My Khoisan Grammars and Dictionaries

Here is a list of descriptive books (grammars and dictionaries) on the Khoisan languages that I have written, or helped to write. It is unlikely that I will write any further descriptive books of this nature on the Khoisan languages. So I thought I would gather all the titles together in one place. If you need any of these books, please let me know.

In chronological order:

Collins, Chris and Levi Namaseb. 2011. A Grammatical Sketch of N|uuki with Stories. Rüdiger Köppe Verlag. (https://www.koeppe.de/titel_a-grammatical-sketch-of-n-uuki-n-uuki-with-stories)

Collins, Chris and Jeffrey S. Gruber. 2014. A Grammar of ǂHȍã. Rüdiger Köppe Verlag. (https://www.koeppe.de/titel_a-grammar-of-hoa-h-a)

Sands, Bonny and Kerry Jones (chief editors). 2022. Nǀuuki Namagowab Afrikaans English ǂXoakiǂxanisi/Mîdi di ǂKhanis/Woordeboek/Dictionary. Stellenbosch: African Sun Media for African Tongue. (https://dictionary.sadilar.org/#/about) [Chris Collins was a member of the editoral team.]

Collins, Chris. 2023. A Grammatical Sketch of Kuasi (Botswana). Rüdiger Köppe Verlag. (https://www.koeppe.de/titel_a-grammatical-sketch-of-kuasi-botswana)

Collins, Chris. 2024. Sasi Dictionary (Botswana). Rüdiger Köppe Verlag. (https://www.koeppe.de/titel_sasi-dictionary-botswana)

Collins, Chris and Zachary Wellstood. 2025. A Grammatical Sketch of Cua. Peter Lang. (https://www.peterlang.com/document/1499513)

A Grammatical Sketch of Cua

Summary

Cua is a Kalahari Khoe language spoken in southeastern Botswana (Kweneng District). It is closely related to languages such as G||ana, Tshila and Tsua. The phonology chapter describes the consonant, tone and vowel inventories, as well as a system of depressed tones following aspirated and voiced consonants. Later chapters provide concise overviews of the morphology and syntax of the language. Cua is characterized by a complex system of person-gender-number markers (PGN markers), which play a role in the formation of the pronouns. The features defining pronouns include: singular, dual, and plural number; first, second, and third person; and masculine, feminine and neutral gender. There is also a distinction between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns.

https://www.peterlang.com/document/1499513

Remembering Andrew Radford

Andrew Radford passed away on December 16, 2024. 

I first met Andrew Radford in China. We were both invited speakers for the 5th International Conference on Formal Linguistics, held in Guangzhou, China (December 2011). When we met, we hit it off right away, and the four of us (me and my wife, Andrew and his), spent most of our time outside of the conference together. The conference organizers had assigned to us two young Chinese linguistics students as guides, one male one female. So that was our little group of six. We went to lunch and dinner together, and had fantastic feasts of Chinese food, in styles from all over the country. We asked our Chinese guides endless questions about China and Chinese food and the local region. We also did some sightseeing, going to various scenic regions and a zoo, where there were pandas. It was without a doubt one of the best conference travel experiences of my life, due in large part to meeting Andrew and his wife there (and of course, the hospitality of our Chinese hosts).

While at the conference, Andrew and I gabbed pretty much non-stop about syntax. This was when ‘Imposters’ was just about to come out, so that was on my mind. As for Andrew, he was working a lot on spoken corpus data that he had put together. He was finding all kinds of interesting syntactic patterns that he told me about. After intensive discussions for a few days, we decided to collaborate on a paper, which lay at the intersection of our research domains.

Collins, Chris and Andrew Radford. 2015. Gaps, Ghosts and Gapless Relatives in Spoken English. Studia Linguistica 69.2, 191-235.

From that time onward, I valued him greatly as a colleague. He was a real syntactician’s syntactician, brilliant and deeply committed to the scientific research agenda of generative syntax. After China, I wrote to him often about all kinds of issues. For example, he gave me extensive written feedback on various versions of my 2024 monograph (‘Principles of Argument Structure’), and helped me to clarify a thorny issue concerning exempt anaphora. 

I was so happy to meet Andrew in China, because I owed him a special debt. In the summer of 1984 (nearly thirty years before I met him in-person), I read through his Transformational Syntax (Cambridge University Press, 1981) in its entirety and worked through the exercises with a friend. I still remember how clearly the textbook was written and how captivating it was. It literally drew me in so that I became excited about generative syntax. Then the next academic year, I took a number of graduate level syntax courses (with Hale, Rizzi, Ross), with Andrew’s textbook as my background. It is quite possible that my career would have turned out differently if I had not found and studied his textbook.

I believe through his syntax textbooks he has probably done as much as any other individual to promote the scientific study of generative syntax in the world.

Scribbles on Agentivity

 Abstract: These scribbles investigate unaccusative verbs that have an agent.

Keywords: unaccusative, unergative, agent, theme

Scribbles on Agentivity

A Proposal for a Database of the Syntactic Structures of the World's Languages (Collins and Kayne 2007)

Abstract: On November 9-10, 2007, a conference on creating a database of the syntactic structures of the world’s languages was held at NYU. This document contains the original proposal for the database (Chris Collins and Richard Kayne), the paper presented by Chris Collins and the paper presented by Richard Kayne.

Keywords: adposition, agreement, comparative syntax, database, dialect, glossing, primitives,

questionnaire, replicability, Wikipedia

A Proposal for a Database of the Syntactic Structures of the World's Languages (Collins and Kayne 2007)

The Scope and Limits of Syntactic Variation: A Program for AI Research

Introduction

One of the primary goals of syntactic theory is to understand the scope and limits of syntactic variation cross-linguistically. Doing this kind of research is crucial for syntactic theory. For example, it could be used to argue for properties of UG: the innate mechanisms and principles of human language. 

But the task is vast. 

The first dimension of complexity is the number of languages, both living and dead, and their syntactically distinguishable dialects. Conservative estimates put the number of languages at around 6,000, but with dialects the number is probably much higher.

The second dimension of complexity is that only a few languages have a corpus of materials. The vast majority of languages just have a few descriptive documents written about them (e.g., a grammar or a dictionary or some texts). So there is an unevenness of cross-linguistic coverage. 

The third dimension of complexity is the set of properties that would have to be articulated to describe a single language. How many such properties are there? In fact, given a sufficiently large corpus, there may be properties that could be inferred from the corpus that are not part of any linguistic description. These implicit properties should also be investigated.

Lastly, there is the issue of just what kind of variation we would expect to look for. In standard typological sources, people are interested in implicational correlations: If P, then Q: If a language has property P, then it will also have some other property Q. 

But such implicational correlations are just the simplest kind of relation that could be envisioned. One could extend these correlations using logical combinations: If P ∨ Q, then R ∧ W. And even this dramatic extension of properties is not enough. One could also introduce subsets of languages as properties. If all the languages of S have property P, then they will have Q. These are just the simplest kinds of extensions to the implicational correlation format. It may be there are many other kinds of connections we have not even conceived of yet. And it may be that the AI model could identify those connections.

