DOCSLIB.ORG

Antisymmetry, Linearization and Movement Kazuki

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Antisymmetry, Linearization and Movement Kazuki REVIEW ARTICLE ANTISYMMETRY, LINEARIZATION AND MOVEMENT KAZUKI KUWABARA Kanda University of International Studies* Dynamic Antisymmetry, by Andrea Moro, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2000, xi+142pp. Keywords: antisymmetry, bare small clauses, copular sentences, multiple- spec constructions, split wh-movement 1. Introduction Displacement and phrase structure are specific properties of human languages, both of which have been foci of inquiries in the history of generative grammar. In the current theoretical framework, these two are generally assumed to be independent properties. For example, within the minimalist program, the displacement property of language is related to morphology: movement is regarded as a way to wipe out uninterpretable features of lexical items that do not feed the conceptual-intentional component (Chomsky (1995b)). On the other hand, the notion of phrase structure is assumed to be derived from the principles regulating the operation "Merge" (Chomsky (1995b)) or the mapping between hierachical structure and linear order (Kayne (1994)). This monograph by Andrea Moro is a collection of interesting and ambitious case studies that provides a new perspective on two central aspects of natural language, namely, movement and phrase structure. In particular, Moro explores the hypothesis that movement is triggered * I am grateful to anonymous reviewers for their invaluable comments and sug- gestions on an earlier version of this article, and to Fujie Sakai for her encourage- ment and support. I would also like to thank Bruce Horton for acting as an infor- mant and Kate Allen for stylistic improvements. All remaining errors and inade- quacies are, of course, my own. English Linguistics 20: 1 (2003) 274-298 -274- (C) 2003 by the English Linguistic Society of Japan ANTISYMMETRY, LINEARIZATION AND MOVEMENT 275 by the factors associated with the geometry of phrase structure as opposed to those associated with morphology. In the discussion that follows, I will concentrate on four empirical domains to which the theory of dynamic antisymmetry has been applied and discuss some problematic aspects of their analyses. This paper is organized as fol- lows. In Section 2, I will present an overview of the theory of dy- namic antisymmetry. Section 3 considers the analyses of copular sen- tences and split wh-movement, and discusses their potential problems. In Section 4, I will examine two instances of a multiple-spec construc- tion. Section 5 will address some general questions that emerge from the theory of dynamic antisymmetry. Section 6 concludes the paper. 2. The Weak Version of LCA and Movement Before proceeding, let us take a brief overview of the central aspects of Kayne's (1994) theory of phrase structure, on which Moro's work is based. It has been generally assumed that linear order and hierachical structure are independent properties. Thus, any given hierarchy can be associated with more than one linear order. However, interlocking these two properties, Kayne proposed a theory of phrase structure which aims at deriving the major properties of X-bar theory from a single axiom called Linear Correspondence Axiom (LCA). The basic idea of the LCA is that hierarchy and precedence are not independent, but each can be mapped onto the other. More specifically, the LCA states that given two nonterminals, X and Y, and the terminals they dominate, x and y, if X asymmetrically c-commands Y, x precedes y.1 To illustrate how the theory works, let us concentrate on the specific configuration that is excluded by the LCA. A structure like (1) in which a phrase K exhaustively dominates two nonterminals (M and P) is ruled out. 1In Kayne's theory, the notion of c-command is defined as follows: (i) X c-commands Y iff X and Y are categories and X excludes Y and every category that dominates X dominates Y. (Kayne (1994: 16)) This definition of c-command exclusively referring to categories rather than segments provides us with important consequences that there is no distinction between ad- juncts and specifiers, and they can occur only once in each phrase. I will come back to this aspect of the theory in Sections 4.1-2. 276 ENGLISH LINGUISTICS, VOL. 20, NO. 1 (2003) (1) In (1), the nonterminal M asymmetrically c-commands the nonterminal Q, and the nonterminal P also asymmetrically c-commands the nonter- minal N. Therefore, the terminals dominated by M and P would not be linearly ordered. Following Moro, I will call this offending struc- ture 'a point of symmetry.' Note here that the LCA, which excludes the structure in (1), has the effect of deriving part of the basic tenet of the X-bar theory that all phrases be headed.2 Kayne assumes that the LCA holds at all levels of representations, according to which a con- figuration like (1) would never be generated. However, given that the organization of words into linear order is a PF phenomenon, it is possi- ble to regard the LCA as a condition applying at PF. This interpreta- tion of the LCA is also desirable in the light of the minimalist thesis that all conditions must be related to either one of the interface levels (PF and LF). Adopting this weak version of the LCA, Moro, argues for the following conjecture: (2) Movement is driven by the search for antisymmetry.3 According to (2), movement is regarded as a device to nullify the point of symmetry. In other words, whenever a symmetrical structure like (1) is generated, movement intervenes to rescue the structure by turn- ing one of the elements (i.e. either M or P) constituting the point of symmetry into a phonetically empty element (trace), which by defini- tion is not visible in the linear sequence at PF.4 In Chapter 3, Moro identifies three types of configurations given in (3), and considers spe- cific constructions corresponding to them: 2 For the discussion on how the LCA derives other properties of the X-bar theory, see Kayne (1994) and Cinque (1996). 