Arguing against subject incorporation in Turkish relative clauses

Proposals have been made that Turkish exhibits properties of both object and subject incorporation. However, neither the head-incorporation analysis for object incorporation nor the pseudo-incorporation analysis for subject/agent incorporation can account for data found in Turkish relative clauses. Turkish nominals that are specific must raise for case, and this movement obeys Minimality. Non-specifics must remain in situ. What has been deemed instances of (pseudo-)incorporation are cases where a nominal cannot raise, while examples to the contrary can be explained by a raising requirement on specifics.

[1]  Jaklin Kornfilt,et al.  Scrambling, Subscrambling, and Case in Turkish , 2008 .

[2]  Ilhan Merih Cagri.  Minimality and Turkish Relative Clauses , 2005 .

[3]  Mürvet Enç.  The semantics of specificity , 1991 .

[4]  Birgit Nilsson,et al.  Case marking semantics in Turkish , 1985 .

[5]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The Minimalist Program , 1992 .

[6]  Mark C. Baker,et al.  Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing , 1988 .

[7]  N. Richards,et al.  Phase Edge and Extraction: A Tagalog Case Study , 2005, Linguistic Inquiry.

[8]  Valentina Bianchi,et al.  Consequences of Antisymmetry: Headed Relative Clauses , 1999 .

[9]  Balkız Öztürk,et al.  Case, referentiality, and phrase structure , 2005 .

[10]  Jaklin Kornfilt,et al.  Some Syntactic and Morphological Properties of Relative Clauses in Turkish , 2000 .

[11]  Shigeru Miyagawa.  Wh-in-situ and Scrambling in the Context of Comparative Altaic Syntax * , 2004 .

[12]  Jaklin Kornfilt,et al.  On the Syntax and Morphology of Relative Clauses in Turkish , 1997 .

[13]  M. Kural.  Postverbal constituents in Turkish and the linear correspondence axiom , 1997 .

[14]  Eser Erguvanlı-Taylan.  THE ROLE OF SEMANTIC FEATURES IN TURKISH WORD ORDER , 1987 .

[15]  Jorge Hankamer,et al.  Wa and Ga in Turkish. , 1990 .

[16]  Artemis Alexiadou,et al.  The syntax of relative clauses , 2000 .

[17]  Paul Schachter.  Focus and relativization , 1973 .

[18]  Simin Karimi,et al.  Word order and scrambling , 2003 .

[19]  Eser Emine Erguvanlı.  The Function of Word Order in Turkish Grammar , 1984 .

[20]  David M. Perlmutter.  Impersonal Passives and the Unaccusative Hypothesis , 1978 .

[21]  J. Kornfilt.  Case marking, agreement, and empty categories in Turkish , 1984 .

[22]  Ken Hiraiwa,et al.  On Nominative-Genitive Conversion * , 2000 .

[23]  Fehmi Engin Sezer.  Issues in Turkish syntax , 1991 .

[24]  Meltem Kelepir.  Topics in Turkish syntax : clausal structure and scope , 2001 .

[25]  Laura E. Knecht.  Subject and object in Turkish , 1985 .

[26]  Gülşat Aygen.  Specificity and Subject-Object Positions / Scope Interactions in Turkish , 2007 .

[27]  Jean-Roger Vergnaud.  French relative clauses. , 1974 .

[28]  Ludo Verhoeven,et al.  Turkish linguistics today , 1994 .

[29]  Richard S. Kayne.  The Antisymmetry of Syntax , 1994 .