Hypothetically, let’s say we could characterize a language fairly accurately with one million properties. Given the amount of information that has been uncovered about English and other languages in the history of generative grammar, this number seems conservative. Then just to compare the properties pairwise in simple correlations would require one trillion combinations (#(P) x #(Q)) (one million times one million), which would then have to be verified over at least 10,000 languages. Calculating all possible correlations in the broader sense (see paragraph above) would require an astronomical number of calculations.

The issues can be stated in terms of neural networks. 

Imagine all properties as a vast network of nodes. Then in principle all the nodes could be connected to one another, such that P is connected to Q iff whenever P is true, Q is true. Possibly such connections could be given different strengths depending on the certainty of the implication (zero is no information). If there are a million properties, there a trillion connections (million squared). Of course, if we allow subsets of languages as properties, and logical connectives, there will be many more connections than that. How could we create and search such a vast network of information for possible correlations?

With the advent of AI (“Artificial Intelligence”) and LLMs (“Large Language Models”), we are possibly close to being able to think about such a task. 

The general proposals follow Collins and Kayne 2007, but is updated to use Artificial Intelligence, Deep Learning and LLMs. 

Collins, Chris and Richard Kayne. 2007. A Proposal for a Database of the Syntactic Structures of the World's Languages. (https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/003404)

Path Forward

The idea is to develop an AI program (using neural networks and deep learning) that could search the internet, including linguistic resources, to answer comparative syntax questions. 

First, it needs to be understood what kind of syntactic information ChatGPT can give, and how it gets that information. Does the information come directly from texts or does it come from grammars and other descriptions? How accurate is the information?

Some preliminary studies are here concerning grammatical judgments:

https://ordinaryworkinggrammarian.blogspot.com/2024/10/acceptability-judgments-in-chatgpt.html

https://ordinaryworkinggrammarian.blogspot.com/2024/10/acceptability-judgments-in-chatgpt_20.html

Second, it needs to be understood how much access ChatGPT has to available resources on natural language syntax, such as WALS.

Third, it needs to be investigated whether a new AI interface needs to be developed (over and above ChatGPT) to interact with the online resources.

Forth, the system should have the ability to recognize the values of linguistic properties for so called low-density languages, so that those languages could play an integral role in the search for correlations. This means that any such system will have to have the ability to work on the basis of grammars, dictionaries and texts.

Fifth, the project does not envision the collection or uploading of any actual linguistic data, but rather the combined use of already existing resources to answer questions about comparative syntax. There is no need to get buy-in from language specialists to populate the database, although there may be some need to get access to databases that can be searched.

Preliminary Results with ChatGPT

First, as of December 8, 2024, ChatGPT4 seems to have some knowledge of other languages. Here are my queries and the responses:

Chris: Do you speak French?

ChatGPT said:

Oui, je parle français ! 😊 Je peux répondre à tes questions, t'aider avec des traductions, ou simplement discuter en français. Dis-moi ce dont tu as besoin!

Chris: Translate that into English.

ChatGPT said:

Yes, I speak French! 😊 I can answer your questions, help you with translations, or simply chat in French. Let me know what you need!

Chris: How many languages do you speak?

ChatGPT said:

I can communicate effectively in many languages, covering a broad range of linguistic families and regions. While I’m most proficient in widely spoken languages, I have varying levels of expertise in others. Here’s an overview…While I can assist with a variety of languages, my fluency level varies. For highly niche or less commonly spoken languages, my ability may be limited to basic phrases, cultural context, or translations. Let me know which language you have in mind, and I’ll do my best to assist! 😊

Now, consider the following interchange on pronoun verb order cross-linguistically.

Chris: What is the order of the verb and the object pronoun in English? Just a one line response, please.

ChatGPT said: In English, the object pronoun comes after the verb (e.g., I see her).

Chris: Now, what is the order of the verb and the object pronoun in French? Just a one line response, please.

ChatGPT said: In French, the object pronoun comes before the verb (e.g., Je la vois).

Chris: What is the difference between French and English with respect to the order of the object pronoun?

ChatGPT said: In French, the object pronoun comes before the verb, while in English, it comes after the verb.

Chris: In which languages that you know does the object pronoun come before the verb?

ChatGPT said: The object pronoun comes before the verb in languages such as French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Arabic, Hindi, Russian, Polish, and Hungarian.

Even this small dialogue highlights the potential power of ChatGPT to do comparative syntax work. 

The following dialogue shows that ChatGPT has access to information on WALS.

Chris: According to WALS, what is the basic word order of Ewe?

ChatGPT said: According to the World Atlas of Language Structures (WALS), the basic word order of Ewe, a Niger-Congo language spoken in Ghana, Togo, and neighboring countries, is Subject-Verb-Object (SVO).

Handouts for MaS Seminar (Fall 2024)

Here are the handouts which I distributed as part of the "Morphology as Syntax" seminar during Fall 2024. I do not include materials that Richie distributed or the student presentations, which were really interesting and very relevant to the goals of the course. As you can see, it was a productive semester, more for consolidating old ideas, than for proposing new ones.

Syllabus (Revised and Final)

The Juncture Morpheme in Kua (September 23 2024)

A Very Short History of MaS (September 24 2024)

Two Allomorphy Models without Late Insertion (September 24 2024)

A Syntactic Approach to Case Contiguity

Forms of the Copula in English

Bare Nominal Passives

A Note on Singular They/Them (November 6 2024)

A Note on Singular They/Them (Addendum November 6 2024)

Overview of Nanosyntax (from the Perspective of MaS) (November 11 2024)

Romance s-Forms as Imposters (November 20 2024)

Allomorphy without Context: An MaS Alternative (November 27 2024)

A MaS State of Mind (December 9 2024)

A MaS State of Mind

Abstract: MaS (“Morphology as Syntax”) is a framework for the analysis of so-called morphological phenomena developed in Collins and Kayne (2023) and the papers cited there. Without going into any technical proposals, I will cover some general ways in which MaS is more than a framework, but also a state of mind. Surprisingly, most of these high-level properties distinguish MaS from DM (“Distributed Morphology”) to some extent, as will be discussed below.

Allomorphy without Context: An MaS Alternative

Abstract: Caha et. al. (2024) give an interesting account of the forms of adjectives in Czech. They propose that the different forms of the positive and comparative can be accounted for by a system of portmanteau lexical items, formalized in the Nanosyntax framework. In this squib, I give a alternative account of the data in the MaS (‘Morphology as Syntax’) framework (see Collins and Kayne 2023) without invoking portmanteau or Late Insertion. Rather, the account developed makes crucial use of the licensing of empty elements.

Allomorphy without Context: An MaS Alternative

Concept Map of My Work (Some Reflections)

Concept Map

This concept map represents the intellectual work of my entire career as a syntactician. It is grouped into five areas: Foundations/Formalization, African Fieldwork (Ewe and Khoisan), Natural Language Logic, Argument Structure and Imposters. In this post, I will sketch briefly the intellectual origin of each of these areas of interest.

