The document discusses the complex plural logic system in Slovene, where a singular noun can have two plurals corresponding to both object-mass and subject-mass. It proposes a formalization of this system using a semi-HPSG representation. Key points include: - Slovene has a marked plural system where a singular can take two plurals to denote object-mass and subject-mass. - The author proposes representing this using features like [±plural], [±mass] in a semi-HPSG framework. - Aspects of prosody, agreement and semantics are discussed in relation to plural types like cumulative vs discriminating quantifiers. - The theory aims to provide an explanatory model of

1. Nominal Collectivity, S-mass & O-mass
Moreno Mitrović
The University of York
Department of Language & Linguistic Science
Syntax, Semantics, and Phonology Interface
in Slovene Plural Logic

2. N N
General Idea
• Slovene language has a marked system of plural logic: a singular noun may
have a double plural, each of which two may correspond to both S- and O-
mass.
singular
O-mass
plural
O-mass
plural
S-mass
N

3. N N
General Idea
• Slovene language has a marked system of plural logic: a singular noun may
have a double plural, each of which two may correspond to both S- and O-
mass.
• Intra-plural parameters?
[±plural]
[±countable]
[±augmented] / [±mass]
[±countable]
[±collective]
singular
O-mass
plural
O-mass
plural
S-mass
N
‘grozd’
‘grozdi’‘grozdje’

4. Proposition
• Dealing with the (Morpho-) Syntax/Semantics/Phonology interface, I
propose formalsation in a semi-HPSG system of representation.
PHONOLOGY
SYNTAX SEMANTICS

5. • Dealing with the (Morpho-) Syntax/Semantics/Phonology interface, I
propose formalsation in a semi-HPSG system of representation.
Proposition
PHONOLOGY
SYNTAX SEMANTICS
Slovene Plural
Logic
{fixedaffix}
{mass}
{plural}
{agr.}

6. Formalisation in semi-HPSG
system of representation
PHON
SYNSEM
phonology
〈 x[x NOUN x : ‹[+CORONAL]#› ] 〉
syntax
semantics
SYN
SEM
CAT
CONT
category
HEAD
SYNCONT
noun
syntactic category
NUM
MASS
sing
O
semantic category
NUM
MASS
sing
O

7. Formalisation in semi-HPSG
system of representation
PHON
SYNSEM
phonology
〈 x[x NOUN x : ‹[+CORONAL]#› ] 〉
syntax
semantics
SYN
SEM
CAT
CONT
category
HEAD
SYNCONT
noun
syntactic category
NUM
MASS
sing
O
semantic category
NUM
MASS
sing
O

8. Formalisation in semi-HPSG
system of representation
PHON
SYNSEM
phonology
〈 x[x NOUN x : ‹[+CORONAL] + [jɛ]#› ] 〉
syntax
semantics
SYN
SEM
CAT
CONT
category
HEAD
SYNCONT
noun
syntactic category
NUM
MASS
plur
O
semantic category
NUM
MASS
α
S

9. Formalisation in semi-HPSG
system of representation
PHON
SYNSEM
phonology
〈 x[x NOUN x : ‹[+CORONAL] + [jɛ]#› ] 〉
syntax
semantics
SYN
SEM
CAT
CONT
category
HEAD
SYNCONT
noun
syntactic category
NUM
MASS
plur
O
semantic category
NUM
MASS
α
S

10. • Distinction between MASS and NUMBER within the Syntax/Semantic
Interface?
• Syntactic number as implication to object-mass
• Syntactic Plural Syntactic O-mass
• Is there such a thing as SYNTACTIC NUMBER?
• Is there such a thing as SEMANTIC NUMBER?
• (NUMBER syntax) ≟ (MASS semantics)?
Confusion & Assumption

11. Phonological Formalisation
coda in
singular nouns plural nouns
a.
[...]-t
[...]-tʃ
[...]-d
[...]-t
[...]-tʃ
[...]-d
b.
[...]-k
[...]-g
[...]-m
[...]-k
[...]-g
[...]-m
c. [...]-b [...]-b
# + [jɛ]
#
#
+ [ov] + [jɛ]
+ [ev] + [jɛ]

