A’-extraction of subjects is cross-linguistically marked, requiring a difference in complementizer or verbal morphology. I put forward the hypothesis that many such quirks of subject extraction result from an anti-locality constraint on A’-movement which blocks movement which is too short; specifically, subject movement from Spec,TP to Spec,CP is blocked, necessitating the use of an additional strategy for subject extraction.

This view is motivated by my work on Agent Focus in Kaqchikel (Mayan; Guatemala). Kaqchikel is a morphologically ergative Mayan language where the A’-extraction of subjects of transitives (ergative arguments) requires special verbal morphology, known as Agent Focus (AF). Through my fieldwork on Kaqchikel, I discovered cases where the extraction of an ergative subject does not require AF. In particular, when additional clausal material is projected between the base position of the ergative subject and its landing site, AF becomes unnecessary and in fact impossible. I propose an anti-locality-based solution in my Natural Language & Linguistic Theory paper, which also accounts for the distribution of AF in certain person agreement combinations.

I am currently pursuing this anti-locality approach to a range of subjext extraction asymmetries, including anti-agreement effects, complementizer-trace (that-trace) effects, and Highest Subject Restrictions on resumption.

In 2017, I hosted a Workshop on Quirks of Subject Extraction, which brought together a group of established and emerging experts on the cross-linguistic landscape of subject extraction asymmetries, their theory, and implications. I myself presented my anti-locality work there. Following the workshop, I will be editing a special issue of Glossa on Subject Extraction.

Return to all projects