My interest in Ewe started when I was in the Peace Corps in Togo (1985-1987). I had taken enough syntax by then (as an MIT undergraduate) to start to look at Ewe through the eyes of a syntactician.  One of the topics that caught my eye, when I was trying to learn to speak Ewe, was the serial verb construction (SVC). In fact, my writing sample on SVCs for the MIT Department of Linguistics was something I had written during the Peace Corps.

The Khoisan portion of the concept map is ultimately due solely to my encounters with Jeff Gruber while I was in graduate school at MIT. At that time, he was a visiting scholar, so we overlapped. We had long talks about his work on theta-theory, and especially about his fieldwork in Botswana on the Khoisan languages. He graciously made available to me all of his Khoisan fieldwork materials (including reel to reel tapes). Because of Jeff, I became a Khoisanist.

The Negation and Imposters subareas of the concept map originated during my time at NYU, after I left Cornell in 2006. I became interested in working on these topics because of conversations with Paul Postal, who was affiliated with NYU at the time. We worked together extensively for over a decade. I have often reflected that my collaboration with him was a second graduate school education in syntax because I learned so much.

We first got interested in the word ‘ass’ in expressions like ‘Your ass is crazy.’ We started talking about it in early 2006 (just after I was hired). Our first paper together was Collins, Moody and Postal (2008) published just a few years later. That topic naturally led into imposters, and culminated in an MIT Press monograph Collins and Postal (2012). For Paul, those works were just a hiatus from his true obsession, which was negation. So after we finished working on camouflage and imposters, he invited me to help him with his project on negation, which ultimately led to the MIT Press monograph Collins and Postal (2014).

A hypothetical question is what would have happened if I had remained at Cornell, and not met Paul Postal. It seems unlikely that I would have ever worked on camouflage or imposters or negation. But I might have looked at some other problems in anaphora or the syntax/semantics interface. After all, Molly Diesing was at Cornell, and I studied her work very closely while I was there. Furthermore, logic and formal semantics have been interests of mine for a long time.

As for argument structure, that was one of the big topics in the intellectual atmosphere when I got to graduate school in 1988. One of my first graduate courses was Richard Larson’s seminar on VP shells, which had a deep impact on me. Soon after his paper on double object constructions appeared, Hale and Keyser started writing about argument structure (developing Larson’s framework, and modifying it) and so did Noam Chomsky, David Pesetsky and Howard Lasnik (in effect, all of the syntacticians at MIT were working intensely on argument structure around then). Almost overnight, the subfield of ‘argument structure’ transformed from a collection of odd statements about conceptual structure and subcategorization frames and mapping principles, to discussions with highly ramified syntactic structures!

In that climate, I also started working on argument structure, including my thesis work on serial verb constructions, a fairly influential paper on double object constructions in Icelandic (in collaboration with Hoski Thrainsson) and a paper on quotative inversion (in collaboration with Phil Branigan). My basic operating procedure in those years was to see how syntactic principles of locality of movement interact with assumptions about the projection of arguments. That kind of methodology eventually led to my theory of smuggling, which has played an important role throughout my career.

My work on negation, imposters, ellipsis and the interpretation of implicit arguments are all core topics in the syntax/semantics interface, which has occupied much of my career. My attraction to these issues is probably related to my long-time interest in the relation between language and mind (see my graduate school statement of purpose on my blog). 

It is without a doubt that my courses and meetings with Noam Chomsky led to my interest in the foundations of minimalism. In almost all the cases, my innovations have built on his ideas in some way or the other. Chomsky’s lectures taught me what it is to build a theory of natural language syntax, in part by subjecting standard assumptions to intense criticism in a way that I found to be exciting and liberating.

The one area in the foundations section of the concept map which is not directly related to Noam Chomsky’s work is the theory of Morphology as Syntax (Mas), which I created together with Richard Kayne of NYU. After decades of living in the epicenter of Distributed Morphology, I decided to stop grumbling to myself. Rather, I wanted to state clearly what I found to be the problematic aspects of that framework, proposing an alternative framework. Somewhat unexpectedly, I learned that Richard Kayne at NYU had ideas similar to my own, so we decided to collaborate around January 2012. After over a decade of discussions and correspondence, we finally published our foundational paper in 2023. Once again, had I not moved to NYU, it is doubtful that I would have worked on MaS.

Concept Map of my Work (Lucid version)

Concept Map

This is my attempt (third version, the first two were handwritten) at organizing my life's work on the syntax of natural language in a kind of concept map. I just indicate constructions and concepts and topics, not concrete physical things like paper, books, grants, databases, talks, grammars, dictionaries, courses, people, students, colleagues, places or times. In two very important cases, I indicate language (Ewe and Khoisan) because they are crucial to organizing my work. 

Not every syntactic topic that I have worked on is represented, but most of them are.The small amount of work that I have done outside of syntax, semantics and morphology (e.g., phonology, phonetics, historical) is not included.

The general areas are organized around the perimeter, and are circled. The sold lines are topics in a given area. The dotted lines are connections between nodes in the network. For example, Spanish Ustedes supports Morphology as Syntax, and that connection is indicated with a dotted line. I am very intrigued to see how the dotted lines took shape! And I am noticing missing dotted lines even as I write.

Concept Map of My Work

This is my first try at organizing my life's work on the syntax of natural language in a kind of concept graph. I just indicate constructions and concepts and topics, not concrete physical things like paper titles, grants, databases, talks, grammars, dictionaries, courses, people, students, colleagues, places or times. In two very important cases, I indicate language (Ewe and Khoisan) because they are crucial to understanding my work. 

Not every syntactic topic that I have worked on is represented. The small amount of work that I have done outside of syntax, semantics and morphology (e.g., phonology, historical) is not included.

The general areas are organized around the perimeter, and are circled in red. The sold lines are topics in a given area. The dotted lines are connections between nodes in the network. For example, Spanish Ustedes supports Morphology as Syntax, and that connection is indicated with a dotted line. Similarly, simplest Merge is the foundation of my theory of argument structure, so there is a dotted line for that connection too. I am very intrigued to see how the dotted lines took shape! And I am noticing missing dotted lines even as I write.

I will probably try again later once I understand the connections better. I also need to work on the photo quality. 

Here is a second try that I made the next day. It is basically the same content, but I grouped together the topics a little better.

Romance s-Forms as Imposters

Abstract: In this blog post, I situate the results of Kayne’s (2018) in the imposter framework of Collins and Postal (2012) and Collins and Ordóñez (2021).

Romance s-Forms as Imposters

A Merge-Based Approach to the Syntax-Semantics Interface

These notes are based on a career of looking at issues in the syntax-semantics interface, including argument structure, anaphora, negation, quantifiers, coordination, and ellipsis.

Philosophy

1.

Be open to syntax.

Be open to radically syntactic approaches to traditionally semantic and pragmatic issues, no matter how authoritative or how widely adopted the semantic or pragmatic approach might be.

2. 

Semantic operations are defined in terms of syntactic structure. 

In other words, there is no semantics without syntax. As a consequence, all semantic analyses involve important assumptions about syntax. 

3.

Hypothesis: The correct syntactic analysis will have a semantic interpretation that is simple, transparent and uniform (in the sense clarified below in 4-8).

