The Linear Limitations of Syntactic Derivations
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Linear Limitations of Syntactic Derivations by Colin Pierce Bryon Davis B.A., Linguistics, University of Minnesota, 2014 Submitted to the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY September 2020 © Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2020. All rights reserved. Author.................................................. Department of Linguistics and Philosophy September 8, 2020 Certified by . Danny Fox Anshen-Chomsky Professor of Language & Thought Thesis Supervisor Certified by . Sabine Iatridou Professor of Linguistics Thesis Supervisor Certified by . David Pesetsky Ferrari P. Ward Professor of Modern Languages and Linguistics Thesis Supervisor Accepted by . Kai von Fintel Andrew W. Mellon Professor of Linguistics Linguistics Section Head blank 2 The Linear Limitations of Syntactic Derivations by Colin Pierce Bryon Davis Submitted to the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy on September 8, 2020, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Abstract In this dissertation, I identify and analyze several new generalizations about how phrasal displacement and discontinuity are constrained in natural language. These patterns reveal, I argue, that many limitations of syntactic derivations are attributable to the way in which syntactic operations are cyclically interleaved with the compo- nent of the grammar that establishes word order. This finding has consequences for many phenomena, and for the architecture of grammar in general. Chapter 1 introduces the theory of cyclic linearization that serves as the foun- dation for this work, and several principles about the locality of movement that importantly interact with it. Chapter 2 shows that these concepts predict the cross- linguistic distribution of stranding in intermediate positions. Chapter 3 extends these considerations to an analysis of possessor extraction in colloquial English, a phenomenon subject to numerous intricate but systematic limitations. Chapter 4 provides further evidence for the theory advanced here from constraints on sub- extraction in Russian. Chapter 5 argues that certain facts about parasitic gaps in sentences with overlapping moved phrases reveal further evidence that lineariza- tion constrains syntactic derivations, with consequences for the nature of movement more generally. Chapter 6 argues that linear order constrains extraposition, and pro- poses an account of this phenomenon that addresses a number of puzzles about its distribution. Chapter 7 diverges from the theme of linearization to explore parasitic gaps in relative clauses, which connect to several results from chapter 5. Chapter 8 summarizes the findings of this dissertation, and discusses several more general implications of the framework advanced here. Thesis Supervisor: Danny Fox Title: Anshen-Chomsky Professor of Language & Thought Thesis Supervisor: Sabine Iatridou Title: Professor of Linguistics Thesis Supervisor: David Pesetsky Title: Ferrari P. Ward Professor of Modern Languages and Linguistics 3 blank 4 Acknowledgments Looking back over these last 5 years, I realize that I took the first step on the path of research that would lead to this dissertation, and many related endeavors, on a certain unremarkable night in the fall of 2016. Since then I have often felt overwhelmed and under-slept, but I can see that pushing myself to my limits during this time has made me stronger and more capable than I would have otherwise been. Dedicating so many years to the intense study of this rather specific field of science has turned out to be a good decision, in no small part due to the intensity of the people in the linguistics department at MIT. For positively affecting the work in this dissertation in one way or another, I thank Adam Albright, Andrei Antonenko, Itai Bassi, Jonathan Bobaljik, Tanya Bondarenko, Željko Bošković, Kenyon Branan, Noam Chomsky, Justin Colley, Stephen Crain, Patrick Elliott, Michael Yoshitaka Erlewine, Suzana Fong, Naomi Francis, Martin Hackl, Heidi Harley, Laura Kalin, Roni Katzir, Heejeong Ko, Filipe Kobayashi, Loes Koring, Anton Kukhto, Nick Longenbaugh, Travis Major, Mar- tina Martinović, Dana McDaniel, Andrew McInnerney, Michelle Sheehan, Shigeru Miyagawa, Takashi Morita, Mitya Privoznov, Phillip Shushurin, Juliet Stanton, Donca Steriade, Abdul-Razak Sulemana, Shoichi Takahashi, Gary Thoms, Hen- rik Torgersen, Harold Torrence, Coppe van Urk, Bartosz Wiland, Michelle Yuan, Stanislao Zompì, and Erik Zyman. Chapters 2 and 3 of this dissertation are enriched versions of material respectively published in Glossa and Linguistic Inquiry, so it’s only proper that I express thanks for the feedback I received from those journals. Similarly, reviewers