3 The term "dynamic antisymmetry," which is the title of the book under review, comes from the approach that links the antisymmetry hypothesis with the theory of movement. 4 For the non-visibility of traces, see Kayne (1994: 133, n. 3) and Chomsky (1995b: 337). ANTISYMMETRY, LINEARIZATION AND MOVEMENT 277 (3) a. b. C. According to Moro, (3a) is an instance of small clauses, (3b) multiple- spec constructions, and (3c) clitic complementation. Given the weak version of the LCA, the structures in (3) are toler- ated before linearization is required. A question is whether these structures can indeed be generated. The answer to this question has to do with the properties of a syntactic operation, Merge. Merge is a basic syntactic operation that takes two distinct constituents α and β as input and yields a larger constituent K as output. What is the label for K ? According to Chomsky (1995b: 241-249), there are only two op- tions, which can be represented as (4): (4) ∀ α, β, Merge yields K: a. K={α, {α, β}} b. K={<α, α>, {α, β}} The elements contained in the braces are the constituents of the phrase, and the rest is the label of the phrase itself. According to (4), the label of the resulting constituent can be either simple as in (4a) (either α or β, a case of substitution) or complex as in (4b) (the ordered pair of the projecting element <α, α>, a case of adjunction). As it can be seen from the labeling, the essential property of Merge is that the label of the resulting constituent is formed by adding no new information with respect to the features of α and β.5 Let us now con- sider whether Merge can generate the structures given in (3). Merge can generate (3b) and (3c) without any problems: in both (3b) and (3c), either α or β is projected. In contrast, (3a) appears to be prob- lematic, since two maximal projections are merged to yield a new max- imal projection that is neither YP nor ZP. Specifically, (3a) (in this case, the label XP) does not correspond to any of the choices in (4). However, Moro argues that there is a third option to be added for the 5 Another defining property of Merge is that there are no "mixed" labels com- posed by the hybrid information of the two items merged. 278 ENGLISH LINGUISTICS, VOL. 20, NO. 1 (2003) label of K, which is given below:6 (4) c. K={<0> {α, β}} (4c) illustrates the case where the newly formed constituent is under- specified with respect to the features of α and β. Notice that this oP- tion does not run against the property of Merge, since neither α nor β projects. Moro argues that the small clauses to be discussed below in- stantiate the third option given in (4c). On intuitive grounds, small clauses form syntactic units (Williams (1975)), but may not have the same distribution of either of their subparts. Thus, small clauses can be regarded as a result of merging α and β when neither of them pro- sects. Moro takes up a variety of constructions corresponding to one of the abstract structures in (3), which are heterogeneous in nature. In this article, I would like to concentrate on the instances of (3a) and (3b) and their analyses, which I think are related to each other and are the central focus of the book. In particular, I will discuss the analyses and problems of English copular sentences, split wh-movement, subject- object asymmetry in root wh-questions with respect to Subject-Aux In- version, and Italian copular sentences. 3. Bare Small Clauses 3.1. Copular Sentences Let us consider a pair of sentences like (5), in which we find two DPs around a copular verb.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Word Order, Parameters and the Extended COMP
    Alice Davison, University of Iowa [email protected] January 2006 Word order, parameters, and the Extended COMP projection Abstract The structure of finite CP shows some unexpected syntactic variation in the marking of finite subordinate clauses in the Indic languages, which otherwise are strongly head-final.. Languages with relative pronouns also have initial complementizers and conjunctions. Languages with final yes/no question markers allow final complementizers, either demonstratives or quotative participles. These properties define three classes, one with only final CP heads (Sinhala), one with only initial CP heads (Hindi, Panjabi, Kashmiri) and others with both possibilities. The lexical differences of final vs initial CP heads argue for expanding the CP projection into a number of specialized projections, whose heads are all final (Sinhala), all initial, or mixed. These projections explain the systematic variation in finite CPs in the Indic languages, with the exception of some additional restrictions and anomalies in the Eastern group. 1. Introduction In this paper, I examine two topics in the syntactic structure of clauses in the Indic languages. The first topic has to do with the embedding of finite clauses and especially about how embedded finite clauses are morphologically marked. The second topic focuses on patterns of linear order in languages, parameters of directionality in head position. The two topics intersect in the position of these markers of finite subordinate clauses in the Indic languages. These markers can be prefixes or suffixes, and I will propose that they are heads of functional projections, just as COMP is traditionally regarded as head of CP. The Indic languages are all fundamentally head-final languages; the lexically heads P, Adj, V and N are head-final in the surface structure, while only the functional head D is not.