Specific Assumptions

Here are some specific assumptions that help to articulate the above hypothesis.

4.

Semantic operations are simple and limited in type (simplicity).

Semantic operations are as constrained as possible, perhaps only function application and predicate abstraction. Powerful semantic operations such as type shifting, function composition, existential closure and semantic coercion are not part of UG. If an analysis uses such operations, try to think about how to replicate their effects syntactically (e.g., using Merge) and then test the consequences.

5.

Semantic values are simple (simplicity).

The semantic values of lexical items are simple. The more complex a semantic value is, the greater the chance that it should be broken into several different morphemes each with its own simple semantic value. These morphemes will them be merged together in the syntactic derivation.

6.

Variables are represented syntactically (transparency).

If there is a variable x in the semantic representation, then there is a DP in the syntactic representation which is interpreted as the variable x. This constraint forces variables to be introduced into both syntax and semantics via Merge. A simple example is the passive. Since there is a variable representing the agent in the short passive, there must be a DP in the syntactic representation interpreted as that variable. See Collins 2024 for a discussion and references.

7.

Semantic interpretation is uniform (uniformity).

Semantic interpretation is uniform in the sense that a single syntactic structure is not interpreted in two different ways. A single syntactic structure has a single interpretation. 

For example, a DP in a position P, cannot be interpreted optionally as specific or non-specific. To get the two interpretations, something must be different, either the internal syntactic structure of the DP, or the syntactic position of the DP, or both.

8.

Semantic relations and predicates are directly represented in syntactic structure to the greatest extent possible (transparency).

For example, the scope of one quantifier phrase QP1 over another QP2 is represented syntactically in terms of asymmetric c-command at some point in the derivation (not in terms of type shifting one quantifier phrase to given it semantic scope over another). Another example is Rizzi 1997 use of FocP to syntactically represent the semantics of focus.

Of all the assumptions concerning the syntax-semantics interface, (8) is the vaguest and hardest to pin down since the notion of “semantic relations and predicates” is very broad. Furthermore, it may be that (8) follows from the other assumptions in (4-7).

Method

9.

Work out the truth conditions, entailments, presuppositions, scope and other semantic properties. Pay close attention to how the semantic properties vary with varying syntactic configurations. Are there important generalizations about how differences in syntax affect changes in interpretation? 

10.

Work out the syntactic analysis using Merge-based framework. 

(9) and (10) feed into one another. Semantic properties may suggest a particular syntactic analysis (in conformity with (4-8). And the syntactic analysis may suggest investigating certain semantic properties.

11.

Work out the compositional semantics based on assumptions 4-8.

Depending on the audience and venue, it is not always necessary to give the complete compositional semantics. But you should be confident about what the semantic properties of your proposed syntactic analysis are. Your syntactic representation should capture the semantic properties of the construction.

Evaluation

12.

Justify your syntactic analysis using traditional syntactic tests.

You don’t just get to propose syntactic structure free of charge. Since the assumptions in (4-8) are a hypothesis, you need to prove that your proposed analysis is correct or at least better than alternatives. Whatever representation you ultimately come up with, it should be consistent with standard syntactic tests (e.g., constituent structure tests, Binding Theory, islands, distributional tests, agreement, etc.). This is your opportunity to dig very deeply into the syntax of the construction.

13.

Justify your syntactic analysis using cross-linguistic comparisons.

For some topics, it might be easier probe syntactic structure and its semantic interpretation in a different language. In some languages, the morphosyntax of a construction clearly reflects its semantic properties. Investigating such languages can give important clues about the best syntactic analysis cross-linguistically. For example, it is much easier to investigate the syntactic and semantic properties of logophoricity in Ewe, which has a morphologically distinct logophoric pronoun.

14.

Look for the smoking gun.

Does the syntactic approach yield insights into any particular aspect of the problem? Are there interesting empirical predications? Is there a deep theoretical consequence? Try to find something that would convince a disinterested party, or even a skeptic. 

Acknowledgments: I thank Richard Kayne, Paul Postal and Gary Thoms for comments on a draft of this blog post.

Overview of Nanosyntax (from the Perspective of MaS) (November 11 2024)

Summary: Nanosyntax is a theory of syntax that assumes late insertion, and phrasal spell-out.

< /blikәt/ ⇔ [ZP Z [YP Y [XP X ]]] ⇔ BLICKET > (Baunaz and Lander 2018: 26)

Example: Russian accusative of ‘lip’ gub-ú (Caha 2020: 30, example (65))

[ACCP F2 [NOMP F1 [#P # [FEMP FEM REF]]]]

Discuss: Superset Principle, Elsewhere Principle, Cyclic Override Principle

Positives:

1. Minimalist (Merge), Cartography, LCA

2. One feature, one head (no bundling)

3. No Morphological Component (no impoverishment, no post-syntactic insertion)

Spellout-Driven Movement

1. Motivated by Spellout (in addition to syntactic movement)

2. Leaves no trace (needed for lexical insertion)

3. Spellout Algorithm/Lexicalization Algorithm (Caha et. al. 2024)

a. Merge F and lexicalize FP

b. If (a) fails, move the Spec of the complement of F, and lexicalize FP

c. If (b) fails, move the complement of F, and lexicalize FP

d. If (c) fails, go back to the previous cycle and try the next option for that cycle

Paval Caha (p.c.): “You need Spec movement before complement movement in all cases where an agglutinative form (derived by complement movement) could have been used, but never is, because there is a portmanteau morpheme.”

Worries:

1. Spellout driven movement seems like a second syntactic system (outside of regular syntax) needed for spell-out. In that way, it is similar to the operations of the morphological component (e.g., impoverishment, post-syntactic movement) in DM.

2. How does compositional semantics work in Nanosyntax?

a. Spell-out driven movement does not leave traces.

b. Lexical insertion introduces conceptual material at the phrasal level.

MaS and Nanosyntax:

Note: NS uses phrasal spell-out, where MaS uses empty elements. 

Hypothesis: For every NS proposal, it is possible to translate that proposal mechanically into an MaS proposal in the following way:

a. If in NS, a lexical item spells out a phrase with one head H as PHON, then in MaS, there is the lexical item {H, PHON}.

b. If in NS, a lexical item spells out a phrase involving two heads H1 and H2 (H1 c-commands H2) as PHON, then in MaS, there is the lexical item {H2, PHON}, and H1 is licensed as an empty element when occurring with H2.

A Singular Note on Singular-They/Them (Addendum)

 The following exchange is based on (with minor revisions) an exchange which took place on Facebook on November 6, 2024.

https://www.facebook.com/christhadcollins/posts/pfbid02m9SzEhAzGiWkXuhE3ModZdytKhf2h5Rbv8oTnyxFMfwWh6cZMVf5J2gUeETJxzqrl

Facebook Reader: 

Karlos Arregi & Matt Hewett noted this for singular 'they' and it-clefts in their recent NELS presentation at Yale. The handout is on the NELS website.

