Person-Case Interaction: Examining Argument Licensing in Punjabi
The distribution of arguments in a given structural position is usually assumed to be determined by case (Chomsky 1981 and henceforth). Additionally, it has been noted that 1st/2nd pronouns are unique in that they require a special licensing of their 1st/2nd person features (Bejar and Rezac 2003, Bianchi 2006, Baker 2008, Preminger 2011 among others). The distinct status of the two mechanisms is contested. While one approach advocates a distinct need to license person vis-à-vis case (Bejar and Rezac 2003, Bianchi 2006, Lochbihler 2012), the alternative approach reduces person licensing to case licensing (Rezac 2008, Bejar and Rezac 2009, Baker 2011). This talk furthers this debate by employing data from Punjabi, a South Asian language that manifests a person-case interaction in both subject and object domains. In the perfective aspect, Punjabi is a person based split ergative language that also differentially marks its objects based on their person/D-featural composition. An examination of perfective argument licensing shows that 1st/2nd pronouns in Punjabi need both person and case licensing. Specifically, person licensing corresponds to the movement of 1st/2nd pronouns from their in situ position to the specifier of the relevant functional head. These pronouns, in their final landing site, get a P(ostpositional) case, distinct from the case obtained by their 3rd counterparts.