    [Show full text]
  • Serial Verb Constructions Revisited: a Case Study from Koro
    Serial Verb Constructions Revisited: A Case Study from Koro By Jessica Cleary-Kemp A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Linguistics in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Associate Professor Lev D. Michael, Chair Assistant Professor Peter S. Jenks Professor William F. Hanks Summer 2015 © Copyright by Jessica Cleary-Kemp All Rights Reserved Abstract Serial Verb Constructions Revisited: A Case Study from Koro by Jessica Cleary-Kemp Doctor of Philosophy in Linguistics University of California, Berkeley Associate Professor Lev D. Michael, Chair In this dissertation a methodology for identifying and analyzing serial verb constructions (SVCs) is developed, and its application is exemplified through an analysis of SVCs in Koro, an Oceanic language of Papua New Guinea. SVCs involve two main verbs that form a single predicate and share at least one of their arguments. In addition, they have shared values for tense, aspect, and mood, and they denote a single event. The unique syntactic and semantic properties of SVCs present a number of theoretical challenges, and thus they have invited great interest from syntacticians and typologists alike. But characterizing the nature of SVCs and making generalizations about the typology of serializing languages has proven difficult. There is still debate about both the surface properties of SVCs and their underlying syntactic structure. The current work addresses some of these issues by approaching serialization from two angles: the typological and the language-specific. On the typological front, it refines the definition of ‘SVC’ and develops a principled set of cross-linguistically applicable diagnostics.
    [Show full text]
  • Antisymmetry Kayne, Richard (1995)
    CAS LX 523 Syntax II (1) A Spring 2001 March 13, 2001 qp Paul Hagstrom Week 7: Antisymmetry BE 33 Kayne, Richard (1995). The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CDFG 1111 Koopman, Hilda (2000). The spec-head configuration. In Koopman, H., The syntax of cdef specifiers and heads. London: Routledge. (2) A node α ASYMMETRICALLY C-COMMANDS β if α c-commands β and β does not The basic proposals: c-command α. X-bar structures (universally) have a strict order: Spec-head-complement. There is no distinction between adjuncts and specifiers. • B asymmetrically c-commands F and G. There can be only one specifier. • E asymmetrically c-commands C and D. • No other non-terminal nodes asymmetrically c-command any others. But wait!—What about SOV languages? What about multiple adjunction? Answer: We’ve been analyzing these things wrong. (3) d(X) is the image of a non-terminal node X. Now, we have lots of work to do, because lots of previous analyses relied on d(X) is the set of terminal nodes dominated by node X. the availability of “head-final” structures, or multiple adjunction. • d(C) is {c}. Why make our lives so difficult? Wasn’t our old system good enough? • d(B) is {c, d}. Actually, no. • d(F) is {e}. A number of things had to be stipulated in X-bar theory (which we will review); • d(E) is {e, f}. they can all be made to follow from one general principle. • d(A) is {c, d, e, f}. The availability of a head-parameter actually fails to predict the kinds of languages that actually exist.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Minimalism Minimalism Is the Name of the Predominant Approach In
    Minimalism Minimalism is the name of the predominant approach in generative linguistics today. It was first introduced by Chomsky in his work The Minimalist Program (1995) and has seen several developments and changes since. The central idea of minimalism is that a linguistic theory should contain as few non-derived assumptions as possible. Many notions that had been developed in earlier generative theory, specifically the Government & Binding theory (GB), have been abandoned, in an attempt to derive them from more basic concepts. In Chomsky's (1995) view, minimalism is an implementation of the more general Principles and Parameters model. According to this language model, the human language capacity consists of a set of universal principles combined with a set of parameters. The principles are thought to be innate, which means that every language adheres to them. The parameters can be thought of as switches that can be set in two positions. Learning the syntax of one's native language, according to Chomsky's view, is a matter of acquiring the correct parameter settings for the language. Chomsky describes syntax as a cognitive system that connects two other cognitive systems: the conceptual-intentional system and the articulatory-perceptual system. Because syntax is linked to these two systems, the syntactic model defines two interface levels, one for each of them: Phonological Form (PF) is the interface to the articulatory-perceptual system, and Logical Form (LF) is the interface to the conceptual-intentional system. The grammar model is built up as follows: a clause is derived by selecting a set of lexical items from the lexicon.