Response:

Thank you for your comment, which is very relevant. Based on your comment, I have now reviewed Arregi and Hewett. Here are a few observations. First, I had heard about Arregi and Hewett before I wrote my blog post. I even got their handout from Gary Thoms, but I had not read it, or even glanced at it. My recent blog post is based on completely original empirical observations by me, which stemmed intellectually 100% from reading John David Storment's thesis chapters, where he has lots of puzzles concerning agreement in inversion constructions with pronouns. I basically applied the kinds of tests that he is looking at to singular-they, and that led to my blog post. Second, they (Arregi and Hewett) only discussed it-clefts, which I did not discuss. I discussed there-constructions and inversion. So the empirical discoveries complement each other. I admit the patterns seem to be similar (in that, singular-they triggers singular verb agreement in all three constructions). But their explanation (based on the antecedent of a relative pronoun) will definitely not carry over to my data. In my data, there are no relative pronouns. Third, I am quite interested in their analysis of singular-they, based on imposters. It seems very promising (and very different from the usual DM analyses based on impoverishment, underspecification and late insertion). It seems to me to be real progress in understanding singular-they. Fourth, what is deeply ironic about their handout, is that with Paco Ordonez I proposed an imposter account of 'ustedes' (2PL) in Spanish to respond to claims about impoverishment in Latin American Spanish made by Arregi and Nevins. So in effect, we have come full circle in the development of these ideas: Arregi/Nevins --> Collins/Ordonez --> Arregi/Hewett --> Collins (blog post). What an interesting world we live in!

A Singular Note on Singular-They/Them

 Abstract: 

This squib shows that singular-them in expletive and inversion contexts only gives rise to singular verb agreement.

Keywords: singular-they/them, agreement, expletives, inversion

A Singular Note on Singular-They/Them

Biographical Notes (Technology Review, Class Notes, March/April 2025)

I wrote this for the Technology Review, Class Notes. It should appear in the March/April 2025 issue. There are also some pictures to accompany the text. They are pictures of me in the field. But I do not post them here.

Cartography and the Passive

 This paper is chapter for the following volume:

Wolfe, Sam. Forthcoming. Mapping Syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Link to paper:

Cartography and the Passive

Acceptability Judgments in ChatGPT (Study 2)

In this study, I am looking at structure dependence, which is an important concept for generative syntax. Based on a standard poverty of stimulus argument, structure dependence is taken to be part of UG (or derived from third factor considerations).

200,000 Visits for Ordinary Working Grammarian

As of 4:05 October 19, 2024, my blog Ordinary Working Grammarian has reached a total of 200,000 visits. The first blog post ever was March 14, 2017. So we have been going strong for over seven years.

The readership of the blog has dramatically increased since its inception. I only reached the 100,000 mark less than two years ago  on December 20, 2022.

In celebration of this fantastic milestone, I am posting a list of my most popular blog posts over the last year (in order of popularity). I have a broad readership throughout the world, so if you want to post as a guest, please let me know!

Acceptability Judgments in ChatGPT

On a dreary Saturday afternoon, I decided to ask ChatGPT a bunch of standard acceptability judgments. My prompt was this:

For each sentence, tell me if it is acceptable in spoken English or not. Do not give any explanations.

After that, I just typed in the sentences one after the other. And it spit out either 'Acceptable' or 'Not Acceptable.'

Bare Nominal Passives

 Abstract: In this squib, I introduce the bare nominal passive (‘a book by Chomsky’), and give an analysis for it in terms of a null passive participle. I provide evidence for the analysis from the distribution by-phrases, dative to-phrases, purposes clauses, and the Binding Theory. The analysis is argued to provide support for the principles of argument structure developed in Collins 2024.

Key Words: passive, implicit arguments, argument structure

Bare Nominal Passives

Hinton on Chomsky

The following videos are listed in reverse chronological order. For each video, I include the spots on video where Hinton talked about Chomsky (referring explicitly to Chomsky).

Syntax and Semantics (humorous)

Semantics pushed herself out of her recliner, after a lazy morning reading through her favorite novel, ‘Montague and his Discontents’. Her muscles felt stiff, and she felt the need for a brisk walk outside. There were little drops still hitting the window panes, but it was bound to clear up soon. So she jumped up and grabbed the leash.

A Smuggling Approach to HXPS

Abstract: This squib argues that Heavy XP Shift (HXPS) is to be analyzed as smuggling (in the sense of Collins 2005): The shifted constituent moves to Spec FocP, followed by vP movement smuggling the external argument around the focused constituent.

A Smuggling Approach to HXPS

Implicit Arguments for Dummies

In this post, I summarize my recent MIT Press monograph for non-linguists. 

Collins, Chris. 2024. Principles of Argument Structures: A Merge-Based Approach. MIT Press, Cambridge. 

Back to Cornell (September 25-27 2024)

In this post, I write down some of my thoughts and observations on returning to Cornell to give a talk, after almost two decades away. It is loosely based on my Facebook posts.

Cornell Talk Video (September 26 2024): A Merge-Based Approach to Argument Structure

Here I post the handout and videos for my Cornell talk. I don't know how long the videos will stay posted, so you should download them as soon as possible. This talk covers the same material as the Yushan Salon talk, but it is considerably more polished.

Cornell Talk Announcement 

Handout

part 1
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oPLqPM3uPS09Ue0IyFryBQrSRarMoEO-/view?usp=sharing

part 2
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TlvyLDJDl3ZYOk0_Ew53EDlW9ViBjn51/view?usp=sharing

On the origin of the term ‘implicit argument’ (Tom Roeper)

 On the origin of the term ‘implicit argument’

Tom Roeper, University of Massachusetts, Amherst 

Sept 21,2024       

A Very Short History of Mas (Morphology as Syntax)

December 2020

First version of “Towards a Theory of Morphology as Syntax” posted to Lingbuzz.

(published in 2023)

August 2018

Collins’ “The Logical of Contextual Allomorphy” posted to Linguzz. “I explore ways of analyzing contextual allomorphy that eschew reference to competition and blocking.”

December 2016

Kayne’s “What is Suppletive Allomorphy? On ‘went’ and ‘*goed’ in English’ posted to Lingbuzz (published in 2019). “These analyses do not invoke late insertion. It may be that late insertion is systematically unavailable.”

September 28, 2015

The name “Morphology as Syntax (MAS)” is proposed for first time.

December 13, 2012

Considering names for approach:

syntax-based morphology, Merge-based morphology, minimalist morphology

January 14-19, 2012

Long e-mail discussions about English past tense morphology.

January 14, 2012

Long e-mail discussion of “contextual allomorphy” with the conclusion that there is no contextual allomorphy.

Two Allomorphy Models without Late Insertion (Morphology as Syntax)

 Here is a handout from my seminar with Richard Kayne (Morphology as Syntax). On this handout, I outline two approaches to allomorphy not involving late insertion. This list is not meant to be exclusive. In fact, in the very same class period (September 23 2023), I presented yet another completely different model of allomorphy based on autosegmental phonology.

Syllabus: MaS Seminar (Fall 2024)(Collins and Kayne)(Revised Final Version)

 Syllabus MaS Seminar (Fall 2024)

Course Description: 

This seminar will develop the program sketched in Collins and Kayne (2023) (MaS or "Morphology as Syntax").  We will attempt to show that pursuing a syntactic approach to various questions that might otherwise be called ‘morphological’ yields deeper insights than could otherwise be achieved.  

The choice of topics will in part be sensitive to the interests of the students.  Some possible topics include (but are not limited to): grammatical gender and noun class, approaches to allomorphy and syncretism not based on late insertion and competition, the non-existence of post-syntactic operations, the non-existence of suppletion, the licensing of empty elements, merge-based approaches to phonology.

The A'-Quadrangle: From Ewe Dialects to UG (Selikem Gotah)

 Selikem Gotah's doctoral dissertation on Ewe syntax.

https://lingbuzz.net/lingbuzz/008408

Abstract:

"This dissertation argues for an Ā-quadrangle, which unifies the treatment of wh-questions and relative clauses, following extant proposals for the cross-linguistic analysis of wh-questions (Cable 2007, 2010). The Ā-quadrangle makes a case for a subsystem of Universal Grammar. Exploring some Ā-phenomena in Ewe through the lens of micro-comparative syntax (Kayne 1996, 2005), the dissertation argues that the core elements in the syntax of wh-questions and relative clauses in three dialects of Ewe are related to one another in a principled way, where elements relatively farther away from wh-words and relativized DPs, i.e. focus markers and the relative particle, are the outer elements and those closer to them, i.e. the wh-particle ka and relative pronouns, are the inner elements of the Ā-quadrangle. It is demonstrated that the relation between the inner and outer elements of the quadrangle and wh-words and relativized DPs in the derivation of wh-questions and relative clauses is mediated by the Agree and EPP feature mechanisms (Chomsky 1995, 2000, 2001), where the outer elements are goals attracted by C heads to the left periphery. It is argued that focus movement, which is integral to wh-questions, and relativization involve the projection of a FocP and RelP within the extended projection of focused categories and relativized elements, where the focus and relative heads form a constituent with the focused categories and the relativized elements. The resulting larger constituent is attracted to the specifier of CP. The current proposal allows for interposition of focus markers and relative particles internal to the moved constituent. The proposal is empirically superior to the existing analysis of argument focus in Ewe (Badan & Buell 2012), which adopts Aboh's (2004) account for deriving focus movement in Gungbe, a sister Gbe language. Crucially, the dissertation postulates a principle of UG according to which Ā-movement entails an outer element, like FOC and REL, which is the goal for agreement with C. This outer element determines pied-piping. This principle holds for all I-languages. Languages that lack an overt outer element like FOC and REL have null outer elements."

Syllabus: Morphology as Syntax (Fall 2024, NYU) (Collins and Kayne)

This seminar will develop the program sketched in Collins and Kayne (2023) (MaS or "Morphology as Syntax").  We will attempt to show that pursuing a syntactic approach to various questions that might otherwise be called ‘morphological’ yields deeper insights than could otherwise be achieved.  

Syllabus

Smuggling and Labeling Theory (version 2)

 Smuggling and Labeling Theory

Andreas Blümel, Humboldt-Universität Berlin / University of Göttingen

Chris Collins, New York University

August 17, 2024

Abstract: This paper draws a deep connection between smuggling (Collins 2005) and labeling (Collins 2002, Chomsky 2013, 2015), showing that the movement of the smuggler in a smuggling derivation can be triggered by the labeling algorithm. 

Keywords: passive, smuggling, labeling algorithm

Smuggling and Labeling Theory (version 2)

Also posted on Lingbuzz:

https://lingbuzz.net/lingbuzz/008353?_s=lz2tSpW9lsIV7tra&_k=iCveR3gWzID1_l82

Congratulations to Selikem Gotah on successful dissertation defense!

Congratulations to Selikem Gotah for passing his NYU doctoral dissertation defense "The A'-Quadrangle: From Ewe Dialects to UG"! I attach a screenshot. Lots of interesting Ewe dialect data, with very important theoretical implications for A'-movement (e.g., extending the Cable/Sulemana system to relativization and arguing against the Rizzi/Aboh analysis of focus particles).

Principles of Argument Structure (Sharing Discount Codes)

The sale date is fast approaching: September 17, 2024.

Readers with a US mailing address can use the below code for discounts on orders placed through PenguinRandomHouse.com. You can share this discount code with friends, family, colleagues, and through social media, and email outreach. Please make sure to include a link to our discount code information and a link to your book on PRH.com.

About discount codes

Principles of Argument Structure on Penguin Random House

a.                 

PUBDAY30: Share this code for 30% off on publication day (this is our biggest available discount!).

b.                 

READMIT20: This code offers 20% off your book at any time after publication.

Inversion and the Nominal Linker in Kua

Abstract: The linker in Kua relates modifiers (demonstratives, adjectives, possessors, relative clauses) to the head noun in the DP. I propose that the linker is the head of an LkP projection where NP moves into Spec LkP giving rise to an inverted word order. 

Keywords: linker, inversion, concord

Inversion and the Nominal Linker in Kua

Smuggling and Labeling Theory

 Smuggling and Labeling Theory

Andreas Blümel, Humboldt-Universität Berlin / University of Göttingen

Chris Collins, New York University

August 4, 2024

Abstract: This paper draws a deep connection between smuggling (Collins 2005) and labeling (Collins 2002, Chomsky 2015), showing that the movement of the smuggler in a smuggling derivation can be triggered by the labeling algorithm.

Smuggling and Labeling Theory

The Year of Smuggling (2024)

There has been a tidal wave of recent work on smuggling, in the sense of Collins 2005. I will refer to 2024 as ‘The Year of Smuggling’ for all the breakthrough work taking place.

Yushan Salon Talk Video (July 23, 2024): A Merge-Based Approach to Argument Structure

Abstract: This talk outlines the Merge-based approach to argument structure developed in Collins 2024 (updating, defending and extending Collins 2005). The predictions of the Merge-based theory of implicit arguments and by-phrases will be compared to the predictions made by non-Merge based theories, such as Bruening 2013.

Yushan Salon Talk Video

My Second Saturn Return

Saturn takes approximately 29.4 years to orbit the sun. 

Astrologers believe that when Saturn returns to its position at the time you were born, you reach a new stage of life. As one astrologer explained it to my friend ZW, when Saturn returns, it is like entering a narrow door, and you can only carry so many things with you. The metaphor indicates a time of change from one stage to another, with significant consequences.

Phasal versus Non-Phasal Movement

Abstract: In this short speculative blog post, I introduce the distinction between phasal and non-phasal movement. I show how the distinction fits in with the distinction between A and A’-movement. I discuss the implications of the distinction in resolving the freezing dilemma for smuggling.

*by it

 I recently noticed this paradigm. It is likely that other people have noticed the same thing, but I did not search very hard for references. The bottom line is that clausal expletive it cannot the complement of a by-phrase in the passive. At the end of the note, I offer some tentative ideas about why this generalization holds.

