Search

This paper introduces a new complementizer agreement relation to the theoretical literature from Lubukusu (Bantu, Kenya), in which a declarative-embedding complementizer agrees in an upward orientation with the subject of its selecting clause. The agreement relation is extensively documented in a wide variety of syntactic contexts including ditransitives, causatives, passives, and multiple embeddings, establishing the empirical generalization that the complementizer agrees with the most local superordinate subject. The paper proposes that this agreement relation is not a direct Agree relation, but is instead the result of local agreement between the complementizer and a null subject-oriented anaphor (whose antecedent is necessarily the superordinate subject). This is termed an Indirect Agree relation, defined as an instance of agreement between a head and an agreement trigger that is mediated by a different syntactic element (a null anaphor, in this case). A variety of evidence is given in support of this conclusion, including mismatched agreements between the complementizer and matrix subject agreement, lack of split anaphora, the properties of raising constructions, (tensed) clause-boundedness, and the intervention of specified subjects. A number of issues for future research are noted as well, including various complementation patterns relating to evidentiality, factivity, and sentience as they intersect with the properties of the agreeing complementizer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]