Documentation

Linglib.Syntax.Agreement.Basic

Agreement Target Hierarchy [Cor79] #

The Agreement Hierarchy ([Cor79]; [Cor91] ch. 8) has four positions — attributive > predicate > relative pronoun > personal pronoun — along which the likelihood of semantic (rather than syntactic) agreement increases monotonically from left to right.

The AgreementTarget enum below additionally carries a verb target for languages with verbal gender/number agreement. verb is a linglib refinement, not a fifth position of Corbett's hierarchy, and its placement is theory-laden: it is ranked below personal pronoun (the semantic end), following [WZ00]'s classification of verbal agreement as INDEX-reading (see WechslerZlatic2000.indexReaders_lowerSet, which depends on this placement). Corbett instead subsumes verbal agreement under the predicate position, where his Predicate Hierarchy ([Com75]) makes the finite verb the most-syntactic sub-position — the opposite end. That view is formalized separately as PredicateTarget below; the two codings are a genuine cross-framework disagreement, kept visible rather than merged. Theorems about the four-position hierarchy proper should quantify over the four canonical positions only (as Corbett2000.hierarchyPositions does).

This type is shared by gender typology (Studies/Corbett1991.lean) and number agreement (Studies/Corbett2000.lean).

Morphosyntactic targets where agreement can surface, ranked by the Agreement Hierarchy ([Cor79]). verb is a linglib refinement placed at the semantic end per [WZ00] — NOT a position of Corbett's hierarchy; see the module docstring for the competing Corbett/Comrie placement (PredicateTarget).

Higher rank = closer to the controller, agreement more syntactic. Lower rank = further from the controller, agreement more semantic.

Instances For
    @[implicit_reducible]
    Equations
    Equations
    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
    Instances For
      @[implicit_reducible]
      Equations
      • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.

      Numeric rank in the Agreement Hierarchy: higher = more likely to show agreement (more syntactic); lower = less likely (more semantic).

      Equations
      Instances For
        @[implicit_reducible]

        The Agreement Hierarchy is a LinearOrder lifted from the rank. Provides , <, min, max, Finset.sort, etc. for free.

        Equations

        The hierarchy rank is injective — derivable from the LinearOrder instance, restated here as a named lemma for direct invocation.

        The Predicate Hierarchy ([Com75], systematised by [Cor00]) decomposes the predicate position on the Agreement Hierarchy into a sub-hierarchy: verb < participle < adjective < noun.

        Semantic agreement increases monotonically along this sub-hierarchy: if semantic agreement is possible on a verb, it is possible on a participle; if on a participle, then on an adjective; etc.

        This is orthogonal to AgreementTarget, which treats .predicate and .verb as two positions on the main hierarchy. The Predicate Hierarchy provides finer resolution within the predicate position.

        Instances For
          @[implicit_reducible]
          Equations
          Equations
          • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
          Instances For

            Rank in the Predicate Hierarchy: higher = more likely to show semantic agreement. verb (0) < participle (1) < adjective (2) < noun (3).

            Equations
            Instances For
              @[implicit_reducible]

              The Predicate Hierarchy is a LinearOrder lifted from the rank.

              Equations

              The Predicate Hierarchy rank is injective.

              Whether agreement markers have referential autonomy. [BN07]

              • grammatical: pure agreement — the marker cannot stand alone as an argument; an independent NP is required (English she walk-s, the -s cannot replace she)
              • pronominal: cross-referencing — the marker can function as the sole expression of the argument; an independent NP is optional (Swahili a-li-ki-soma (kitabu) — the prefixes suffice without the noun)

              This distinction is orthogonal to the Agreement Hierarchy: a language can have pronominal agreement on verbs but grammatical agreement on adjectives, or vice versa.

              Instances For
                @[implicit_reducible]
                Equations
                Equations
                • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                Instances For

                  Direction of agreement: which element originates ("drives") the features. [BN07] §9

                  • headDriven: the phrasal head provides features that percolate to its dependents — dependents carry the agreement morphology. (German/Watam NP concord: noun's gender/number → adjective, det; = dependent marking in the sense of §3.)
                  • dependentDriven: a dependent provides features that the head matches — the head carries the agreement morphology. (Belhare/Swahili verb agreement: subject's person/number → verb; = head marking in the sense of §3.)

                  Related to but distinct from Morphology.LocusOfMarking: locus is a language-level WALS typological parameter classifying where all grammatical relations are marked (head, dependent, double, zero). AgreementDirection is phenomenon-specific — a language can be overall head-marking (LocusOfMarking.headMarking) yet have specific head-driven agreement (e.g., NP concord in an otherwise head-marking language).

                  Instances For
                    @[implicit_reducible]
                    Equations
                    Equations
                    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                    Instances For