My Five Year Research/Writing Plan (2024-2029)

In the next five years, I will accomplish the following research and writing projects. There are many other issues that I am interested in, but these are the ones for which I have been able to write up concrete proposals. Surprisingly all of these projects have the flavor of returning to my roots.

1. A comprehensive grammar of the Kpele dialect of Ewe. This is the language that I know best, other than English. I want to combine my years of experience writing Khoisan grammars with my knowledge of Ewe and Kpelegbe, and write a comprehensive grammar. Doing this project will involve fieldwork in Togo during the summers of 2025, 2026 and 2027. It will also require applying for a research permit for Togo during the academic year 2024-2025. I should have a complete draft by Fall 2027.

Grammar of the Kpele Dialect of Ewe

2. An interactive map of Ewe dialects. This is a sister project to the Kpelegbe grammar. Both projects aim to increase knowledge of syntactic variation between Ewe dialects. As opposed to the Kpelegbe grammar, the Ewe dialect map will require a large international team, and significant funding. Therefore, I will have to write up and submit a grant proposal during Fall 2024. Once I get funding, the project will take four years to complete.

Ewe Dialect Map

3. Autobiography. For the last several years I have been assembling materials and writing excerpts of my autobiography. I am interested in how my life fits together, and why I choose the path I did, and what that path has led to. I am also interested in presenting my discoveries for a general audience. It will take me at least two or three more years to complete the writing. Then I need to find a publisher.

The Autobiography of Christopher Thad Collins

4. Quotative Inversion. One of my first syntactic loves was quotative inversion. I discovered many things about it early on in my career. Now, I would like to return to it, and see what more can be said. I will give a seminar on quotative inversion during academic year 2025-2026. It should take two years to write.

Quotative Inversion Monograph

Fall 2024 Seminar: Morphology as Syntax (Collins and Kayne, NYU)

Course Description: 

This seminar will develop the program sketched in Collins and Kayne (2023) (MaS or "Morphology as Syntax"). We will attempt to show that pursuing a syntactic approach to various questions that might otherwise be called ‘morphological’ yields deeper insights than could otherwise be achieved.  

Yushan Salon Talk Handout (July 23, 2024): A Merge-Based Approach to Argument Structure

Abstract: This talk outlines the Merge-based approach to argument structure developed in Collins 2024 (updating, defending and extending Collins 2005). The predictions of the Merge-based theory of implicit arguments and by-phrases will be compared to the predictions made by non-Merge based theories, such as Bruening2013.

Yushan Salon Talk Handout

Please register if you are interested

https://ordinaryworkinggrammarian.blogspot.com/2024/07/a-merge-based-approach-to-argument.html

Writing the Sasi Dictionary: Some Personal Recollections

Introduction

Writing the Sasi dictionary was difficult. The purpose of this piece is to explain to a general audience (of non-linguists) why I found it so difficult. From this, they might get an idea of the challenges that a field linguist faces in their day-to-day work.

Book Proposal: A Grammar of the Kpele Dialect of Ewe (Kpelegbe)

Ewe is a Kwa language spoken in West Africa in Ghana, Togo and Benin. Kpelegbe is a dialect of Ewe spoken in Kpele canton in Togo, on the road from Kpalime to Atakpame. While there is quite a bit of linguistic literature concerning standard Ewe, there is far less documentation of the many Ewe dialects.

I propose to write a comprehensive grammar of the Kpele dialect of Ewe. It will be at around 500 pages long (single spaced, 12 font), and will include a phonological sketch. All words and phrases in the grammar will be tone marked, and there will be a complete account of tone.

A Merge-Based Approach to Argument Structure (Upcoming talk July 23, 2024)

Here is an announcement of my upcoming talk. If you wish to attend online, you need to contact the organizers (see the e-mail address on the announcement). You need to register. I will be giving a very condensed version of my monograph, focusing on the higher level principles. You can find a pre-publication version here: Principles of Argument Structure (Final pre-publication version).

Summary of Fieldwork Skills for NSF Project (2018-2024)

The following is a list of basic fieldwork skills that the students involved in my NSF research project learned. The particular skills taught varied by student and field trip.

Sasi Dictionary (Botswana)(ToC)

 

A Grammatical Sketch of Kuasi (Botswana) (Cover)

 

Sasi Dictionary (Botswana)(Cover)

 

Principles of Argument Structure (Combined Excerpts)

Here are a series of four short excerpts from my forthcoming MIT Press monograph giving a taste of some of the theoretical issues that I engage with.

Principles of Argument Structure (Final Prepublication Version, April 28 2023)

Excerpt 1: The Wedge

Excerpt 2: VoiceP

Excerpt 3: Formal Semantics

Excerpt 4: Collins 2005 vs Bruening 2013

Principles of Argument Structure (Excerpt 4: Collins 2005 vs Bruening 2013)

  To summarize the discussion, we have the following two theories and their properties:

(5) Collins 2005a (see also Angelopoulos et. al. 2020):

a. Principles: Theta-Criterion/Argument Criterion

b. Prediction: Implicit arguments are syntactically projected.

c. Empirical support: distribution of reflexives, reciprocals, pronouns, Helke expressions and secondary predicates in the short passive in English.

(6) Bruening 2013 (see also Legate 2014 and Alexiadou et. al. 2015):

a. Principles: No Theta-Criterion/Argument Criterion, only formal semantics

b. Prediction: Implicit arguments are not syntactically projected.

c. Empirical problems: distribution of reflexives, reciprocals, pronouns, Helke expressions and secondary predicates in the short passive in English.

Book Proposal: In Search of the Roots of Human Language

In Search of the Roots of Human Language: 

The Autobiography of Christopher Thad Collins

Synopsis/Back Cover:

Follow the life journey of a mild-mannered professor from modest beginnings, deep into the heart of Africa in search of the meaning of life and the secrets of human language.

Principles of Argument Structure (Final Pre-publication Version, April 28 2023)

 Dedication

This monograph is dedicated to my three great syntax teachers, Noam Chomsky, Richard Kayne and Paul Postal. Their influence can be felt on every page.

Principles of Argument Structure (Final Pre-Publication Version)

Principles of Argument Structure (Excerpt 3: Formal Semantics)

 The discussion above raises the question of where formal semantics goes wrong as a theory of argument structure? The basic problem is that formal semantics (as presented in standard textbooks) is far too unrestricted to serve as theory of anything, even natural language semantics. As Chomsky notes in Collins 2021:

(35) “Work in formal semantics has been some of the most exciting parts of the field in recent years, but it hasn’t been treated with the kind of critical analysis that other parts of syntax (including generative phonology) have been within generative grammar since its origins. Questions about explanatory power, simplicity, learnability, generality, evolvability, and so. More as a descriptive technology. That raises questions.”

Photos of Summer 2024 Tshila Expedition

A few photos of our recent NSF funded expedition in Botswana to document Tshila (a Khoe Kwadi language) during the summer of 2024.

The team standing in front of the village sign. From left to right, Kagiso, Chris, Andre and Akuwa. John David is not pictured since he had to leave a bit early. As can be seen, the village is built on sand in the Kalahari desert.

A picture of John David lounging on the back of my Toyota Land Cruiser, a super powerful vehicle that can drive through deep sand without even engaging the 4x4.

