Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Ora Matushansky is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Ora Matushansky.


Linguistic Inquiry | 2006

Head Movement in Linguistic Theory

Ora Matushansky

In this article, I address the issue of head movement in current linguistic theory. I propose a new view of the nature of heads and head movement that reveals that head movement is totally compliant with the standardly suggested properties of grammar. To do so, I suggest that head movement is not a single syntactic operation, but a combination of two operations: a syntactic one (movement) and a morphological one (m-merger). I then provide independent motivation for m-merger, arguing that it can be attested in environments where no head movement took place


Journal of Semantics | 2006

The Composition of Complex Cardinals

Tania Ionin; Ora Matushansky

This paper proposes an analysis of the syntax and semantics of complex cardinal numerals, which involve multiplication (two hundred) and/or addition (twentythree). It is proposed that simplex cardinals have the semantic type of modifiers (AEAEe, tae, AEe, taeae). Complex cardinals are composed linguistically, using standard syntax (complementation, coordination) and standard principles of semantic composition. This analysis is supported by syntactic evidence (such as Case assignment) and semantic evidence (such as internal composition of complex cardinals). We present several alternative syntactic analyses of cardinals, and suggest that different languages may use different means to construct complex cardinals even though their lexical semantics remains the same. Further issues in the syntax of numerals (modified numerals and counting) are discussed and shown to be compatible with the proposed analysis of complex cardinals. Extra-linguistic constraints on the composition of complex cardinals are discussed and compared to similar restrictions in other domains.


Syntax | 2002

Tipping the Scales: The Syntax of Scalarity in the Complement of SEEM

Ora Matushansky

This paper argues for a syntactic and semantic distinction between the verb seem that takes propositional complements (i.e., CP and IP) and the verb seem that takes nonpropositional complements. The latter takes a smaller sized complement (in terms of the presence of functional structure), has a perceptual rather than epistemic interpretation, and imposes a scalarity–related restriction on its complement, which will be formalized as a selectional requirement of a DegP complement. The notion of scalarity, heretofore applicable only to adjectives, is extended to PPs, such as out of her mind, and nouns, such as fool. DegP is projected either if a predicate is scalar (has a degree argument slot) or to function as a landing site for QR of degree, which will be shown to function as the licensing mechanism for complements of seem


Linguistic Inquiry | 2006

The Morphophonology of Russian Adjectival Inflection

Morris Halle; Ora Matushansky

In this article, we present the morphosyntactic structure underlying the Russian adjectival declension and the phonological rules that apply to it to derive the surface representations. We describe the two declension classes of Russian adjectives and argue that adjectives and nouns employ the same theme suffixes (-oj- and -o-) and, importantly, that choice of theme suffix also determines choice of Case exponents. On this view, there is no special adjectival declension class; instead, Case exponents are shared between adjectives and nouns, and the choice of a paradigm is determined by the choice of the theme suffix. The article covers all adjectival inflections, including those of the possessives, demonstratives, interrogatives, and paucal numerals.


Theoretical Linguistics | 2007

Predication and escape hatches in Phase Extension Theory

Ora Matushansky

Abstract 1. Introduction The main proposal of den Dikkens paper consists of two elegant assumptions, which propose to derive phase theory in a dynamic way and to explain a number of extraction constraints. The first assumption is that a projection immediately containing a predication (i.e., a subject and its predicate) is a phase inherently. The second assumption is that a phase is extended to the maximal projection that its head moves to.


Linguistic Inquiry | 2015

Mistaking For: Testing the Theory of Mediated Predication

Marijana Marelj; Ora Matushansky

This article investigates the validity of the theory of mediated predication by examining one of the proposed overt realizations of Pred0. Taking the law of parsimony as our starting position and using evidence from English, Russian, and Serbo-Croatian, we argue that the element that looks like the preposition ‘for’ is, in fact, a preposition (not Pred0), and we show how it explains the syntax and the semantics of the relevant ‘for’ sequences. Cases of apparently predicative interpretation of ‘for’-PP result from the interplay between the meaning of the preposition ‘for’ and the metaphorical reinterpretation of motion and locative verbs that ‘for’-PPs combine with.


Linguistic Inquiry | 2018

Against the PredP theory of small clauses

Ora Matushansky

Since Bowers 1993, it has been accepted that nonverbal small clauses are headed by a functional head, Pred0, whose function is to obligatorily mediate all nonverbal predication. I argue against this hypothesis by critically reanalyzing the original syntactic arguments for PredP, examining possible semantic support for mediated predication, and reviewing the putative crosslinguistic evidence for overt equivalence of Pred0. I first demonstrate that the facts originally taken as motivating a functional head in small clauses can now be accounted for by independently needed assumptions. I then show that standard Montagovian semantics treating NPs, APs, and PPs as unsaturated functions requires no mediating projection and that suggested alternative meanings for Pred0 either fail or cannot be used as motivation for its existence. Finally, I provide evidence that the syntax of copular particles and other “overt predicators” is different from that expected of Pred0 in such ways that they cannot be taken as prima facie evidence for it either. I sketch an alternative theory linking the use of predicative particles to nominal predication and provide evidence for it from crosslinguistic lexicalization patterns of copular particles. In sum, neither theoretical nor empirical considerations require a mediating functional head in small clauses, and therefore the PredP hypothesis should be abandoned.


Linguistics and Philosophy | 2008

On the linguistic complexity of proper names

Ora Matushansky


Archive | 2002

Movement of degree/degree of movement

Ora Matushansky


Archive | 2010

Adjectives. Formal analyses in syntax and semantics

Patricia Cabredo Hofherr; Ora Matushansky

Collaboration


Dive into the Ora Matushansky's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Patricia Cabredo Hofherr

Centre national de la recherche scientifique

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Morris Halle

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge