DOCSLIB.ORG

Movement in Minimalism, Class 6: Diagnosing A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Movement in Minimalism, Class 6: Diagnosing A Movement in Minimalism, Class 6: 2.1 Intervening DPs ¯ Diagnosing A- and A-movement . A-movement¯ can always cross intervening DPs. July 25, LSA Summer Institute 2017 (1) A-movement¯ crosses DPs: a. Who did you talk to ? b. the man [that Jess said [Kim talked to ]] 1 The problem of the A/A-distinction¯ . A-movement often cannot cross an intervening DP. In the minimalist view, all structure-building is achieved by Merge. (2) A-movement doesn’t cross DPs: = All else being equal, all movement should make use of the same mecha- nisms) , and be subject to the same constraints. a. It seems [Jess has seen Kim]. b. *Kim seems [Jess to have seen ]. c. I showed Sam a book. Problem: There are many different types of movement! d. *A book was shown Sam . (except in some British English varieties!) . Wh-movement . extraposition . topicalization . Heavy NP shift A well-known point of variation: . relativization . particle shift English allows raising across experiencers: . passivization . scrambling . raising . ... (3) Raising across experiencers: a. Jess seems to Kim [ to be smart]. A particularly clear instance of this problem arises with the A/A-distinction¯ , or b. Jess struck Kim [as clever]. the observation that there are two classes of movements that show a consistent set of correlated properties, which goes back at least to Postal (1971). But other languages don’t: . A-movement: passivization, raising, A-scrambling (4) Raising across experiencers is blocked in Italian: . A-movement:¯ wh-movement, relativization, topicalization, A-scrambling¯ a. Sembra a Maria che Gianni è stanco. seems to Maria that Gianni is tired ‘It seems to Maria that Gianni is tired.’ Focus today: What properties correlate with the A/A-distinction?¯ b. Gianni sembra (*a Maria) [ essere stanco]. Gianni seems to Maria to.be tired ‘Gianni seems (to Maria) to be tired.’ (Rizzi 1986) 2 Locality One of the most striking difference between A- and A-movement¯ is their local- 2.2 Escaping DPs ity signature: . A-movement¯ can escape a DP. A-movement¯ can cross or escape a DP, but A-movement cannot (most of (5) A-movement¯ out of a DP: the time) a. Who did you see [DP a picture of ]? . A-movement¯ can escape finite clauses, but A-movement cannot (most of b. What did you observe [DP the destruction of ]? the time) 1 . A-movement cannot escape a DP. (10) Raising only out of a finite clause in Zulu: a. ku-bonakala [CP ukuthi iqhina i-zo-phuma embizeni]. (6) A-movement is banned out of a DP: 17s-seem that 5steinbok 5s-fut-exit 3cooking.pot ‘It seems that the secret will come out.’ a. *Sam was seen [ a picture of ]. DP b. iqhina li-bonakala [ ukuthi i-zo-phuma b. *The city was observed [ the destruction of ]. CP DP 5steinbok 5s-seem that 5s-fut-exit embizeni]. Again, languages vary in this regard. In a number of languages, like Nez 3cooking.pot Perce, possessor raising is available: ‘It seems that the secret will come out.’ (lit. ‘It seems that the steinbok will leave the cooking pot.’) (7) Possessor raising in Nez Perce: c.* iqhina li-bonakala [ uku-phuma embizeni]. 5 5s inf 3 a. Angel-nim Tatlo-na paa-‘yaxna’ny-aˆ [ taaqmaal]. steinbok -seem -exit cooking.pot Angel-erg Tatlo-obj 3/3-find-rem.past hat.nom ‘It seems that the secret will come out.’ ‘Angel found Tatlo’s hat.’ (lit. ‘It seems that the steinbok will leave the cooking pot.’) b. ’ew-’niiyey’-se Angel-ne [ pike] taaqmaal. (Halpert 2015:6) 3obj-give-imperf Angel-obj mother.nom hat.nom ‘I’m giving Angel’s mother a hat.’ *I’m giving the mother Angel’s hat.’ 2.4 Improper movement (Deal 2013:399,403) The ban on A-movement out a finite clause has often been linked to an or- dering asymmetry between A- and A-movement.¯ A-movement¯ can follow A-movement, but A-movement cannot follow A-movement:¯ 2.3 Escaping clauses (11) a. Who was hugged? . A-movement¯ can escape a finite clause. b. Who seems [ is smart]? One of the famous properties of A-movement¯ in that it can escape all types (12) Ban on improper movement: ¯ of clauses in many languages: A-movement cannot follow A-movement. (8) A-movement¯ out of a clause: a. Who did Jess say [that Kim saw ]? 3 What phrases move b. Who does it seem [ is smart]? . A-movement¯ is not restricted in category and permits pied-piping . A-movement (often) cannot escape a finite clause. A-movement is mainly limited to DPs and does not allow pied-piping In contrast, A-movement is often limited to non-finite clauses: 3.1 Restriction to nominals (9) A-movement only out of a non-finite clause in English: . A-movement¯ displays no categorial restriction. a. Jess seems [ to be smart]. b. *Jess seems [ is smart]. Like A-movement, A-movement¯ is possible with DP of all types: c. Jess was believed [ to be smart]. d. *Jess was believed [ is smart]. (13) A-movement¯ of simplex and complex DP: a. [Which student] did Jess see ? However, languages like Zulu do permit raising out of a finite clause: b. [Who] did Jess say [she saw ]? 2 Adjectives and adverbs also undergo A-movement¯ (in English just predica- b.[ DP The president] is Kim. tive adjectives, because of the ban on Left Branch Extraction): c.[ DP The president] seems [ to be Kim]. (14) A-movement¯ of adjectives and adverbs: Then we can see that A-movement of an adjective is banned as well: a.[ AdjP How proud of Sam] are you ? b.[ AdvP When] did Casey say [she was singing ]? (20) No A-movement of AdjP predicate: a. Jess is [AdjP proud of Lee]. A-movement¯ of PPs is also fine, both of arguments and adjuncts: b.[ AdjP Proud of Lee] is Jess. c.*[ AdjP Proud of Lee] seems [ to be Jess]. (15) A-movement¯ of PP: a.[ PP To whom] did you give the book ? A-movement of a PP is also generally banned: b.[ PP Under the table], Jess said [that Kim is sleeping ]. (21) No A-movement of PP: And you can front VPs and CPs as well (remember also the examples of a.*[ To Kim] seemed [ that it was raining]. VP/CP pied-piping from last week!): PP CP b.*[ PP Under the table] was slept. (16) A-movement¯ of VP and CP: However, there are cases of Locative Inversion, in which a PP occupies a.[ VP Criticize Lee] I never will . the subject position (22a–b). Further A-movement is also possible (22c–d): b.[ CP That Sasha is smart], Kim said [he wouldn’t admit ]. (22) Locative inversion: = Every category can in principle undergo A-movement.¯ 1 ) a.[ PP Down the hill] rolled a ball. b.[ PP To Kim] was given a book. A-movement is restricted to nominals. c.[ PP Down the hill] seemed [ to roll a ball]. A-movement can be distinguished from A-movement¯ in that it is generally d.[ PP To Kim] seemed [ to have been given a book]. restricted to nominals, like (17a–b). There is no A-movement of VP, for example in a passive: (17) A-movement of simplex and complex DP: (23) No A-movement of VP: a.[ DP The student] was spotted in the library. a.*[ Criticized Lee] will have . b.[ DP She] seems [ to be very smart]. VP b.*[ VP Slept] will have been . A-movement of adverbs is impossible: Complement clauses appear to be able to participate in A-movement: (18) No A-movement of adverbs: (24) Passive and raising of CP: a.*[ AdjP Loudly] was screamed . b.*[ AdvP Clearly] seemed [that it was raining]. a.[ CP That Sasha is smart] seems [ to be true]. b.[ CP That the world is round] is widely believed . Only predicative adjectives allow A-movement,¯ so we have to look at environments in which predicates can A-move, like (19a–c): However, it has been questioned whether CPs really occupy argument positions, and not a dummy pronoun (e.g. Koster 1978; Alrenga 2005): (19) A-movement of DP predicate: a. Kim is [DP the president]. (25) CPs don’t occupy an argument positions: a. *I believed [ that the world is round] [ to be true]. 1Although there may be locality restrictions that prevent certain constituents from ever moving CP (see, for example, Abels 2003 on TP fronting). b. *Is [CP that the world is round] true? 3 (See Claire’s class for much more!) = A-movement is categorically restricted, and only generally produc- I’ll argue for the following picture: tive) with nominals. A-movement¯ does not establish new binding relations, but permits corefer- ence (see also Ruys 2004; Safir 2015) 3.2 Pied-piping . A-movement can feed binding (except when it doesn’t) . A-movement¯ displays pied-piping. One of the distinctive properties of A-movement¯ is that a phrase undergo- 4.1 Strong and Weak Crossover ¯ ing A-movement can drag along material it is contained in. A-movement¯ shows crossover effects (Postal 1971; Wasow 1972), of at A-phrases¯ can pied-pipe prepositions, nouns, adjectives, and adverbs: least two types: Strong Crossover and Weak Crossover: (26) Pied-piping of various categories: (29) Strong Crossover: a.[ PP To [DP whom]] did you give a book ? a. Whoi believes shei is smart? b.[ DP [DP Whose] book] did Jess read ? b. *Whoi does shei believe [ is smart]? c.[ AdjP [How] proud of Jess] is Lee ? (30) Weak Crossover: d.[ AdvP [How] silently] did they chase each other ? a.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • University of California Santa Cruz Ungrammatical
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ UNGRAMMATICAL DOUBLE-ISLAND SLUICING AS A DIAGNOSTIC OF LEFT-BRANCH POSITIONING A thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS in LINGUISTICS by Sara Cantor June 2013 The Thesis of Sara Cantor is approved: Professor Jorge Hankamer, Chair Professor Sandy Chung Professor Pranav Anand Tyrus Miller Vice Provost and Dean of Graduate Studies Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 The Problem 3 3 The Facts 5 3.1 Islands that do not form a barrier to amelioration . 5 Complex Noun Phrase: Relative Clause . 6 Complex Noun Phrase: Noun with CP Complement . 8 CoordinateStructure . 10 Adjunct ............................ 12 3.2 Islands that do form a barrier to amelioration . 14 Subjects............................ 14 SententialSubjects . .. .. 16 Topicalization......................... 18 4 Background on Sluicing 19 4.1 MovementandDeletion ....................... 20 4.2 LF-CopyingandMerger ....................... 22 5 Proposal 23 5.1 Certain islands are barriers to island amelioration . 23 5.2 MovementorSpecifiers? ....................... 24 Movement to a Non-Specifier Position: Leftward Adjuncts 25 Movement to a Non-Specifier Position: Heavy NP Shift . 27 Base-Generated Specifiers: Small Clause Subjects . 30 Generalization about Amelioration Blocking . 32 5.3 NotaRecencyEffect ......................... 32 5.4 NotPropositionalvs.PFIslands . 33 6 Theoretical Implications 34 6.1 ImplicationsforCoordinateStructures . 34 6.2 Extraposition ............................. 36 7 Future Questions 40 7.1 Non-SluicingContexts ........................ 40 7.2 D-Linking ............................... 41 8 Conclusion 42 9 References 43 iii Abstract Ungrammatical Double-Island Sluicing as a Diagnostic of Left-Branch Positioning Sara Cantor Sluicing, as described by Ross (1969), Chung, Ladusaw, and McCloskey (1995), and Merchant (2001), ameliorates island violations. In this paper, I identify constructions in which sluicing does not ameliorate island viola- tions.
    [Show full text]
  • Malagasy Extraposition: Evidence for PF Movement
    Nat Lang Linguist Theory https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-021-09505-2 Malagasy extraposition Evidence for PF movement Eric Potsdam1 Received: 28 August 2018 / Accepted: 23 January 2021 © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. part of Springer Nature 2021 Abstract Extraposition is the non-canonical placement of dependents in a right- peripheral position in a clause. The Austronesian language Malagasy has basic VOXS word order, however, extraposition leads to VOSX. Extraposed constituents behave syntactically as though they were in their undisplaced position inside the predicate at both LF and Spell Out. This paper argues that extraposition is achieved via movement at Phonological Form (PF). I argue against alternatives that would derive extraposi- tion with syntactic A’ movement or stranding analyses. Within a Minimalist model of grammar, movement operations take place on the branch from Spell Out to PF and have only phonological consequences. Keywords Malagasy · Extraposition · Movement · Phonological Form · Word order 1 Introduction Extraposition—the non-canonical placement of certain constituents in a right- peripheral position—has been investigated in detail in only a small number of lan- guages. There is a considerable literature for English, SOV Germanic languages Ger- man and Dutch, and the SOV language Hindi-Urdu. The construction has not been widely explored in other, typologically distinct languages. This lacuna means that we have probably not seen the full range of options and have also not tested pro- posed analyses in the widest possible way. The goal of this paper is to investigate in some detail extraposition in Malagasy, an Austronesian language with basic VOXS word order spoken by approximately 17 million people on the island of Madagascar.
    [Show full text]
  • A Theory of Generalized Pied-Piping Sayaka Funakoshi, Doctor Of
    ABSTRACT Title of dissertation: A Theory of Generalized Pied-Piping Sayaka Funakoshi, Doctor of Philosophy, 2015 Dissertation directed by: Professor Howard Lasnik Department of Linguistics The purpose of this thesis is to construct a theory to derive how pied-piping of formal features of a moved element takes place, by which some syntactic phenomena related to φ-features can be accounted for. Ura (2001) proposes that pied-piping of formal-features of a moved element is constrained by an economy condition like relativized minimality. On the basis of Ura’s (2001) proposal, I propose that how far an element that undergoes movement can carry its formal features, especially focusing on φ-features in this thesis, is determined by two conditions, a locality condition on the generalized pied-piping and an anti-locality condition onmovement. Given the proposed analysis, some patterns of so-called wh-agreement found in Bantu languages can be explained and with the assumption that φ-features play an role for binding, presence or absence of WCO effects in various languages can be derived without recourse to A/A-distinctions.¯ ATHEORYOFGENERALIZEDPIED-PIPING by Sayaka Funakoshi Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, College Park in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2015 Advisory Committee: Professor Howard Lasnik, Chair/Advisor Professor Norbert Hornstein Professor Omer Preminger Professor Steven Ross Professor Juan Uriagereka c Copyright by ! Sayaka Funakoshi 2015 Acknowledgments First and foremost, I would like to thank my advisor Howard Lasnik for his patience, support and encouragement.
    [Show full text]
  • Subject Placement in the History of Latin
    Catalan Journal of Linguistics 16, 2017 125-161 Subject Placement in the History of Latin Lieven Danckaert CNRS/Université de Lille 3 [email protected] Received: May 2, 2017 Accepted: July 17, 2017 Abstract The aim of this paper is to provide further support for one aspect of the analysis of Classical and Late Latin clause structure proposed in Danckaert (2017a), namely the diachrony of subject place- ment. According to the relevant proposal, one needs to distinguish an earlier grammar (‘Grammar A’, whose heyday is the period from ca. 200 BC until 200 AD), in which there is no A-movement for subjects, and a later grammar (‘Grammar B’, which is on the rise from ca. 50-100 AD, and fully productive from ca. 200 AD onwards), where subjects optionally move to the inflectional layer. Assuming the variationist acquisition model of language change developed in Yang (2000, 2002a,b), I present corpus evidence which confirms that it is only in the Late Latin period that TP-internal subjects fully establish themselves as a grammatical option. Keywords: Latin; language change; word order; subject placement; grammar competition Resum. La posició del subjecte en la historia del llatí L’objectiu d’aquest article és proporcionar un suport addicional a un aspecte de l’anàlisi de l’estructura oracional del llatí clàssic i llatí tardà proposada a Danckaert (2017a), a saber, la dia- cronia de la posició del subjecte. D’acord amb la proposta rellevant, cal distingir una gramàtica anterior (‘Gramàtica A’, l’apogeu de la qual és aproximadament el període comprès entre el 200aC i el 200dC), en què no hi ha moviment-A per als subjectes, i una gramàtica posterior (‘Gramàtica B’, que sorgeix aproximadament el 50-100dC, i esdevé totalment productiva a partir del 200dC en endavant), on els subjectes es mouen opcionalment a la capa flexional.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Syntax of Multiple Sluicing and What It Tells Us About Wh Scope Taking
    On the syntax of multiple sluicing and what it tells us about wh scope taking Anonymous April 22, 2020 Abstract This paper takes as its starting point the observation that across many languages multiple sluicing obeys a clause-mate constraint. We suggest that this observation can be understood on the assumption that covert phrasal wh- movement is clause bound and subject to superiority. Both assumptions have substantial independent empirical support. With this analysis as background, the fact that the distribution of multiple sluicing is substantially narrower than that of multiple wh-questions, under both the single pair and the pair- list interpretation, then entails that there must be mechanisms for scoping in- situ wh-phrases that do not rely on covert phrasal wh-movement. While long distance single-pair readings are handled straightforwardly by existing theo- ries, we develop a novel approach to pair-list readings adopting a functional analysis for cases where phrasal wh-movement is ruled out, as in superiority violating configurations. The paper provides independent evidence for the idea that there is syntactic structure at the ellipsis site, that movement oper- ations within the ellipsis site are subject to locality constraints, that pair-list readings of multiple questions are rooted in functional readings and presents a new perspective on pair-list readings of questions with quantifiers. Keywords: syntax, locality, sluicing, ellipsis, multiple sluicing, syntax-seman- tics interface, wh-scope, covert movement, wh-in-situ, multiple wh-questions 1 Introduction This paper begins with the observation that multiple sluicing across many languages obeys a clause-mate condition: all remnants of multiple sluicing must originate in the 1 same clause.
    [Show full text]
  • Particle Topicalization and German Clause Structure
    Erschienen in: The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics ; 19 (2016), 2. - S. 109-141 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10828-016-9080-y Particle topicalization and German clause structure Andreas Trotzke1 • Stefano Quaglia2 Abstract In this paper, we provide a comprehensive account of the phenomenon of topicalizing verb particles in German. Based on the data we discuss, we argue that only a version of the Split-CP hypothesis for the German clause can account for the observations. Section 1 critiques previous accounts of particle topicalization and discusses some properties of particles that are potentially relevant to topicalization. We conclude that a particle’s ability to be topicalized depends more on its ability to be contrasted with other particles than on the semantic autonomy of the particle per se. Section 2 discusses unexpected cases of non-contrastable particles in the left periphery. In this context, we introduce a previously unnoticed phenomenon in which particle verbs denoting strongly emotionally evaluated situations allow their particles to be topicalized, even if the particle does not receive a contrastive interpretation. In Sect. 3, we show that an elaborated syntax of the German left periphery of the kind argued for in cartographic approaches is uniquely able to predict the distribution of topicalized particles. Keywords Contrast Á Emphasis Á Expressive content Á Left periphery Á Particle verbs Á Topicalization & Andreas Trotzke [email protected] Stefano Quaglia stefano.quaglia@uni konstanz.de 1 Center for the Study
    [Show full text]
  • Why Germanic VP-Topicalization Does Not Induce Verb Doubling
    Why Germanic VP-topicalization does not induce verb doubling Johannes Hein [email protected] University of Potsdam CGSW 32 Trondheim, 13–15 September 2017 Partly funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinscha (DFG), Collaborative Research Centre SFB 1287, Project C05. J. Hein Germanic VP-topicalization lacks verb doubling 13–15 Sep 2017 1 / 60 Proposal Proposal I argue that the absence of verb doubling with verb phrase topicalization in Germanic languages despite them having V-to-T(-to-C) movement is a consequence of the language-specific ordering of the two operations copy deletion (CD, Nunes 2004; Trinh 2011) and head movement (HM, Chomsky 1995; Platzack 2013) both of which take place post-syntactically. While verb doubling languages like Hebrew, Spanish, or Polish order head movement before copy deletion which allows the verb to escape the lower VP copy, CD applies before HM in Germanic languages deleting the lower VP copy thereby bleeding verb movement. J. Hein Germanic VP-topicalization lacks verb doubling 13–15 Sep 2017 2 / 60 Introduction In a number of languages it is possible to displace the verb phrase into the le periphery of the clause. Usually, this displacement is associated with a topic or focus interpretation and some kind of contrast. Examples from Polish (1-a), Hebrew (1-b), German (1-c), and Norwegian (1-d) are given below. (1) a. [VP wypić herbatę] (to) Marek chce , ale nie chce jej robić drink.inf tea to Marek wants but not wants it make ‘As for drinking tea, Marek wants to drink it, but he doesn’t want to make it.’ (Polish, Joanna Zaleska p.c.) b.
    [Show full text]
  • HISTORICAL SYNTAX from Obligatory WH-Movement to Optional WH-In-Situ in Labourdin Basque MAIA DUGUINE ARITZ IRURTZUN University
    HISTORICAL SYNTAX From obligatory WH -movement to optional WH -in-situ in Labourdin Basque Maia Duguine Aritz Irurtzun University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU CNRS-IKER In this article, we analyze the nature and origin of a new wh -question strategy employed by young speakers of Labourdin Basque. We argue that this new strategy implies a parametric change: while Basque has always been a bona fide wh -movement language, these new construc - tions are instances of wh -in-situ and display the syntactic and semantic properties and patterns of in-situ wh -questions in French. We analyze the emergence of this new strategy as being due to the combination of three factors: (i) the abundance of structurally ambiguous wh -questions in the pri - mary linguistic data, (ii) the change in the sociolinguistic profile of bilingual Basque-French speakers, and (iii) an economy bias for movementless derivations. Keywords : wh -movement, wh -in-situ, parameters, change, language contact, economy, Basque 1. Introduction: the wh-question strategy in standard basque . The Basque language is spoken on both sides of the Franco-Spanish border and is in a diglossic sit - uation with respect to both French and Spanish (see Moseley 2010, Eusko Jaurlaritza 2013, inter alia). In terms of grammar, it is a head-final language. The ‘neutral’ word order of constituents (the word order of an out-of-the-blue sentence) is subject-indirect object-direct object-verb (S-IO-DO-V) (see e.g. Laka 1993 , Elordieta 2001). Regard- ing interrogatives, wh -questions in Basque are generally analyzed as involving wh - movement, followed by movement of the verb, which results in a strict adjacency between the wh -phrase and the verbal complex.
    [Show full text]
  • Pied-Piping in Wh-Questions
    Pied-piping in wh-questions: What do children say about it? Natalia Pavlou In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts by research University of York Department of Language and Linguistic Science September 2011 To my mother An everyday hero ii Abstract Errors/non-target responses characterizing sub-extraction of a wh-phrase from complex DPs in child speech are found in first language acquisition studies (van Kampen 1997 among others) and have provided the basis for arguing the complexity of question formation involving pied-piping. In this dissertation, data were drawn from 81 children, aged 3;0-6;0, participating in two experiments, with one eliciting a D-linked question in complex phrases such as inda milo ‘which apple’ in Cypriot Greek. The results validated previous literature on sub-extraction phenomena and have provided the first observation for such cases in the specific variety. Errors were characterized by movement of the operator and stranding of the noun in which+NP structures, such as ‘which apple’. Another error involved movement of the operator and pied-piping of a noun, but stranding of the second noun in wh+NP+NP structures, such as ti xroma tsenda (lit., ‘which color bag’). Results from the production experiment show that children show high percentages of omission of the NP in D-linked questions (up to 50%) in all age groups. Their responses involve stranding of the NP (7%-17%), which does not seem to fade out even in the oldest age group. These errors appear across ages when children produce a wh-question with the wh-phrase ti ‘which’.
    [Show full text]
  • A Minimalist Analysis of English Topicalization: a Phase-Based Cartographic Complementizer Phrase (CP) Perspective
    J UOEH 38（ 4 ）: 279－289（2016） 279 ［Original］ A Minimalist Analysis of English Topicalization: A Phase-Based Cartographic Complementizer Phrase (CP) Perspective Hiroyoshi Tanaka* Department of English, School of Medicine, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Japan. Yahata- nishi-ku, Kitakyushu 807-8555, Japan Abstract : Under the basic tenet that syntactic derivation offers an optimal solution to both phonological realization and semantic interpretation of linguistic expression, the recent minimalist framework of syntactic theory claims that the basic unit for the derivation is equivalent to a syntactic propositional element, which is called a phase. In this analysis, syntactic derivation is assumed to proceed at phasal projections that include Complementizer Phrases (CP). However, there have been pointed out some empirical problems with respect to the failure of multiple occurrences of discourse-related elements in the CP domain. This problem can be easily overcome if the alternative approach in the recent minimalist perspective, which is called Cartographic CP analysis, is adopted, but this may raise a theoretical issue about the tension between phasality and four kinds of functional projections assumed in this analysis (Force Phrase (ForceP), Finite Phrase (FinP), Topic Phrase (TopP) and Focus Phrase (FocP)). This paper argues that a hybrid analysis with these two influential approaches can be proposed by claiming a reasonable assumption that syntacti- cally requisite projections (i.e., ForceP and FinP) are phases and independently constitute a phasehood with relevant heads in the derivation. This then enables us to capture various syntactic properties of the Topicalization construction in English. Our proposed analysis, coupled with some additional assumptions and observations in recent minimalist studies, can be extended to incorporate peculiar properties in temporal/conditional adverbials and imperatives.
