Draft Syntax in the Treetops Shigeru Miyagawa September 2020 ii Contents Preface………………………………………………………………………………...vi Abbreviations………………………………………………………………………...vii Chapter 1. Setting the Stage…………………………………………………………1 1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………1 2. Ross (1970) and Emonds (1969).…...………………………………………………3 2.1 Combining Ross (1970) and Emonds (1969)…...………...…………………..11 2.2 Problems associated with the performative analysis…………...……..............12 3. Evidence for the representation of the speaker and addressee…………...………..18 3.1 Logophors………………………….………………………………...………..19 3.2 Modern evidence for the speaker and addressee representations in syntax…………………………………………..…………………..………....20 3.2.1 Allocutive agreement and the addressee representation…………...…….21 3.2.2 Evidence for the speaker representation: Romanian………………….....23 3.3 Speech Act Phrase………………………………………………………….....25 4. Problems associated with Emonds’s conception of the root……………………....27 5. Speaker and temporal coordinates (Giorgi 2010) ………………………………....34 6. SAP, Act Phrase, and Illocutionary Force………………………………………....36 7. Previewing the remaining chapters………………………………………………..46 Miyagawa, Treetops, draft, Sep2020 iii Chapter 2. The SAP and the politeness φ-feature………………………………...55 1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………..55 2. Where is -mas-?…………………………………………………………………....57 3. Moving -mas- to the “correct” location…………………………………………....60 4. Allocutive agreement at C………………………………………………………....63 4.1 SAP……………………………………………………………………............69 4.2 Style adverbs in English…………………………………………………...….74 5. -mas-: Discrepancy between form and function…………………………………...76 5.1 Yamada (2019a) ……………………………………………………………...77 5.2 Where is -mas-?……………………………………………………………….90 6. -des-………………………………………………………………………………..97 6.1 Second type of -des-…………………………………………………………100 7. An interlude: Magahi allocutive agreement……………………………………...104 8. -mas- in embedded, non-root contexts…………………………………………...115 8.1 -koto and -yooni C………………………………………………………...…118 8.2 Feature raising and embedded -mas-…………………………………….......126 9. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………..134 Chapter 3. Sentence Final Particles………………………………………………136 1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………136 2. SFPs as root phenomena…………………………………………………………139 3. Expressivity of SFPs……………………………………………………………..143 3.1 Experiments on the expressivity of SFPs……………………………………144 3.2 Follow-up experiments: Matsui et al. (2009) ………………………….........147 4. The structure of SFPs…………………………………………………………….148 Miyagawa, Treetops, draft, Sep2020 iv 4.1 Three layers of structure and SFPs………………………………………......149 4.2 Structures for ne and yo…………………………………………………………160 4.3 kana and Judgment Phrase……………………………………………………...162 4.4 sira, i…………………………………………………………………………….169 5. Romanian hai…………………………………………………………………….171 5.1 Hai and the SAP…………………………………………………………......177 5.1.1 Injunctive and evaluative readings……………………………………..179 6. SFPs and the language of autistic children……………………………………….184 6.1 Structural positions of ne and yo and ASD………………………………….186 6.2 Matsuoka et al. (1997) ………………………………………………………187 7. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………..192 Chapter 4. Topicalization…………………………………………………………194 1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………194 2. Topicalization in German………………………………………………………...195 2.1 Issues with Frey and Meinunger (2019) …………………………………….203 3. Topicalization: Basic issues……………………………………………………...205 4. Topics associated and not associated with movement…………………………...209 5. Topic Islands……………………………………………………………………..212 6. Truncation………………………………………………………………………..218 7. Topicalization and the root: Truncation or Topic Island?………………………..219 7.1 Hooper and Thompson (1973) ………………………………………………221 7.2 Focus operator and truncation……………………………………………….230 8. Variation across languages……………………………………………………….240 8.1 Strong Uniformity and topicalization………………………………………..242 Miyagawa, Treetops, draft, Sep2020 v 9. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………..250 Chapter 5. The Question Particle and the Nature of Exhaustivity in Wh- questions…................................................................................................................252 1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………252 2. Expressive structure and questions……………………………………………….254 2.1 Evidence: Newari………………………………………………………........256 3. Labeling and the treetop………………………………………………………….260 4. Questions and exhaustivity……………………………………………………….265 5. Q-particle drop…………………………………………………………………...268 5.1 Pair-list questions………………………………………………………........272 5.2 Q-particle and Question Under Discussion (QUD) …………………………275 5.2.1 Question Under Discussion (QUD) ……………………………………279 6. Partial answer…………………………………………………………………….281 6.1 For example……………………………………………………………….....282 6.2 Mentions some……………………………………………………………….285 6.2.1 Mention-one and singleton indefinites…………………………………291 7. The Q-particle, the ‘why’ question, and structure of the interrogative…………..296 8. Concluding remarks……………………………………………………………...303 References……………….......