University of Southern California 20 February 2018 ⋅ (Im)possible traces Ethan Poole University of California, Los Angeles [email protected] 1 Introduction – Even though natural language has expressions over higher types, like e;t and et;t , these expressions cannot be represented as traces. ✳ The big question ⟨ ⟩ What are the kinds of semantic representations (i.e. LFs) that a movement – Predecessors:⟨ ⟩ Chierchia (1984), Romero (1998), Fox (1999), Landman (2006) dependency can map onto? • This constraint forces movement either to map onto a trace over an in- • Interpreting movement dividual type or to reconstruct. All other representations are ill-formed. – One of the pivotal discoveries about movement is that when an expression moves, it leaves behind something in its launching site. (3) DP1 λxe ::: ::: xe 1 ::: (4) 1 ::: ::: DP 1 ::: – Chomsky (1973) proposed that what is left behind is a trace, but since reconstruct Chomsky (1993, 1995), it has been standardly assumed that the launching [ [ [ ] ]] [ [ [ ] ]] site is instead occupied by a copy. Thus, the interpretation of movement is tightly restricted, and higher-type expressions generally reconstruct when they move. – The shift to copy-theoretic conceptions of movement gives rise to an im- ⇒ mediate semantic puzzle: a structure that contains two copies of a moved ✳ Main claim #2 expression cannot be straightforwardly composed semantically. – Traces are not simple variables, but bound anaphoric denite descriptions, – There are two available and readily employed options: à la Trace Conversion (e.g. Engdahl 1980, 1986; Fox 1999, 2002, 2003): (1) Which book did Nina read which book ? (5) D NP 1 ::: D NP 1 D NP λx ::: the NP λy : y x ::: [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] ↝ [ ] [ [ [ = ]] ] a. Convert to a λ-bound variable (“leaving a trace”) – Anaphoric denite descriptions are only type e because they cannot be Which book λx did Nina read x ? type shifted to e;t and et;t . This blocks movement dependencies from utilizing higher-type traces. b. [Reconstruct ][ [ ]] which book did Nina read which book ? ⟨ ⟩ ⟨ ⟩ – Under this hypothesis, the restrictions on possible traces reduce to the syntax and semantics of denite descriptions. ✳ Main claim[ #1 ] [ ] – Traces only range over individual semantic types: (2) Trace Interpretation Constraint * DP1 λfσ ::: ::: fσ 1 ::: , where σ is not an individual type [ [ [ ] ]] 1 2 Trace Interpretation Constraint ✳ What about property traces? 2 No one has yet addressed whether property traces exist. Thus, a central • Semantic types of DPs 1 contribution of this project is an empirically motivated argument against DPs come in three semantic guises (Partee 1986): property traces: (6) e Entity (individual type) (10) * DP1 λf⟨e;t⟩ ::: ::: f⟨e;t⟩ 1 ::: e;t Property (sets) et;t Generalized quantier (sets of sets) [ [ [ ] ]] ⟨ ⟩ 3 Entity⟨ traces⟩ Completing the “triangle” We have abundant evidence that entity traces exist. These are the canonical This investigation supplies the crucial nal piece of the argument that the ⇒ traces left by movement types like QR: constraint on possible traces is against any higher-type trace. This is an important advance in our understanding of the syntax–semantics interface. (7) DP λf ::: ::: f ::: 1 e e 1 • Empirical base: Π-positions [ [ [ ] ]] The crucial motivation comes from a series of original observations about what I call Π-positions (“Π” for property). These are syntactic environ- 7 Generalized-quantier traces ments where a DP denotes a property: – Romero (1998) and Fox (1999) show that generalized-quantier traces are (11) a. Existential constructions unavailable (contra Rullmann 1995 and Cresti 1995): There is a potato ⟨e;t⟩ in the pantry. (8) * DP1 λf⟨et;t⟩ ::: ::: f⟨et;t⟩ 1 ::: b. Change-of-color[ verbs] [ [ [ ] ]] Megan painted the house magenta ⟨e;t⟩. – The argument is based on the correlation between Condition C connectivity c. Naming verbs [ ] and scope reconstruction. Generalized-quantier traces would incorrectly Irene called the cat Snowake ⟨ ⟩. allow for scope reconstruction without reconstruction for Condition C: e;t d. Predicate nominals[ ] (9) How many pictures that John2 took in Sarajevo 1 does he2 want the Erika became a teacher ⟨e;t⟩. editor to publish 1 in the Sunday Special? [ ] a. Wide-scope reading [ ] 3 • In the interest of time, I will not review the arguments that DPs in these For what n: There are n-many particular pictures x that John took positions denote properties. It would take us too far aeld. The arguments in Sarajevo such that John wants the editor to publish x. mainly come from the existing literature: b. Narrow-scope reading – Existential constructions: McNally (1992, 1997, 1998) *For what n: John wants the editors to publish in the Sunday Special (any) n-many pictures that John took in Sarajevo. – Change-of-color verbs: Resultatives [Romero 1998:96] – Naming verbs: Matushansky (2008) – In Poole (2017:122–126), I provide additional arguments against generalized- – Predicate nominals: Standard analysis quantier traces based on ACD, extraposition, and parasitic gaps. 2 Chierchia (1984) argues that property variables exist based on anaphora like such and do so. However, 1 Landman (2006) shows that these cases should be reanalyzed as reference to kinds and thus do not Properties are intensional, i.e. ⟨s; ⟨e; t⟩⟩, but throughout this talk, I will treat them in purely involve property variables. These arguments are couched in terms of variables, but we will see that extensional terms for the sake of simplicity. This reduces them to sets of entities. traces are likely more than just variables, but rather denite descriptions. 