Marjo van Koppen

Complementizer Agreement and the Relation between C 0 and T 0

Several proposals suggest a φ-feature dependency between C0 and T0 (see, e.g., Zwart 1993, Chomsky 2008). In most (if not all) of these proposals, the core piece of empirical evidence is complementizer agreement (CA). On the basis of two sets of CA data, CA with coordinated subjects and CA with external possessors, we conclude that there is no φ-feature dependency between C0 and T0; instead, C0 and T0 must each be endowed with a discrete set of φ-features.

The Noun Phrase: Diversity in Dutch DP Design (DiDDD)

In this paper we discuss our project: Diversity in Dutch DP Design. This project investigates the variation found in the Dutch DP. Not only the variation concerning contemporary dialects is taken into account, also the variation between contemorary Dutch and older variants of the language are investigated. By looking into variation, the project aims to provide an answer to two questions: (i) what is the locus of variation, (ii) what is the structure of the DP-domain.

Pronominalization and Variation in Dutch Demonstrative and Possessive Expressions

The goal of this article is to provide a detailed analysis of DP-internal pronominalization patterns in standard Dutch and Dutch dialects. A core ingredient of our analysis will be the idea that the possessive and demonstrative constructions we discuss feature a DP-internal predication relationship. Furthermore, we aim to explain the (dimensions of) variation between dialects. Part of the attested micro-variation will be shown to be reducible to the PF-interface and the lexicon, i.e., the loci where we expect cross-linguistic/dialectal variation to be given the assumptions of the minimalist program (Chomsky 2000, Kayne 2005).We will further argue that some cross-dialectal differences relate to displacement.