The blurring of the regularity of the strategies of agreement, determined by the existence of several coordinated subjects, attracted considerable attention. Many studies have documented the distribution of concordance patterns in different languages or attempted to provide an explanation of confirmed phenomena. As might be expected, the approaches and solutions proposed are very different. This distribution of the dual cannot be a coincidence. Whenever two people play the role of synactic subjects, the plural is often used instead of the double. But whenever the duel is actually used, the idea of duality, of the reciprocal participation of both parties is emphasized (Chantraine 1953: 25-26). Ex. 21 of Hesiod`s works and days illustrates the point very clearly: the two moral concepts of aidṓs (“respect”, “shame”) and nemesis (“righteous anger”) are personified and represented when they fly away mortal men; the double, with vivid descriptive details like the veiled heads of both (lines 197-198), emphasizes the personification. Both are close to the χ2 value for p < 0.001 with df = 1 (10.87); the contribution of cells for and coordinates (respectively 0.48 and 0.50, respectively, for singular or non-singular concordance) is significantly lower. 2) Different formations are used for the irregular verb, but a -s is always used for the singular of the third person To analyze the acceptance data, we performed a repeated analysis of variance (ANOVA) with number (singular versus plural) and subject position (preverbal, postverbal) as variable within the subject. Figure 1 shows the results of the acceptance judgment.
The work is constructed as follows. In point 1.1, we provide the definitions and terminology we will use; Sections 1.3 and 1.4 are devoted to the corpus used for the study and the methodology of our experiments. We will then present complete quantitative data for the observations reported by the grammars. The hypothesis that a sub-agreement is effective only in the area of the clause is discussed in point 2.2. Finally, we will focus on factors that seem to play the greatest role in influencing the choice of the concordance model, namely the constituent order (2.3), the cognitive aspects (2.4) and the animacy value of the subjects involved in the coordination (2.5). The theme of this sentence is the singular “one”, not the plural “dogs”. This means that the verb should also be singular. To correct this type of error, take a look at the sentence to identify the topic. As proposed in the introductory section, the derivation of partial correspondence (Singularverb) includes the coordination of the Vice-President and V-Raising (Aoun et al., 1994); Munn, 1999; Spyropoulos, 2007). On the other hand, total agreement presupposes DP coordination and no dependence on movement is formed.
When it comes to processing costs, we therefore expect a partial agreement to be more complex than a full agreement, not only because rejection requires more steps, but also because the full agreement directly reflects the semantic numbering agreement, while the partial agreement does not. . . .