……………………………………………………..304 Miyagawa, Treetops, draft, Sep2020 vi Preface To be written Miyagawa, Treetops, draft, Sep2020 vii Abbreviations A Adjective ABS Absolutive ACC Accusative ActP Act Phrase ADDR Addressee feature addrP Addressee Phrase ADVP Adverbial Phrase AL Allocutive marker ALLOC Allocutive marker AP Adjectival Phrase ARB Arbitrary ASP Aspect AUX Auxiliar C Colloquial C Complementizer Cl Clitic CL Classifier CommitP Commitment Phrase Comp Complementizer CONJ Conjunction CONTR Controlled COP Copula Miyagawa, Treetops, draft, Sep2020 viii CP Complementizer Phrase DAR Double Access Reading DAT Dative DECL Declarative DISJ Disjunction DP Determiner Phrase ERG Ergative F Formal FM Feminine GEN Genitive GHT German Hanging Topic HONA Addressee honorific H Honorific HH High honorific HHA High honorific addressee HHS High honorific subject HP Honorific Phrase IND Indicative JudgeP Judgment Phrase LF Logical Form MAS Politeness marker/Japanese MCP Main Clause Phenomena MSC Masculine MASC Masculine MOD Modal Miyagawa, Treetops, draft, Sep2020 ix ModP Modal Phrase NCP Negative Constituent Preposing NEG Negation NH Non-honorific NHA Non-honorific addressee NHS Non-honorific subject NOM Nominative NP Noun Phrase NPI Negative Polarity Item P Person PL Plural PP Prepositional Phrase PRES Present PRF Perfective PROG Progressive PRT Particle PRS Present PST Past PTCL Particle Q Question marker QUD Question Under Discussion REFL Reflexive RIDE Root-like indirect discourse embeddings RM Relativized Minimality RT Root transformations Miyagawa, Treetops, draft, Sep2020 x S Singular S Sentence phrasal marker saP Speech Act Phrase SAP Speaker-Addressee Phrase SFP Sentence Final Particles SH Subject honorification spkP Speaker Phrase SUBJ Subject SUBJ Subjunctive TOP Topic TopP Topic Phrase TP Tense Phrase V Verb VOC Vocative VP Verb Phrase Miyagawa, Treetops, draft, Sep2020 1 Chapter 1 Setting the stage 1. Introduction In this monograph, I will explore a variety of issues — morphological, syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic — that arise when we look at phenomena associated with the highest points in the structure of utterances. Many of these “treetop” phenomena are well known — such as topicalization and auxiliary inversion in English, and V2 in Germanic —, and are typically classified as main clause phenomena. The same phenomena are sometimes called root phenomena, which today seem incongruous since they occur at the top of the tree structure, not at the bottom, in the roots. Whatever term one uses to refer to them, there is general agreement that something special happens up there. Many have observed that these main clause phenomena have a function to pragmatically connect the expression to the conversational context, something we see with, for example, topicalization, as in As for this book, I will read it for sure, in which this book is singled out as referring to something that has been mentioned in some prominent way in the conversation, and topicalization both recognizes and sustains this prominence of the topic. Others see in these main clause phenomena grammatical constructions that are not observed in subordinate clauses, such as Aux inversion in interrogatives in American English and the politeness marking -des-/-mas- in Japanese. Unless there is a need to employ another term, I will use “main clause phenomena” or its singular version to refer to 2 the constructions I will be looking at, following a recent practice in Aelbrecht, Haegeman, and Nye (2012). My purpose in looking at the main clause phenomena is to show that there isn’t just one category into which all main clause phenomena fall into, but rather, we will see that some constructions may occur strictly at the highest point in the tree structure, while others may occur at varying degrees of distance from the very top of the structure, a point noted by others including, recently, Frey and Meinunger (2019). I will in fact deal with three classes of phenomena: (i) those that fit into the environments that Emonds (1969) called “root,” approximately equal to what Frey and Meinunger (2019) call “strongly root sensitive;” (ii) those that, in response to Emonds, Hooper and Thompson (1973) identified as constructions that allow the meaning of assertion, approximately what Frey and Meinunger (2019) call “weakly root sensitive,” which occur in more positions than Emonds’s root; and, finally, (iii) a very different set of phenomena associated with the labeling of structures (e.g., TP, CP, etc.), which, as we will see, can only occur at the highest point