    [Show full text]
  • Adjuncts and the HPSG Binding Theory
    Adjuncts and the HPSG Binding Theory Heike Walker University of Frankfurt 18th International Conference on HPSG August 22-25, 2011 Seattle Heike Walker (Univ. of Frankfurt) Adjuncts and the HPSG Binding Theory HPSG, August 25, 2011 1 / 56 Introduction HPSG binding theory in Pollard and Sag (1994): o-command, based on the relative obliqueness of arguments Problem: Binding theoretic interaction between main clause and adjunct-internal elements Proposed revision: Following Hukari and Levine (1995, 1996) A configurational relation: v(alence-based)-c-command Principle C involves vc-command in addition to o-command. New data Heike Walker (Univ. of Frankfurt) Adjuncts and the HPSG Binding Theory HPSG, August 25, 2011 2 / 56 Outline 1 Problems with Pollard and Sag’s (1994) binding theory 2 A valence-based binding theory 3 Further consequences of the revised binding theory (Anti)reconstruction effects Extraposition VP topicalization VP complements 4 Is Principle C pragmatic in nature? 5 Conclusion Heike Walker (Univ. of Frankfurt) Adjuncts and the HPSG Binding Theory HPSG, August 25, 2011 3 / 56 Problems with Pollard and Sag’s (1994) binding theory Outline 1 Problems with Pollard and Sag’s (1994) binding theory 2 A valence-based binding theory 3 Further consequences of the revised binding theory (Anti)reconstruction effects Extraposition VP topicalization VP complements 4 Is Principle C pragmatic in nature? 5 Conclusion Heike Walker (Univ. of Frankfurt) Adjuncts and the HPSG Binding Theory HPSG, August 25, 2011 4 / 56 Problems with Pollard and Sag’s (1994) binding theory Binding theory in Pollard and Sag (1994)1 (1) A synsem object Y is less oblique than a synsem object Z just in case it precedes Z on the arg-st list of some lexical head.
    [Show full text]
  • Rule Ordering in Verb Cluster Formation: on the Extraposition Paradox and the Placement of the Infinitival Particle Te/Zu
    Rule Ordering in Verb Cluster Formation: On the Extraposition Paradox and the Placement of the Infinitival Particle te/zu Martin Salzmann* Abstract This paper addresses two puzzles in the domain of verb cluster formation and proposes a solution in terms of rule ordering. The first puzzle is the so- called extraposition paradox where extraposition can target a VP that is part of a verb cluster only if the VP is topicalized but not when the VP remains clause-final. I propose that verb cluster formation takes place at PF under adjacency and thus after extraposition and topicalization. Extraposition and topicalization can therefore bleed cluster formation, leading to a crash of the derivation if the VP remains in-situ. The second puzzle involves the placement of the infinitival marker te/zu in Dutch and German. I will show that the cross-linguistic differences in placement follow from the fact that the rule that associates the particle with the verb takes place at different points of the PF-derivation in the two languages. While it is an early operation in Dutch and is still sensitive to hierarchical structure, it is a late process in German and is therefore subject to linear order and adjacency. Both operations interact with other PF rules, and I will demonstrate that it is possible to determine a strict and non-contradictory (and predominantly intrinsic) ordering of the rules which as a side-effect provides evidence for the articulation of the PF-component. Finally, I will show that the zu-placement facts do not provide decisive evidence in favor of either a right-branching or a left-branching VP-structure; rather, the advantages and disadvantages of the two views turn out to largely balance each other out.
    [Show full text]