The dikkens, Marcel. 1999. On the structural representation of ownership and agreement. In Crossing boundaries: Advances in the theory of Central and Eastern European languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Several details are to be provided during a revision of the tables. First, the use of the agreement between the verb and the object (in determination) and between the subject and the verb (in person and number) effectively doubles the size of the paradigm. The number of bends that need to be learned by Hungarian-speaking children is therefore quite significant. Verb-Objet-Agreement is much rarer in typological terms than the verb-subject chord.
In fact, many languages show a subject-verb chord without verb-object agreement, but the opposite does not seem to be the case. Note in the tables that all difficulties specific to the verb-object chord must be recognizable. In contexts that require a current singular form of the first person, a child can produce z.B. Tolok instead of Tolom (or vice versa). The report “Morphological Wealth” is drawn from the conclusions of Leonard and his colleagues (Leonard, Sabbadini, Leonard, Volterra, 1987; Leonard, 1998, 255-257; Dromi, Leonard, Adam, Zadunaisky-Ehrlich, 1999). According to this presentation, the exceptional difficulties associated with tension and agreement morphisms are the result of an interaction between a more general limitation of linguistic capacity and the characteristics of the grammar system, which must be learned. The main details of morphological richness were inspired by the competition model (z.B. MacWhinney, 1987; Bates – MacWhinney, 1989), as well as the view that languages differ in the details of grammar, which have the greatest validity cue, that the discovery and use of these indications are probabilistic and that some indices have higher processing costs than others. Coppock, Elizabeth and Stephen Wechsler. 2010. From the less frequented paths of the Pronoun to the agreement: the case of the objective conjugations of the Urals. In The proceedings of the LFG`10 conference, ed.
Tracy Holloway King, 165-185. Stanford: CSLI Publications. Mr. Melich. 1913. A magyar t`rgyas igeragozes [Hungarian objective conjugation]. Magyar Nyelv 9: 1:14. In Hungarian, inclinations mark tension and mode, correspondence with the subject in the person and number and correspondence with the object in a certain way. (Of these dimensions, the distinctions by mode are not studied in this study; all the curves studied are indicative.) Although Hungarian is often referred to as a clumping language, the dimensions of the person and number are clearly merging and there is a complex relationship between clumping and non-merging elements. We will return to this problem after introducing the verb into the exam folds. Specificity also plays a role in other constructions, including fights in Dutch and German, participatory agreements in French and Hindi, and the case of morphological drums in Turkish. For a summary and references, see Anagnostopoulou (2005).
Lepez (2009) argues that misunderstanding is irrelevant to characterize cliptic left debauchery in Spanish and suggests that strong anaphoricity is what characterizes the left-wing elements deployed. This term does not include all definitive terms; for example, in the following dialogue, the teacher is not anaphoric in the respective sense (example of Lepez`s (2.35): (i) Q: Who did you see? A: I saw the professor. Consider the translation of this dialogue into Hungarian (with The Current Form, because subjective and objective conjugations are mixed in the first person`s past): (ii) Q: Comrie, Bernard. 1977. Direct themes and objects in the Ural languages: a functional explanation of fall marking systems. Finno-Ourgriennes 12:5 (17). In this study, we found that a group of Hungarian-speaking children with LI was significantly lower than the level of young children with VC in a task where children had to repeat sentences and provide the corresponding dissolving of tension and concordance.