12. [PHON cont.
(1) a. lasjé so
hairs are
(2) a. dvóje [OBJ] je
two (different kinds) [OBJ]
is
b. klâsje je
blades of wheat
is
b. tróje [OBJ] je
three (different kinds) [OBJ]
is
Prosody & Plural/Mass Agreement

13. Prosody & Plural/Mass Agreement
IP
DP
D’
D
NP
ključa
key/s
dva
two
[...]
VP
V’
Agr
V
sta
are
[+DUAL]
[+NOM.]
NP
N’
Agr
[+DUAL]
[+NOM.]

14. Prosody & Plural/Mass Agreement
IP
DP
D’
D
NP
ključa
key/s
dva
two
[...]
VP
V’
Agr
V
sta
are
[+DUAL]
[+NOM.]
NP
N’
Agr
[+DUAL]
[+NOM.]

15. Prosody & Plural/Mass Agreement:
General Cardinal Quantifier DP (GCQ-DP)
IP
DP
D’
D
NP
ključa
key
dva
two
[...]
VP
V’
Agr
V
sta
are
[+DUAL]
[+NOM.]
NP
N’
Agr
[+DUAL]
[+NOM.]
σP
σ
R
N CO
[ d v á ]

16. Prosody & Plural/Mass Agreement
Cardinal Discriminating Quantifier DP (CDQ-DP)
IP
DP
D’
D
NP
ključev
key
dvoje
two
(different kinds)
[...]
VP
V’
Agr
V
je
is
[+SINGULAR]
NP
N’
Agr
[-NUMBER]
[-NOMINATIVE]
[+GENITIVE]

17. IP
DP
D’
D
NP
ključev
key
dvoje
two
(different kinds)
[...]
VP
V’
Agr
V
je
is
[+SINGULAR]
NP
N’
Agr
[-NUMBER]
[-NOMINATIVE]
[+GENITIVE]
σP
σ
R
N CO
[ d v ó
σ
R
NO
j e ]
Prosody & Plural/Mass Agreement
Cardinal Discriminating Quantifier DP (CDQ-DP)

18. IP
DP
D’
D
NP
ključev
key
dvoje
two
(different kinds)
[...]
VP
V’
Agr
V
je
is
[+SINGULAR]
NP
N’
Agr
[-NUMBER]
[-NOMINATIVE]
[+GENITIVE]
σP
σ
R
N CO
[ d v ó
σ
R
NO
j e ]
Prosody & Plural/Mass Agreement
Cardinal Discriminating Quantifier DP (CDQ-DP)

19. IP
DP
D’
D
NP
ključev
key
dvoje
two
(different kinds)
[...]
VP
V’
Agr
V
je
is
[+SINGULAR]
NP
N’
Agr
[+PLURAL]
[-NOMINATIVE]
[+GENITIVE]
σP
σ
R
N CO
[ d v ó
σ
R
NO
j e ]
Prosody & Plural/Mass Agreement
Cardinal Discriminating Quantifier DP (CDQ-DP)

20. Cardinal Discriminating Quantifier DPs:
Refreshing Algebraic Discrimination
• In mathematics, square equations are solvable by using the
Discriminant
(1)
• Discriminant resolves the problem with binary results only. This could
only apply to CDQ-DP 2 (e.g. ‘Dvoje ključev’ / ‘Two kinds of keys’)
(2)
• There only two matters to resolve before trying to apply D to CDQ-DPs
in Slovene.
1. What linguistic parameters should replace a, b and c?
2. What about ternary discrimination?
D = - b + 4ac
e1,2 = ————
- b ± √D
4a

21. Cardinal Discriminating Quantifier DPs:
Semantic Discrimination
(3)
a.〚dvoje〛= 〚DP〛= λP λQ. x[∣P Q∣ 2 ]; e1 P e2 Q e1 ≠ e2
b.〚ključev〛: D <<e1, e2,>t> = λxλΘ. x[ KEY(x) x [+DATIVE]<Θ,t> ]

