (Q); then it is analogous to v in assigning case by Agree. If the numeral has an unvalucd feature for gender, ami thc noun has an unvalued featüre for case, then both categories are active, Agree applies, and the numeral assigns genitive. However, there is a difference between lexical category of a numeral and the functional categories of T and v: numerals in Russian can express case. We assume, then, that unlike T and v, the .;'('­

numeral in (23) is associated in the lexicon with a fixed vaiue für case, which 13 then copied onto the head noun under Agree. This value cannot be the genitive, because then the numeral would be in genItive evcn in positions of direct case assignment, cr. (23 '):

(23') n06e.uI1TeJIb nonYl.J:HJI *mlmu mblC51lJ aMepUKaHcKux .•~

The wiIllier received five (il,N thousand CiFNPL American GENPL ;Jet

~ deHc.JlCllblX edUHU1j :~

.~..monetary GENPL units GENPL

Wc assurne, with Rappaport, an "abstract" Quantitative case which is spelled out t in the post-syntactic morphology by syncretism with the genitive (former called 1:

erthe GEN (Q» by default, in rough analogy to the cxpression of Animacy in ,~!-l{usslan, wmcn IS ueelJlY C;H1;"'~~~\"o~ ;., ~~-.~ :...... ~:r:~~::.~t"v rof' thp bn~ml~p. hut is expressed only by syncretism with the Genitive. Thus higher numerals may be specified in the lexicon with the case feature [Quantitative]. Such an j-"rp objcct !'

I!Y ~' ,1:-

Quantification 0/NPslDPs in Slavic

is analogous to the Genitive of Negation (cr. ex. 6 iv, v), here repeated as (24), (25):

(24) Dbjeet Position with a Genitive o/lVegation 0/ a higher numeral 6..,ith Unaecusatives)

«HeY)f{TO He yJIbI6HeTcH?» - .uyMaJI SI. 11 B)],pyr 3ap)Kan, COBeprneHHaH

JIOllJa.n;h, 3TO OH )],0 «11H):UOKa» .u06palIC5l. 8 06weM, SI BH)f{Y, 4TO He

npoUVlO U n51mu !lem Modi OTCI1.uKH, a KHl1)KKI1, pO)K)J.eHH>l KOTOphIX )i

6bIJI CBI1.ueTeJIh, y)f(e H3)laHhI! Y)lI1BI1TeJJhHa51 ollt:paTHBHocTb. H, HaKoHeU-TO, rrpl1lIIJIa <DaIOMcKM KHI1)KKa. KaK TaM, )lapcTBeHHaH-To

Ha.unllch Hal.J:I1HaeTcH? Am. [IOJIHH D;aHI13JIh. nl1ChMa 113 3aK.;lIOl.Je HYHI

(1966-1970)]

(7'::;),...... _- / ..)!{bj"ecf Positj(,rr [;1 ;leJgafed existerltial sentences 1:vitll Genitive 0/Negation

Hmi "BTopoe pmK,D,emie"? A? KaK Bbr Ll.Yl\1aeTe? AM, JIlOJ1!1, aM, .nfOJlI1, ­

3at mpl1Kan paMOJII1. .. A CMOTpI1Te-Ka, Bel(h HeITJlOXaH apl1<pMeTI1Ka

nOJIYQaeTC5I: Hf:?rJ mOK1!X I'mmlJ J7em, KOTOpbJe He )KalIl, bh1J10 6hT onycniTh! Jla, ell.(e O,Ll,Ha "Ha,lJ,IU!Cb" rrOSlBHJIaCb - "Ha,n:ITI1Cb Ha

lUlaCTlIIIKe "TeMHa51 HOl.fh". 24/11 KaKl1e rrel.JaJlhHbJe HOBOCTI1 B THoeM nOCJIe.n:HeM ITI1CbMe, Jlapl1K. [IOmofii )laHI13JIb. DI1CbMa H3 :mKJUOqeHIDl

(1966-1970)]

