This study examines the treatment of the subject verb (SV) in the constructions of pre-verbal and postverbal coordinate themes in Greek. Examples (1) and (2) illustrate postverbal and pre-referendum thematic constructions in Greek. The Greek has the agreement of morphological figure (singular and plural) marking between the subject and the verb. However, the subjects of coordinates are a special case, because the numbering agreement is sensitive to the position of the subject. In particular, postverbal coordinate subjects trigger a plural chord, but allow individual verbs as an option, as shown in example (1) below. On the other hand, subjects of pre-verbal coordinates require pluralistic concordance, while singular concordance on verb leads to non-grammativity (Holton et al., 1997; Spyropoulos, 2007; Kazana, 2011), as shown in example (2) below. Finally, we tested the interaction of the characteristic of key factors of our bilinguals, namely the Greek vocabulary [group A (high) versus group B (low)), the group being a factor between the subjects and the number as a factor within the subjects. In both post-verbal and pre-verbal conditions, no interaction was observed (p > 0.05), indicating that their vocabulary skills did not influence their syntactic treatment of contact information subjects. As proposed in the introduction to the section, the derivation of a partial agreement (singular verb) includes the coordination of VP and V-Raising (Aoun et al., 1994; Munn, 1999; Spyropoulos, 2007). On the other hand, the full agreement requires the coordination of the DP and there is no dependence on movement. With regard to processing costs, we therefore expect that a partial agreement will be more complex than a full agreement, not only because the diversion requires more steps, but also because the full agreement is directly linked to the semantic convention, whereas the semantic agreement does not take place. In addition, partial agreement is only possible with postverbal contact information subjects, while in all contexts, perfect agreement is possible. This restriction contributes to the clarity of the partial agreement and the resulting increased complexity.

For these reasons, we predicted that a pluralistic agreement would be preferable during online processing, which would have at least a numerical effect in the last sections of the preverb and postverbal coordinates set. The preference for a majority agreement in both contexts should be found in all groups, although adults were expected to be faster than monolingual children and to be faster than bilingual children. Bilingual children should also have a greater numerical effect in post-lip disease than monolingual children, given the more marginal status of partial agreement with albanian-coordinating postverbal subjects (Meniku and Campos, 2016). It was also expected that, in all groups of the first DP, there would be a numerical effect that appeared in the postverbal coordinate condition after the plural, as the local number did not match.