22. Cardinal Discriminating Quantifier DPs
& Binding
a.〚dvoje〛= 〚DP〛= λP λQ. x[∣P Q∣ 2 ]; e1 P e2 Q e1 ≠ e2
b.〚ključev〛: D <<e1, e2,>t> = λxλΘ. x[ KEY(x) x [+DATIVE]<Θ,t> ]
(3)

23. Outcome
• This theory may logically explain the phonology of the morpho-syntax-
semantics of Slovene gerunds.
infinitives gerunds
(4) a. živeti (5) a. življenje
b. brati b. branje
c. etc. c. etc.
[also živje(old Slovene)

24. Outcome
• This theory may logically explain the phonology of the morpho-syntax-
semantics of Slovene gerunds.
infinitives gerunds
(4) a. živeti (5) a. življenje
b. brati b. branje
c. etc. c. etc.
[also živje(old Slovene)
[+S-MASS]

25. • This theory may logically explain the phonology of the morpho-syntax-
semantics of Slovene gerunds.
Outcome
infinitives gerunds
(4) a. živeti (5) a. življenje
b. brati b. branje
c. etc. c. etc.
[also živje(old Slovene)
[+FOSSILISED PARTICIPLE N-stem ]

26. • This theory may logically explain the phonology of the morpho-syntax-
semantics of Slovene gerunds.
Outcome
infinitives gerunds
(4) a. živeti (5) a. življenje
b. brati b. branje
c. etc. c. etc.
[also živje(old Slovene)
[+FOSSILISED PARTICIPLE N-stem ]
diachronic overriding

27. New-Old Perspective on Gerundisation:
Metonymic Derivation
σP
R
N C
O
σNσO σC
R
NO
[ ʒ i
R
NO
v e
R
NO
t ɪ ]
(4) σP
R
NO
σNσO
R
NO
[ ʒ i
R
NO
v j
(5)
e ]
C
σP
R
N CO
σO
R
NO
[ ʒ i
(5’)
σN
R
NO
v lj e
C
͡ e ]
σC
R
NO
nj͡
NP VP VP

28. σP
R
N C
O
σNσO σC
R
NO
[ ʒ i
R
NO
v e
R
NO
t ɪ ]
(4) σP
R
NO
σNσO
R
NO
[ ʒ i
R
NO
v j
(5)
e ]
C
σP
R
N CO
σO
R
NO
[ ʒ i
(5’)
σN
R
NO
v lj e
C
͡ e ]
σC
R
NO
nj͡
NP VP VP
t > modern usemetonymic derivation
CORONAL CODA
gerundisation
New-Old Perspective on Gerundisation:
Metonymic Derivation

29. • Phonology/Semantics interface? Certain phonological environments,
allowing mass-derivation/mass-upgrade, could not seem to be in
syntax domain. An important argument in favour of this would be
Slovene word games: question of grammaticality vs well-formedness
and interpretability (what is the derivational domain?), as in:
(4) 〚 well-formedness 〛≈ 〚 well-balancedness 〛
(5) 〚 grozdje 〛 ≈ 〚 nogovje 〛
grapes-MASS, SG. legs-MASS, SG. (word game)
•
Potential & Pretentious Implications
LF
DS SS
PF {phonology}
{semantics}
{syntax} ?{phonology} {semantics}?

30. Phenomenon Extension & Cross-linguistic Location
• This phenomenon with the dual, as a marked system, found only in
Slovene in modern IE ( semantics), and with multiple Wh-fronting in
South Slavonic ( syntax), and very weird and awkward philological
facts, raises question to how may these descriptive linguistic
phenomena be extended into an adequate explanation cross-
linguistically?
• [...]

31. Cross-Slavonic Mass Logic Distribution
• A cross-slavonic (and broader cross-linguistic) account to follow at some point.

32. Model-Theoretic Adequacy
Observationally
Adequate Model
Descriptively
Adequate Model
Explanatorily
Adequate Model
Syntax/
Semantics/
Phonology
Interface in
Slovene Plural
Logic
• Head-driven Phrase
Structure Grammar
• Distributed
Morphology
⇅
• Post-
Syntactic
Account-
ability
?