    [Show full text]
  • Serial Verb Constructions: Argument Structural Uniformity and Event Structural Diversity
    SERIAL VERB CONSTRUCTIONS: ARGUMENT STRUCTURAL UNIFORMITY AND EVENT STRUCTURAL DIVERSITY A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF LINGUISTICS AND THE COMMITTEE ON GRADUATE STUDIES OF STANFORD UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Melanie Owens November 2011 © 2011 by Melanie Rachel Owens. All Rights Reserved. Re-distributed by Stanford University under license with the author. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- Noncommercial 3.0 United States License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/us/ This dissertation is online at: http://purl.stanford.edu/db406jt2949 ii I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Beth Levin, Primary Adviser I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Joan Bresnan I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Vera Gribanov Approved for the Stanford University Committee on Graduate Studies. Patricia J. Gumport, Vice Provost Graduate Education This signature page was generated electronically upon submission of this dissertation in electronic format. An original signed hard copy of the signature page is on file in University Archives. iii Abstract Serial Verb Constructions (SVCs) are constructions which contain two or more verbs yet behave in every grammatical respect as if they contain only one.
    [Show full text]
  • The Asymmetry and Antisymmetry of Syntax¹ a Relational Approach to Displacement
    The Asymmetry and Antisymmetry of Syntax¹ A Relational Approach to Displacement Justin Malčić 2019 Part IIB Dissertation Linguistics Tripos University of Cambridge 9,963 words ¹Special thanks go to Theresa Biberauer for her invaluable comments and support while supervising this dissertation. Any remaining errors are my own. Abstract In both syntax and phonology, it has long been observed that significant restrictions exist on displacement. One such restriction ensures that displacement leads to sequences of elements which are in some sense contiguous, formalised in syntax in the concept of Feature Geometry-based Relativised Minimality by Starke (2001) and Contiguous Agree by Nevins (2007), and in Autosegmental Phonology by the Line-Crossing Prohibition (originating in the Well-formedness Condition in Goldsmith 1976). I argue that effects of this type, which have been called Contiguity Effects, are best captured by taking displacement to involve total weak orders of elements in the sense of Order Theory. Building on work taking the LCA to hold throughout the derivation, I argue that precedence relations may be the basis of phrase structure, though without claiming that linearisation is necessary for LF (as for example suggested in Kayne 2013). I then develop this approach to show that Order Theory provides useful axioms for both phrase structure and displacement, and that the existence of displacement is expected given the use of Order Theory. 2 The extent of ‘antisymmetry’ in syntax has been a major issue for phrase structure theories ever since Kayne’s (1994) original proposal for the Linear Correspondence Axiom. The requirement for antisymmetry in linearisation seems to follow from the nature of the phonological component, which seems to show a different kind of recursion to that displayed in syntax.