for and audiences at the following conferences have all affected this research: the Linguistic Society of America’s 92nd, 93rd and 94th annual meet- ings, West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics 36 and 38, Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 27 and 28, Workshop on Altaic Formal Linguistics 14, North East Linguistics Society 49 and 50 (and shortly 51 also), and Chicago Linguistic Society 55. Andrei Antonenko and Tanya Bondarenko deserve additional credit, since collaborative work with them on Russian serves as the basis for chapter 4. For fun times, I thank Andrei Antonenko, Ömer Demirok, Itai Bassi, Tanya Bondarenko, Christopher Baron, Isa Bayırlı, Kenyon Branan, Justin Colley, Patrick Elliott, Enrico Flor, Boer Fu, Yadav Gowda, Peter Grishin, Filipe Hisao Kobayashi, Anton Kukhto, Katya Morgunova, Sophie Moracchini, Roger Paul, Mitya Privoznov, Erin Olson, Vincent Rouillard, Leo Rosenstein, Phillip Shushurin, Juliet Stanton, Yasu Sudo, Henrik Torgersen, Adina Williams, Gregor Williams, Michelle Yuan, Stanislao Zompì, and Hanzhi Zhu. There are many stories I could tell about the non-academic drama and mischief that has occurred during these 5 years. However, in order to maintain the privacy and dignity of those involved, I will leave that to the reader’s imagination. 5 Now for some miscellaneous thanks. I thank the MIT linguistics department for their exceptional support during the bizarre circumstances of 2020, even though I fortunately did not have to take full advantage of it. I thank the department staff (Mary, Matt, Leo, Jen, Aggie, Chris, Christie, in no particular order) for being friendly and dependable. I thank my undergraduate advisor Claire Halpert for warning me that graduate school is a thorny path, and I thank myself for taking that path anyway. I thank Roger Paul for his superhuman effort to introduce a certain scruffy group of linguists to the Passamaquoddy community, though time constraints have prevented any Passamaquoddy from making it into this dissertation. I also thank whiskey, primarily Scotch, secondarily bourbon. Finally, I thank Tanya once more, for reasons she already knows. I apologize to my cohort-mates (Rafael Abramovitz, Itai Bassi, Justin Colley, Suzana Fong, Verena Hehl, Maša Močnik, and Mitya Privoznov) for being the loudest one in the office and for having sticky hands, to my parents and various friends for often being a reclusive workaholic, and to anybody whose name I forgot to mention above but should have. These acknowledgments would not be complete without thanking, in traditional alphabetical order, my main advisors at MIT: Danny Fox, Sabine Iatridou, David Pesetsky, and Norvin Richards. I have learned different things from each of them. Danny has a special ability to cut right to the heart of any issue, and from him I have gained a much deeper appreciation for the value and power of good theorizing. Sabine has helped me to remain grounded, methodical, and coherent, as well as to navigate the tumult of PhD student life and the process of turning into a grown- up linguist. David has taught me to have the courage to push the boundaries of what we think we know, to flip puzzles around until their weak point is exposed, as well as numerous nuggets of wisdom about writing, presenting, and being an academic in general. Norvin has helped me to develop as a fieldwork researcher, to be analytically agile, and to draw connections between disparate cross-linguistic facts. I am grateful to have been able to learn from and with these people over these last few years. I can tell that they’ve done something right, since despite the fact that I wish it weren’t time to leave MIT, I can tell that I’m ready to move on. 6 Table of Contents 1 The framework 15 1 Introduction.............................. 15 1.1 Content of this chapter.................... 16 2 Cyclic spell-out and phase theory................... 16 3 Cyclic linearization and order preservation.............. 20 3.1 Successive-cyclicity and Cyclic Linearization........ 22 3.2 Beyond successive-cyclicity................. 25 4 Locality constraints on movement.................. 27 5 Chapter previews........................... 29 5.1 Chapter 2: Crossing and stranding at edges......... 29 5.2 Chapter 3: Possessor extraction in English.......... 31 5.3 Chapter 4: Limiting discontinuity in Russian........ 33 5.4 Chapter 5: Overlapping paths and parasitic gaps...... 35 5.5 Chapter 6: Ordering extraposition.............. 38 5.6 Chapter 7: A digression about parasitic gaps in relative clauses 40 5.7 Chapter 8: Final remarks................... 42 2 Crossing and stranding at edges 45 1 Introduction.............................. 45 1.1 Preview of results....................... 46 1.2 Chapter contents......................