\Ve begall wirh thc descriptive observation that in nurneral phrases, heterogeneous morphosyntax is found in syntactic contexts of direct/structural case, and homogeneous morphosyntax is found in obiique!inherent contexts. Since we now attribute heterogeneous case marking to a valued case feature on the numeral [Quantitative], and homogeneous case marking to an unvalued case feature, Ollf task is to ensure the correlation of case feature and the direct/oblique position. The mechanism just outlined seems to derive the facts directly. Given the fact that on current assumptions there is non D-structure and that Mcrge and Agree operate cyclically, the higher syntactic context does not even exist during the NP-internal derivation. As a result, a valued case feature on the numeral can assign the quantitative case (giving heterogeneous morphosyntax) in positions of structural case marking (both nominative and accusative), without competition form clause-level case assignment operations. At the same time, we must rule out or block the result of an unvalued case feature in these positions, for example:

(26) fl06e~I1TeJlb rronyql1JI *flJlmb mblC51 l {U aMepUKaftCKUe

The winner rcceived five NOM thousand NOMPL American NOMPL .:I"""~'M" .~ 0,.)1"'1/71'J1

monetary NOMPL units I'O\1Pl

____. 1 ======~---

262 Peter Kosta

lr tbc ca3C fC8.t~;re Gi:. rhe highe!" !1UTl1pr~1 rj::lt' "tive" remains unvalued, the numeral agrees in case (and gender) with the quantified noun and is assigned a nominative case. This construction wouid exempiify hornogel1eoÜs morpho­syntax in a direct case position, which is ruled out, as correctly predicted by the opposition of valued and unvalued casc. We rule out this construction by simply assuming that numerais have no nominative case form. There is a Speil-Out rule for higher numerals in thc quantitative case, required in the direct cases. Conversely, thi: nurncral's case feature in oblique/inherent case positions must be lexically unvalued, in order to give homogeneous morphosyntax. What is the result if a numeral in this context 1s lexically associated with a valued case feature? Recall that the qua.'1tified noun must be associated wit a lexically valued case feature itself in a context of inherent case, so that it is visibie to seiection by the gov~rl1ii1g le;{ical itcm. 1

Al.gree, then, could !1Clt ar'ply·~ hecause the c·ase features by definition do not match since neither of thern is unvaluedlactive for the operation Agree (cf. definition under 21). If Agrcc does not appIl', then the gender feature ofthe numeral rendering it active would never be valued, and the form uitimately unil1terprctablc. In such syntactic context, cmly an unvalued feature \,vill admit a legitimate derivation.

Summary: L

f (1) Numera! phrases in Russian may be rvlerged in syntactic structure with or

without a vaiue for Case: features for gender and anima!.:; are necessarily unvalued, to be assigned a value in concord with the quantified noun. Adjeetives have unvalucd features for aB these feature types. Nouns aiso can be Merged with or without a valued case feature, but gender and 'J.'t'

animacy must be valued. :~

Y: (2) The distinction between valued and unvaiued case features accounts for " .;;,

the distribution of heterogeneous and homogeneous morphosyntax within :~,

i ~,

numeral phrases. ~'

(3) Struchlr(lJ case is assigned by Agree to nouns with an unvalued case 4­feature; moreover, structural case need not be realized (since it pennits ,~, the genitive of negation and special quantified nominal structurcs).

ii~f:

lnherent case is licensed by selection (essentially, Merge); that is, the noun must have thc appropriately vaJued case feature in order to be i;,selected.

(4) A numeral with a valued case feature which will be copied onto the head fnoun (giving heterogeneous morphosyntax) can stand in a position of ~i

~~

slrucLurai ca~c, iJUL lIVl ;11 Vllv v~ :~-~...::-:::: :::::::::-: ~~':' l"Hpr ~r\<:iti()n !'rpc!icts ~i

that the noun have a valued case feature in the lexicon to become visible Ir' ~.~

tür thc governing head. i>: ~, ~'

I'

Quantification ofNPslDPs in Slavic 263

(5) Further investigation on Quantification is nceded to explain the different behavior or higher and Iower l1Umerais in Russian and OLht:r Siavil."

languages. We assume that the major differences between higher and iower numerals (with respt:ct to agree and concord relations) is due to the fact that only the lower numerals (Russian 2-4) can undergo Q-N-D­Movement where unvalued <D-features of the Quantitier (for gender and case) in lexicon have to Merge via Agree operations with the unvalued <P-features (number) of the noun. This explains the interna] agreement of quanti fied noun phrases and the extemal agreement with the prt:dicate of the type: 9mu oee 3{UJU4U 6ydym BblIIOJlWITbCjf opKeCTPOM "BoJ1ra­63H,Il,".