    [Show full text]
  • Movement in Minimalism, Class 2: Linearization and the Problem of Copies July 11, LSA Summer Institute 2017
    Movement in Minimalism, Class 2: Linearization and the problem of copies July 11, LSA Summer Institute 2017 This class: . We discuss Nunes’s (1995, 2004) proposal that copy deletion derives from the demands of the linearization algorithm at PF . We look at cases for which a copy theory has an advantage over a trace theory, involving multiple spell-out in predicate clefting/V-fronting constructions as well as wh-copying . We examine exceptional cases of copy spell-out, including deletion of the highest copy and scattered deletion 1 Two approaches to copy deletion As we discussed last week, Merge provides us with a single structure-building mechanism. Merge can create long-distance dependencies as long as we adopt the Copy Theory of Movement: (1) Which book did you read which book? CP DP C’ which book did TP you T’ did VP read which book However, getting rid of traces in this way means that we need to posit a rule of copy deletion. But where does copy deletion come from? 1.1 Three sources of wellformedness constraints In the Minimalist Program, constraints on wellformedness have only three possible sources: 1. Constraints on the PF interface 2. Constraints on the LF interface 3. Natural principles of computation, often referred to as “economy constraints” =) Copy deletion too should derive from one of these sources. 1 Two of these options have been explored in previous work, and we will discuss them this week: 1. Copy deletion as a result of linearization at PF (Nunes 1995, 2004; cf. Fox and Pesetsky 2005; Johnson 2012): .
    [Show full text]
  • The Place of Linear Order in the Language Faculty Richard S
    The Place of Linear Order in the Language Faculty Richard S. Kayne New York University University of Venice January 16, 2018 1. Introduction. In support of their claim that “order is only established in the morphophonological component”, Chomsky et al. (2017) (henceforth CGO) argue that “no syntactic operation can make reference to it”, i.e. to linear order. I return to this argument below, after addressing another argument that they put forth, related to the fact that “Languages differ in how they ultimately linearize objects constructed by MERGE”, combined with the fact, illustrated by Japanese OV vs. English VO, that “Interpretation is not affected by this difference” in word order. If Kayne’s (1994) antisymmetry proposal is correct in its essence, then the question of the possible effect of order needs to be recast, insofar as there can be no order difference, given antisymmetry, that is not accompanied by a difference in hierarchical structure. Japanese OV and English VO must differ in more than just order; the O in Japanese OV must asymetrically c-command V, whereas in English that cannot be the case. Thus if there is no difference in interpretation, it must be the case that not only does the OV/VO order difference itself have no interpretive effect, but also that the hierarchical difference between Japanese OV and English VO has no interpretive effect. From an antisymmetric perspective, this last point is closely related to another question, alluded to by CGO (cf. Cinque (2018)), namely the question of “semantically vacuous scrambling”, where there is by assumption a hierarchical difference between the ‘scrambled’ and ‘non-scrambled’ structures, yet no apparent interpretive difference.
    [Show full text]
  • UC Berkeley Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society
    UC Berkeley Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society Title Weak Crossover and the Syntax-Phonology Interface Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/51f5h9t3 Journal Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 40(40) ISSN 2377-1666 Author Agüero Bautista, Calixto Publication Date 2014 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California PROCEEDINGS OF THE FORTIETH ANNUAL MEETING OF THE BERKELEY LINGUISTICS SOCIETY February 7-9, 2014 General Session Special Session Approaches to the Syntax-Phonology Interface Parasessions Semantic Theory in Underdescribed Languages Language, Inequality, and Globalization Editors Herman Leung Zachary O'Hagan Sarah Bakst Auburn Lutzross Jonathan Manker Nicholas Rolle Katie Sardinha Berkeley Linguistics Society Berkeley, CA, USA Berkeley Linguistics Society University of California, Berkeley Department of Linguistics 1203 Dwinelle Hall Berkeley, CA 94720-2650 USA All papers copyright c 2014 by the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Inc. All rights reserved. ISSN: 0363-2946 LCCN: 76-640143 Contents Acknowledgments v Foreword vii Weak Crossover and the Syntax-Phonology Interface Calixto Ag¨ueroBautista . 1 Irrealis as verbal non-specificity in Koro (Oceanic) Jessica Cleary-Kemp . 20 Subjectification in the Development of Clitic Doubling: A Diachronic Study of Romanian and Spanish Oana A. David . 42 Reportativity, (not-)at-issueness, and assertion Martina Faller . 62 When Phonology Undergenerates: Evidence from Asturian Enclitic Structures Francisco J. Fern´andez-Rubiera. 85 Contour Tones and Prosodic Structure in Med0mba Kathryn H. Franich . 102 Asymmetric Correlations between English Verb Transitivity and Stress Michelle A. Fullwood . 125 Micro-Variation within Bizkaiera Basque: Evidence from RCs Ager Gondra .
