Background and local extraction morphology Sample Clauses

Background and local extraction morphology. Gitksan exhibits a consistent VSO word order. This word order is disrupted by focus fronting: A’-moved elements are fronted to a sentence-initial position before the verb and all auxiliaries. Such fronting, as well as the extraction marking to be discussed in the rest of the paper, applies in all cases of A’-movement: wh-questions, argument focus, clefts, and relative clauses (Rigsby, 1986; Davis and Brown, 2011).Agreement in Gitksan is morphologically ergative. Ergative agreement may be a pre- predicate clitic (glossed as series I) or a suffix (glossed as series II), depending on clause type.1 Clitics (I) are ergative in dependent clauses, while suffixes (II) are ergative in in- dependent clauses (Rigsby, 1986). Suffixal agreement is often obscured on the surface, whenever it is immediately followed by an enclitic determiner of the DP argument coref- erent with it (Tarpent, 1987; Davis and Forbes, 2015). However, clitic agreement is never obscured, making it easy to distinguish the two.Extraction morphology does not follow an ergative/absolutive split, but instead sur- faces differently when each of the three types of core argument (S, O, and A) are extracted. That is, extraction morphology exhibits a tripartite split, demonstrated below; (a) exam- ples provide a simple declarative sentence, and (b) examples provide a wh-question with A’-extraction. Morphemes characteristic of the extraction type are bolded.2 (1) Subject extraction (SX)