References

Alexiadou, Artemis, and Elcna Anagnostopoulou (1998) "Pararnetrizing Agr: Ward order, V­movcmcnt and EPP-checkL'1g." In: Natural Languo.ge (lnd linguistic Theory 16:491-539.

Babby, Leonhanl H. (1985) "Prepositionai quantifiers and the dircct case condition in Russian". In: Michael S. Flier and Richard D. Brecht (eds.). !ssues in Russian morphosyntax. Columbus, OH: Siavica, 91-117.

Babby, Leonard f-L (1987) "Case, prcqulli'1tifiers, anti discontinuous agreement in Russian" Li: l\.!atural langttage and iinguistic lh(!nr)' 5' 91-13R.

Bejar, Susan (2003) Phi-syntax: A theory 0/agreement. University üfToronto. Toronto. Bobaljik, Jonathan (2003) "Floating quantificrs: Handle with care." In: The second Glat

fniernaiionu! .\tuli.::-üf-the-article book: l'he latest In !inguisrics, eds. Lisa Cheng and Rint Sybesma. BerEn, 107-148.

Borer, Hagit (2004a) Structuring sense: In name on!y. Oxford. Borer, Hagit (2004b) Structuring sense Tht' Y/(irmal course 0/events. Oxford. Bouchard, Denis (1984) On the cantent 0/empty categories. Dordrecht. Boskovi6, ZeIjko (2005) "Be carefui where you f10at your quantifiers." In: Natural Language

and Linguistic Theary. 22.4:681-742. Boskovic, Zeljko (2008) "A MJmmaiist Account of Genirive of Quanii1icatiün." In: Zybatow,

G./Szucsich, L./Junghanns, U./Meyer, R. (eds.) fOffilal Description of Slavic Languagcs. Frankfwi a. M. ctc. 270-287.

Boskovic, Zeljko, and Howard Lasnik. (2003) "On the distribution of null complementizers." Linguistic Inquiry 34:527-546.

Brody, Michael (1997) "Perfect chains." In Elements o} grammar, ed. Liliane Haegeman, 139-167. Dordrecht.

Chomsky, Noam (2000) "Minimalist inquiries: The framework". David Michaels, Roger Martin, and Juan Urigercka, eds. Step by step. Essays on minimalist 5yntax in honor (?f' Haward Lasnik. Cambridge, MA, 89-156.

Chomsky, Noam (2001a) "Beyond explanatory adequacy". Unpublished manuscript. Chomsky, Noarn (200 Ib) "Derivation by phase". Michael Kenstowic2, ed. Ken Haie: A life in

langua~e_ Cambridge, MA, I-52. Corbett, Grt:vil1e G. (1993) "The hcad of Russian rmmera! expressions". N. M. Fräser, G G

Loroen, ana;). lVIC\JIaSlli:Ul, cu. j-j-t:uu',) Ut bfUlIIIllWH.-U; ';'t.-v'y_ ::::U.I1'~"":bV, : ~ :::. Epstein, SamueI, and T Danicl Seely (2000) Cyclic speil-out in "derivation by phase". Ms.

University of Michigan and Eastern Michigan lJniversiiy. Arm Arbor and Ypsila..,ti, Michigan.

:t!;:-" J\ ~? .l';>:,,'", ----=---­--------============-' 'L

264 feier Kos[(l Quantification ojNPs/Dfs in Slavic 265 Il:'r,,"+.oo;r"'l c';"'Y""t..,1l.:::.1 Tl J:''t·~,...h ~,1 t-:. r\ ....... Dn_;I~ ....... V.,n .................. : ................ ............ ..-1 T T:~~+~.~ __ ~~ l/'":+_L 11 noo, A ~t-"v"',","''''.I., ~"""""'''''''''''''''.l ............ .... ...1 ............. ,y ......,U.L .. "\Alll"1 1'~,"VV(hJIIIIII(4, <..4..11\..1 lll.::)a ... .:>uöu J~\.aJlala ~ 17 7U) ~I""] Pe~et~l~y~ !)G;';d, <uJd E3tt~Cl T0ilGgu (2GO~1 '1'1H; SYUlCL"\ UJ-'v'~jualiofl anu lhe inlerprclabiiiry

derivational approach 10 .."yntactie relations. Oxlon.L Fox, Danny (1995) "Economy and scopc." Narural Language Semantics 3:283-341. Fox, Danny (1999a). Economy and semantic interpretation. Cambridge, Mass. Fox, Danny (199%) "Rccol1struction, binding theory. und the interpertation 01' chains."