    [Show full text]
  • The Antisymmetry of Syntax
    Contents Series Foreword xi Preface xiii Acknowledgments xvii Chapter 1 Introduction 3 1.1 Introduction 3 1.2 Proposal 5 Chapter 2 Deriving XBar lhory 7 PART 11 13 Chapter 3 Adjunction 15 3.1 Segments and Categories 15 3.2 Adjunction to a Head 17 3.3 Multiple Adjunctions: Clitics 19 3.4 Multiple Adjunctions: Nonheads 21 3.5 Specifiers 22 ... Vlll Contents Contents 3.6 Verb-Second Effects 27 Chapter 6 3.7 Adjunction of a Head to a Nonhead 30 Coordination 57 6.1 More on Coordination 57 Chapter 4 6.2 Coordination of Heads, Wordorder 33 4.1 The specifier-complement including Clitics 59 Asymmetry 33 6.3 Coordination with With 63 4.2 Specifier-Head-Complement as a Universal Order 35 6.4 Right Node Raising 67 4.3 Time and the Universal Chapter 7 -- Specifier-Head-Complement Order Complementation 69 7.1 Multiple Complements and 36 Adjuncts 69 4.4. Linear Order and Adjunction to 7.2 Heavy NP Shift 71 Heads 38 7.3 Right-Dislocations 78 4.5 Linear Order and Structure below the Word Level 38 Relatives and Posseshes 85 8.1 Postnominal Possessives in 4.6 The Adjunction Site of Clitics English 85 42 8.2 Relative Clauses in English 86 Chapter 5 Fortherconsequences 47 5.1 There Is No Directionality 8.3 N-Final Relative Clauses 92 Parameter 47 8.4 Reduced Relatives and 5.2 The LCA Applies to All Syntactic Representations 48 Adjectives 97 8.5 More on Possessives 101 I 5.3 Agreement in Adpositional Phrases 49 1 8.6 More on French De 105 b 5.4 Head Movement 50 8.7 Nonrestrictive Relatives 1 10 5.5 Final Complementizers and Agglutination 52 ..
    [Show full text]
  • 1 a Microparametric Approach to the Head-Initial/Head-Final Parameter
    A microparametric approach to the head-initial/head-final parameter Guglielmo Cinque Ca’ Foscari University, Venice Abstract: The fact that even the most rigid head-final and head-initial languages show inconsistencies and, more crucially, that the very languages which come closest to the ideal types (the “rigid” SOV and the VOS languages) are apparently a minority among the languages of the world, makes it plausible to explore the possibility of a microparametric approach for what is often taken to be one of the prototypical examples of macroparameter, the ‘head-initial/head-final parameter’. From this perspective, the features responsible for the different types of movement of the constituents of the unique structure of Merge from which all canonical orders derive are determined by lexical specifications of different generality: from those present on a single lexical item, to those present on lexical items belonging to a specific subclass of a certain category, or to every subclass of a certain category, or to every subclass of two or more, or all, categories, (always) with certain exceptions.1 Keywords: word order, parameters, micro-parameters, head-initial, head-final 1. Introduction. An influential conjecture concerning parameters, subsequent to the macro- parametric approach of Government and Binding theory (Chomsky 1981,6ff and passim), is that they can possibly be “restricted to formal features [of functional categories] with no interpretation at the interface” (Chomsky 1995,6) (also see Borer 1984 and Fukui 1986). This conjecture has opened the way to a microparametric approach to differences among languages, as well as to differences between related words within one and the same language (Kayne 2005,§1.2).
    [Show full text]
  • Antisymmetry and Final Particles in a Formosan VOS Language Holmer
    Seediq – antisymmetry and final particles in a Formosan VOS language Holmer, Arthur Published in: Verb First. On the syntax of verb-initial languages 2005 Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Holmer, A. (2005). Seediq – antisymmetry and final particles in a Formosan VOS language. In A. Carnie, H. Harley, & S. A. Dooley (Eds.), Verb First. On the syntax of verb-initial languages John Benjamins Publishing Company. Total number of authors: 1 General rights Unless other specific re-use rights are stated the following general rights apply: Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Read more about Creative commons licenses: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. LUND UNIVERSITY PO Box 117 221 00 Lund +46 46-222 00 00 Seediq – antisymmetry and final particles in a Formosan VOS language* Arthur Holmer, Lund University 1. Background Until the advent of Kayne’s (1994) Antisymmetry hypothesis, word order patterns such as SOV and VOS were generally seen as the result of a trivial linear ordering of X° and its complement, or X' and its Specifier.
    [Show full text]