The next two photos are of our house in the village. After struggling with accommodation in Diphuduhudu, I realize how lucky we were to find this house, which we rented from one of the subchiefs. We really loved it. It was spacious with tiled floors, and some black couches in the living room. It had two bedrooms, a living room (the office), a shower room and a kitchen. The outhouse is pictured to the right, only a short walk from the main house, and pretty much reserved just for us. I paid them over the phone. So it was cozy and convenient.

Another view of the house with my beloved solar panel. We powered three computers, and countless phones, since the neighbors kept popping in for us to charge their phones. Only on the last few cloudy

days in the village did we face any real problem with solar power, but even then we managed to finish the day with enough power.

The photo below shows the fire where we would heat up water for showers (in order to make our gas supply last longer). The desert gets very cold at night and in the morning down into the 30s. It is really lovely to take a hot bucket shower after a long day at work.

A view of my work setup, including computer (powered by solar panel), Zoom H4n as audio-interface, notebook (I am old school, and enter everything in a notebook) and plenty of Setswana dictionaries.

A picture of me working with the consultants.

John David and Andre took a mini-expedition into Khutse to see the animals. Khutse is only a few kilometers from the village (less than five kilometers). The wild animals, including lions and elephants, sometimes make their way outside of the park into the village.

The bare shelves of the village store. This picture just highlights how difficult it is to buy food in the village. There are only a few tuck shops and this mostly empty store.

The incredible beauty of the Milky Way Galaxy at night. Never before have I seen such a beautiful display of the night sky.

NSF Fieldwork by the Numbers (2018-2024)

 This research reported on below was done under the NSF grant “Developing the next generation of researchers investigating Khoisan languages” (Award Abstract # 1760980). The duration of the grant was from June 1, 2018 to August 31, 2024. The grant was extended twice because of the pandemic.

Tshila Fieldwork 2024 by the Numbers

From May 27 2024 to June 28 2024, Andre, John David and I did fieldwork on Tshila, an endangered Khoe-Kwadi language spoken in southeastern Botswana. We did the fieldwork in Kaudwane, which is on the edge of the Khutse game reserve. The purpose of this note is to summarize the work done during our trip.

Monograph Proposal: Quotative Inversion

Abstract: This monograph presents a theory of quotative inversion within the Merge-based theory argument structure of Collins 2024a, building on work on quotative inversion by Collins and Branigan 1997, Collins 1997, Collins 2003, Bruening 2016, Murphy 2022, and Storment 2024, forthcoming. In this theory, the quotative operator is smuggled by VP movement over the in-situ subject (on smuggling see Collins 2005 and Belletti and Collins 2020, amongst many others), and then undergoes A-movement to Spec TP. In developing the analysis, the author summarizes all known data concerning quotative inversion in English, and summarizes what is known about cross-linguistic variation. Lastly, the author proposes a general theory of voice encompassing not only the passive construction, but also quotative inversion and related constructions.

1. Introduction

2. A-Movement of the Quotative Operator

3. The Position of the Subject

4. Smuggling of the Quotative Operator

5. Successive Cyclic Inversion

6. The Transitivity Constraint

7. Related Inversion Constructions

8. Cross-Linguistic Variation

9. Theoretical Consequences

10. Conclusion

Selected References

Belletti, Adriana and Chris Collins. 2020. Smuggling in Syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bruening, Benjamin. 2016. Alignment in Syntax: Inversion in English. Syntax 19, 111-155.

Collins, Chris and Phil Branigan. 1997. Quotative Inversion. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 15, 1-41.

(https://ordinaryworkinggrammarian.blogspot.com/2020/12/quotative-inversion-collins-and.html#more)

Collins, Chris. 1997. Local Economy. MIT Press, Cambridge.

Collins, Chris. 2003. The Distribution of Particle Verbs in Quotative Inversion. Manuscript, Cornell University.

(https://ordinaryworkinggrammarian.blogspot.com/2023/02/the-distribution-of-particles-in.html)

Collins, Chris. 2005. A Smuggling Approach to the Passive in English. Syntax  8, 81-120.

(https://ordinaryworkinggrammarian.blogspot.com/2020/12/a-smuggling-approach-to-passive-in.html)

Collins, Chris. 2024a. Principles of Argument Structure: A Merge-Based Approach. MIT Press, Cambridge.

Collins, Chris. 2024b. Successive Cyclic Inversion. Ms., NYU.

(https://ordinaryworkinggrammarian.blogspot.com/2024/07/successive-cyclic-inversion.html)

Collins, Chris. 2024c. Two More Arguments for A-Movement in Quotative Inversion. Ms., NYU.

(https://ordinaryworkinggrammarian.blogspot.com/2024/07/two-more-arguments-for-movement-in.html)

Murphy, Andrew. 2022. Parasitic Gaps Diagnose A-Movement in Quotative and Locative Inversion. Snippets 43.

Storment, John David. 2024. Quotative Inversion as Smuggling: Evidence from Setswana and English. Presented May 3, 2024 at the 55th Annual Conference on African Linguistics, Montreal, Québec.

Storment, John David. Forthcoming. Projecting (Your) Voice: A Theory of Inversion and Circumvention. Doctoral Dissertation, Stony Brook, New York.

Principles of Argument Structure (Excerpt 2: VoiceP)

 In this chapter I compared two conceptions of VoiceP, the Projection Theory and the Realization Theory. I discussed a number of analyses using Kratzer’s 1996 framework. In each case, they either (a) violate the Terminological Assumption (6), or (b) are empirically inaccurate or incomplete. 

I suggested the Realization Theory (e.g., Collins 2005a) as an alternative way to think about voice. Lastly, I argued that the Kratzerian conception of VoiceP as introducing the external argument is actually inconsistent with the Merge-based theory of argument structure outlined in chapter 1.

There is by now a large literature adopting the theoretical assumptions of Kratzer 1996. It is possible that in some paper the smoking gun has been found crucially linking the projection of the external argument to VoiceP. Alternatively, the whole project is doomed to fail since it conflates two very different syntactic systems: argument structure and voice.

Principles of Argument Structure (Excerpt 1: The Wedge)

In chapters 2 and 3, I argued that the implicit argument in the passive is syntactically projected on the basis of the distribution of reflexives, reciprocals, pronouns, Helke expressions and secondary predicates. I will now argue that all implicit arguments (across different constructions and different languages) are syntactically projected, whether or not any syntactic data actually support that conclusion for a particular construction in a particular language. I will call this argument the wedge, because of its far-ranging consequences. The metaphor is that the generalizations about the English passive help to pry open a much larger generalization concerning implicit arguments cross-linguistically.

Two More Arguments for A-Movement in Quotative Inversion

Abstract: Collins 1997, 2003 claims that quotative inversion and locative inversion involve A-movement to Spec TP (see also Storment 2024). This claim has recently been argued for on the basis of the distribution of parasitic gaps by Murphy 2022. The purpose of this short squib is to provide two additional arguments for A-movement in quotative inversion. 

Two More Arguments for A-Movement in Quotative Inversion