Linguistic Inquiry 30: 157-196. Franks, Steven (1995) Parameters 0/ Slavic morphosyntax. New York (Oxford studies in

comparative syntax). Fr<unpLün, jünn. an.d Saln Güf.manIl (2000) Agreemem is feature sbariug. [vb. NorLhe~lern

University. Boston. http://www.math.neu.eduJling/pdffiles/agrisfs.pdf. Frampton, John, Sam Gutmann, lulie Legate, and CharIes Yang (2UUU) Remarks on

derivation by phase. Ms. Northeastern University and MIT. Boston and Cambridge. Mass. http://.......r~v..W'.math.neu.edülling/pdffi1es/rernJbp.pdf.

Gärtner. Hans-Martin (2002) Generalized transformations and beyond. Reflections on A1inimaiisi syntax. Beriin: Akademie-Veriag.

Ginzburg. Jonathan. and Ivan A Sag (2002) English interrogative construClions. Stanford. HaBe. Morris (19YU) "An approach to morphology". Proceedinj!,s 01 the Northeast Lin~uistic

Society 20,150-84. Halle, M(lITis (1995) "The Russian dcc!ension: A'1 illustration of the theory of distributed

morphology'·. Jennifcr eole and CharIes Kisseberth, eds, Ferspectives in phonology. Palo A 1.. ~. r"C'T T "")....,1 :.-, rt !LU. \.~'''LI, J':' I -JJ.

Harves, Stephallie (2002) Unaccusati've Syntax in Russian. Ph.v. DIssertatIon. Pnnceton. Harves, Stephanie (2003) "Getting Impersonal: Case, Agreement, and Distributive po-Phrases

in Russian." In: Bro\vne. Wayles et als. (eds.). Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 11. Ann Arbar, 235-254.

Harves, Stephanie (2006) "Non-Agreement, Unaccusativity, and the External Argument Constraint." In: Lavine, Jmnes et al. (eds.) Forma! Approaches to S!avic Linguistics 14. /\nn J\rbor. i 72- i 88.

Harves, Stephanie (in print) "Unaccusativity." In: Berger, Tilman, Gutsclunidt, Karl, "Kempgen, Sebastian, Kosta, Peter (eds.). Slavische Sprachen/Lavic Languages. Ein f

t->intemationales Handbuch zu ihrer Struktur, ihrer Geschichte und ihrer Erforschung/An international Handbook for their structure, their history and their investigation. Berlin, New York.

Kosta, Peter (in print) "Satzglieder und impersonale Konstruktionen im Slavischen.. ' In: ;. ~if,

Bcrger, Tilman. Gutschmidt, Karl, Kcmpgcn, Sebastian. Kosta, Pctcr (eds.). Slavische SpracheniLavic Languages. Ein internationales Handbuch zu ihrer Struktur, ihrer Geschichte und ihrer Erforschung/An international Handbook for their structure, their t history and thcir investigation. Berlin, New York.

Krifka, Manfred (1989) Nominalreferenz und Zeitkonstitution. Zur Semantik von ;~

Massenthermen, Pluraltermen und Aspektklassen. München. ~. Madariaga, Nerea (2007) "Russian Patterns of Floating Quantification: (non- )agreeing w

quantitiers." In: Kosta, Peter, Lilia Schürcks (cds). Linguistic Investigations into Formal ;~ Description o/Slavie Languages. Frankfurt am Main usw., 267-282. fMel'cuk, Igor' (1985) Poverxnostnyj sintaksis russkix Cislitel 'nyx vyraienij. Vienna: Institut ';j für Slawistik der Universität (Wiener slawistischer Almanach Sonderband 16). .t

Miyagawa, Shigeru. and Koji Arikawa (2007) "Locality in Syntax and Floating Numeral $;' ~Quantitiers." Lin~uistic /nquiry 38.4:645-670. :rPerimutter, David M. (1971) Deep and surface slruclure conslraints in syntax. Ncw York.

li ~;

;.~:

f· 1,1}I~J~

of Features, in: http://wcb.mitedu/linguistics/people/faculty/peselsky/Pesetsky_Torrego_Agrecyaper.pdf

Pesetsky, David (1991) Zero syntax. vol. 2: Infinitives. MIT. Pesetsky. David. and Esther Torrego (2001) "T-to-C movement: Causes and consequences."