2 • Section outline (14) Every teacher likes some student in the rst week. 1. I set the stage by showing that movement types in English dier with a.Narrow-scope reading every some respect to whether they shift scope. For every teacher x, there is some student y such that x likes y. ≫ 2. I then apply these movement types to Π-positions, showing that only b.Wide-scope reading some every movement that reconstructs can target them. This categorically precludes There is some student y such that for every teacher x, x likes y. some movement types. ≫ 3. The Trace Interpretation Constraint derives this pattern, from which I con- • Crucially, in a scenario where the student is a dierent student for each clude that property traces do not exist. teacher, only the narrow-scope reading is true. • Target sentence 2.1 Movement and scope shifting Topicalizing some student in (14) bleeds the narrow-scope reading: • What does it mean for movement to shift scope? (15) Some student 1, every teacher likes 1 in the rst week. 3 – For movement to shift scope means that, at LF, the moved DP takes scope in *every some; some every the position achieved by movement, which for all overt forms of movement, [ ] will be the DP’s surface syntactic position. • The only interpretation of (15) is the wide-scope reading.≫ Consequently,≫ (15) is true i there is a single student that every teacher likes. It is false if the (12) Movement that shifts scope student is a dierent student for each teacher. 3 1 ::: ::: 1 ::: 2.1.2 Wh-movement [ [ ]] Generalization – A check mark will be used to indicate where a DP takes scope at LF. ✳ Wh-movement optionally shifts the scope of the moved DP. – If movement does not shift scope, the scope of the moved DP at LF mis- Wh-movement can reconstruct for scope. matches its surface position in that it takes scope in its position prior to movement, i.e. it reconstructs into its base-generated position. • ↝How many-questions In order to probe scope in constituent questions, we will use how many- (13) Movement that does not shift scope questions. In addition to the wh-meaning component, how many indepen- 3 1 ::: ::: 1 ::: dently carries its own existential quantication that can vary in scope (Kroch 1989; Cinque 1990; Cresti 1995; Rullmann 1995; Frampton 1999): [ [ ]] (16) How many books 1 should Nina read 1 this summer? 2.1.1 Topicalization [a.Wide-scope reading] how many should Generalization ✳ i. For what number n: There are n-many particular books x such Topicalization obligatorily shifts the scope of the moved DP. ≫ that Nina should read x this summer. Topicalization cannot reconstruct for scope. ∗ ii. (16) w0 p n N p λw : X bookw X #X n • Baseline sentence ′ ∗ ↝ shouldw λw : readw ′ X Nina Consider the possible interpretations of the baseline sentence, which has ⟦ ⟧( ) = ∶ ∃ ∈ [ = ∃ [ ( ) ∧ = ∧ iii. Possible answer: ‘Three books, namely Aspects, LGB, and The narrow-scope and wide-scope readings of some student w.r.t. every teacher: ( ( )( ))]] Minimalist Program.’ 3 b.Narrow-scope reading should how many • Qualication i. For what number n: It is necessary for there to be n-many We are only interested in the scope-shifting functionality of QR. ≫ books x such that Nina reads x this summer. – This functionality ordinarily coalesces with QR for interpreting quanti- ers, but we will see that even though quanticational DPs can occur in ii. (16) w0 ′ ∗ Π-positions, they do not enjoy the scopal mobility that QR would aord. p n N p λw : shouldw λw : X bookw ′ X ⟦ ⟧( ) = ∗ #X n read ′ X Nina – For reasons of time, I will not discuss today how to interpret quanticational ∶ ∃ ∈ [ = ( ∃ [ w ( ) ∧ iii. Possible answer: ‘Three books, any three.’ DPs in Π-positions. However, it is essentially an open question; see Poole = ∧ ( )( )])] (2017:83–87) for discussion and some possible solutions. • The wide-scope and narrow-scope readings of (16) can be paraphrased as the questions in (17a) and (17b) respectively. 2.2 Π-positions (17) a. Wide-scope paraphrase of (16) ✳ Predictions How many books are there that Nina should read this summer? The Trace Interpretation Constraint makes the following predictions: b. Narrow-scope paraphrase of (16) 1. Scope prediction What is the number such that Nina should read that many books If movement targets a Π-position, it must reconstruct, because an entity this summer? trace is type-incompatible with a property-denoting DP.