The Minimalist Program (MP) in a page: review

Features drive syntax; they can be binary or multi-valued. Feature specifications are a huge part of syntax (and hence of our course). The MP focuses largely on uninterpretable features, though phi- features (which are largely interpretable), are important too (e.g. for agreement). Lexical categories, case, inflectional morphology, and subcategorization information all relate to features.

The X’ schema is largely followed, but not religiously (cf. bare phrase structure, which we’ll study later). First and Second Merge are the cornerstone of structure. MP tries to describe why, not just how, these Merge operators take place. Binary branching is preferred by most.

We will do a little semantics, too, and so predicates (and their meaning) are salient for us. Predicates have arity (adicity) that reflects their arguments and adjuncts. Logic and linguistics both use predicate expressions extensively.

Arguments receive theta roles, another area of interaction between syntax and semantics. UTAH is important.

The MP calls the featural requirements for subcategorization “c(ategorial)-selection”, and semantic restrictions “s(emantic)-selection”. Uninterpretable c-selection features must be satisfied (via checking, usually under sisterhood), and once checked they can delete. The feature Full Interpretation requires that all uninterpretable features must be deleted before the interface with semantics. (Remember, semantics is interpreted from prior syntax).

The Extension Condition says you can only build a tree up from its root.

If a feature can’t be checked where it is, it may percolate up to its mother node.

Adjunction is allowed to happen at all phrasal levels.

C-command can account for many syntactic phenomena crosslinguistically: binding pronouns, defining negative polarity environments, feature checking for agreement, etc.

Ditransitives (including double object constructions) are problematic for binary X’. So are causatives, light verbs, etc. To accommodate them a new layer is added to the VP: v and its projections, aka the VP- shell).

Intransitives can be split into unergatives and unaccusatives. There’s a lot of crosslinguistic evidence for this (e.g. ne-cliticization in Italian, French aux verb selection, etc.).

Functional projections are X’ structures for function words (e.g. aux verbs, determiners) or non-lexical properties. X’ projections can be described hierarchically. Adger’s clausal hierarchy of projections for English is: (C) >I > (Neg) > (Perf) > (Prog) > (Pass) > v > V.

Features can be either strong or weak. Strong features trigger movement. For example, modal verbs in I move to C for a yes-no question (YNQ) with do-support when necessary; the topmost aux verb moves to I, and some verbs (e.g. copulars) move to T. Other languages behave differently if relevant features aren’t strong.

Agreement is done via checking and valuing features via c-command.

Movements can be categorized several ways; two that are salient for us is what moves (head vs. phrasal) and where things move to (A vs. A-bar). Chains are sometimes relevant. So are restrictions on how far something can move (at once), e.g. subjacency.

Derivations that aren’t successful before Spellout (the interface between syntax and PF and LF) crash.

Subjects start in spec-v and then move to spec-IP (in languages with strong EPP). So does the unaccusative argument, the passive internal argument,

NP is better expressed as DP, including a n shell. Many associated features include umass, uproper, gen, etc. Quantifier float, theta-assigning nominals, and genitive/possessive constructions are of interest. Plus classifiers in other languages.

The C complex is for complementizers, and the uC and uclause-type features help determine clausal structure and function.

Untensed complements are interesting from a syntactic and semantic point of view. PRO is introduced when a theta role has no constituent to absorb it. Subject control and object control result. ECM explains why subjects that do exist in this environment are accusative-marked. The highest argument of untensed raising predicates move to spec-TP.

Some languages have V2, which can be accounted for via feature strength differences crosslinguistically. wh- questions are interesting. Usually the highest wh- item moves to spec-CP (plus I-to-C). Subjacency limits how far it can move in one step (thus defining cyclicity). Various effects (complementizer agreement, superiority, wh- islands, etc.) show this. wh- elements and quantifiers interact in interesting ways. In some languages wh- elements move before Spellout, but in some languages they move afterwards (at LF).