In: Ken Haie: A life in language. ed. Michael Kenstowicz. 355-426. Cambridge. Mass. Pcsetsky, David, and Esther Torrego (2004) "Tense, case, and the nature of syntactic

categories." In: The syntax of lime, eds. Jacqueline Gueron and Jacqueline r ,ecanne. Cä.J.TJ.bridge. Mass.

Pollard, Carl Jesse, and Ivan A. Sag. (1994) Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Chicago: CSLI.

Pollock, Jean-Yves (1989) "Verb movcment, UG and the stmcture of IP " Linguis!ic Inquiry 20:365-424.

Portner, Paul, and Raffaella 7.anuttini. (2000) "The characterization of exc!alnative c1auses in Paduan." Language 76: 123-132.

Portner, Paul, and Ratlaella Zanuttini (2003) "Exclamative c1auses: .'\t the syntax-scmantics mtertace." LanRUage 79:39-81.

Rappaport, Gilbert C. (2002) "Nwneral Phrases in Russian: A Minimalist Approach." in' JOUr !1(!! Qf"Slavic Linguistlc5 10: 329=342.

Rappaport, Gilbert C. (2003a) "The grammatica! w!e uf animacy in a fonna! model of S1avic mürpholügy". Aian Timberiake and Aiexander Schenker, eds. Amencan contributions (0

[he lhlrteeruh international C~ongress üj-Slavisls. ßloomington, pp. Rappaport, Gilbert C. (2003b) "Case Syncretism. Features, and the Morphosyntax of Polish

Numeral Phrascs," In: Proceedings: 127-137. Rezac, Milan (2003) "The fine structurc of cyclic agree:' Syntax 6: 156-182. Richards, Norvin (2004) "Against bans on lowering." Linguistic lnquiry 35:453-463. FJvero, !\1aria Luisa, and Dana Geber. to appear. Raising in RomailiaIl: l'v1üve and agree.

Paper presented at LSRL /4. Sag, Ivan A., Thomas Wasow, and Emily M. Bender (2003) Syntactic theory: A formal

introduction, second edition Chicago: CSLI Publications. Sagey. EIizabeth (1986) The represenf(Jf;(m olfeatures and relations in non-linear phonology.

Doctoral dissertation. Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology. Cambridge, Mass. Sagey, Elizabeth (1990) The representation of features in non-linear phonolof!Y: The

artjeu/ator node hierarchy. New York. Schenker, Alcxander M. (1971) "Same remarks on Polish quantifiers". Slavic and East

European Journal 51: 54-60. Sportiche, Dominique (1988) "A theory 01' floating quantifiers and its corollaries for

constituent structure." Linguistic lnquiry 19:425-449. StowelI, Tim (1981 a) Complementizers and the empty catcgory principle. Paper presented at

Proceedings of the 11th Annual Meeting olthe North Eastern Linguistic Society. University ofMassachusetts.

StowelI, Tim (1982) "The tense ofinfinitives." Linguistic /nquiry 1:561-570. StowelI, Tim (1995) "The phrase structure of tense." In: Phrase structure and the lexicon,

eds. L. Zaring and J. Rooryck. Dordrecht. StowelL Timothv 0981 b) Orirrins ()( nhrasp ,frurt7lre nnf·tnr~ I Oi""I'r1::ltinn M::l""::lrhll"pH"

Institute ofTechnology.

Szabolcsi. Anna (1987) "Functional catcgorics in the noun ph..rase." In: Approuches !v hungarian. Voi 2. Theories and analyses, ed. Istvan Kenesei. Szeged.

---

266 Perer Kosta

Marion Krause rorrego, EsLl.lt::J (/990) "Oil q~l;:;-;t:f:e: t:8~t ::: C0~!!"0! r:!C"'''P'''' ringl1istic lnquiry 27: 11 1­

126. Zwischen Wort und Diskurs: Tsai. Wei-Tien Dylan (1994) "On nominal islands and LF extraction in Chinese." Natural LanguaRe und Linguistic Theory 12: 121-1 75. Überlegungen zu Theorie und Methode der Konzcptforschung

Williams. Edwin (1994) Thematzc structure in syntax. Carnbridge, Mass. Williamson. Janis S. (1987) "An indefiniteness restrietion tor relative clauses in Lakhota." In: Der Wert der Leistung liegt im Geleisteten.

The representation 0/ (in)dejiniteness. eds. Eric J. Reuland and Alice G. B. ter Meulen. Albert Ein.<;tein 168-190. Cambridge, Mass.

Zaliznjak, Andrej A. (j 9(4) "K vopru;';j 0 grammaticeskix krrtegorijax rod9 i ndusev!em1osti v 1. Aufgabenstellung

russkom jazyke". Voprosy jazykoznanija No. 4,25-40. 1 "I- Den Ausgangspunkt des vorliegenden Beitrags bildet die Fragestellung, wie das ~ Konzept LEISTUNG in verschiedenen Kulturen versprachlicht wird. Diese Fra­

ge entwickelte sich im Kontext eines Forschungsprojektes zu marktwirtschaft­lichen Schlüsse!l<~C'!lZepte!1 LInd ir!Ier DiffiJsic)ü, das bei meinem Eintritt in die Wirtschaltsuniversität \Vien im Jahr 2003 gerade abgeschlossen wurd~ (vgl. RATHiviA'{R/KLf1'"~GSEIS/SCHMID 1999; DOLESCIIAL/HoFF~v1Al'n-~ 2003; HOFFI\1i\N1'-I

2004; RATIIMAYR 2004; DOLESCHALlMüLLERIPETTERS 2005). LEISTUNG war eines jener Konzepte, die nicht bearbeitet worden waren LEISTUNG gilt zumindest bislang ab Schlüsselkonzept marktwirtschaftlich or­ganisierter Gesellschaften (MCCLELLAND I Y61 ).1 Gerade in Anbetracht der poli­

~. tischen, wi11schaftlichen und sozialen I'ransförmationsprozesse, die in den letz­

:;~

ten beinahe 20 Jahren in den Ländern rv1ittcl- und Osteuropas stattfanden, stellt sich die Frage nach der Präsenz des Konzepts, seiner semantischen Anreiche­rung und deren Dynamik. Auch in der ideologischen Tenninologie des Sozia­lismus gab es ein Leistungsprinzip. DerulOch ist die Existenz des Konzepts im osteuropäischen Raum nicht unumstritten; politologische und soziologische

~

J z

Diskussionen, insbesondere in und um Russland, machen das deutlich (vgl. THEISEN 2004; Dostiiiteli li my? 2003). Aber selbst wenn das Konzept einzel­1 sprachlich benannt ist, bleibt zu klären, inwiefern mit den Wörtern in einzeinen

l Sprachen und Kulturen tatsächlich dasselbe KONZEPT benannt und aktualisiert !~ !!i. 'vvird. li,

.~'t An diesem Punkt greift die linguistische Analyse semantischer Prozesse, die in f'--

der vorliegenden Arbeit als Reflexe soziokultureller Transfonnationen verstan­:f den werden. In einem solchen Forschungskontext weist linguistische Forschung!t folgerichtig über genuin sprachwissenschaftliche Gegenstände hinaus und '.1~" nimmt den "Ausgang in die Soziologie und die Kultur" (BUDAGOV 1971/2004:I 'i~ 34). Aus dieser Grenzüberschreitung ergibt sich, dass nicht nur der ModelIie­

i; rung von Konzepten unter komparativistischen Gesichtspunkten Bedeutung zu­.>(Tl' kommt. Eine grundlegende Forschungsaufgabe besteht in der Erarbeitung, Eva­'1\1­".1 luierung und Kofundierung von Methoden, die der Komplexität der theoreti­~..

,'~:

J: 'K' I In Kontrast dazu stehen aktuelle Diskurse zu hohen Managergehältem in der Bundes­~. i! republik Deutschland, aber auch in Österreich, und dic zu ihrer Rechtertigung benutzten 1;) l\rguluentationell (vgl. l'Jeckel 2007).I:

LL- _..

I