Revision

Movements leave behind a phonologically null trace in all their extraction sites

Motivation Structural Preservation

Movements don’t alter structure The Projection Principle

Structures are founded on lexical properties So movements don’t alter lexical properties

Evidence Wanna contraction

Who1 do you want to meet t1 (wanna) Who1 do you want t1 to smile (*wanna)

Doubling ci alo visto ci? (Italian dialect) whom has-he seen whom “who has he seen?”

Resumptive Pronouns My brother, he likes to sing

1) In which of the following would we expect ‘wanna’ contraction to be possible? A) I don’t want John to leave B) where do you want to go? C) who do you want to help you? D) John, I don’t want to win

Unconstrained movement is too powerful the need for constraints

Constraints A-over-A principle

An XP cannot move out of an XP Not empirically accurate

Island constraints Wh-Island constraint Complex DP Island Sentential Subject Island Coordinate Structure Island

What explains Islands?

Constraints Subjacency

Reduced Islands down to one constraint Only one bounding node can be crossed by a

single movement Bounding nodes = IP and DP

Long distance movement can be achieved by a series of short movements

[IP He1 seems [IP t1 to have been believed [IP t1 to [VP t1 know Bill]]]]

Constraints Head Movement Constraint

A head can only move to the nearest head position

More restrictive than subjacency But both restrict the length of movements

Constraints Relativised Minimality

An element of type X can only move to the nearest type X position

2) Which of the following structures involves a violation of Subjacency: A) [CP wh1 [IP ... [CP t1 [IP ... [CP t1 [IP ... t1 ]]]]]] B) [CP wh1 [IP ... [CP t1 [IP ... [DP ... t1 ]]]]] C) [CP [IP DP1... [CP [IP t1... [VP t1 ]]]]] D) [CP wh1 [IP t1... [CP [IP t1... [VP t1 ]]]]]

We distinguish Morphological case

The form a nominal element takes Abstract Case

A property that a nominal has because it occupies a certain position

This may or may not effect its morphological case Case theory is about Abstract Case

Case is assigned by certain ‘governors’ to certain positions Finite I governs nominative Case and assigns it

to its specifier P governs accusative Case and assigns it to its

complement Agentive V governs accusative Case and assigns

it to the specifier of its complement (the object) Complementiser for governs accusative Case

and assigns it to the specifier of its complement (the subject)

The Case Filter All overt DPs must sit in Case positions

* the observation John (of John) * very fond John (of John) * tried [John to leave] (tried [to leave])

Nouns, adjectives and non-finite inflection do not assign Case

Exceptional Verbs Assign Case to the subject of their infinitival

arguments I believe [him to be rich]

Case and Movement A DP in a Caseless position has to move to a

Case position in order to satisfy the Case Filter

* it was seen Mary Mary1 was seen t1 It seems [John is rich] * it seems [John to be rich] John1 seems [ t1 to be rich]

Therefore Case Theory applies to S-structure, not to D-structure

3) Concerning the DP John in the following I expect John to behave

A) it gets accusative Case from the verb expect

B) it gets accusative Case from the inflection

C) it gets nominative Case from the inflection

D) it is in a Caseless position

The double object construction Two abstract

verbs Agentive Goal

Two Case assigners

Only agent moves Verb moves to

support both abstract verbs

So is in front of both objects

Dative Construction One abstract verb, one

preposition Two Case assigners

Only the agent moves Verb moves to support

abstract verb Ends up in front of two

internal arguments

Some claim that one of these constructions derives from the other Most probably the double object derives from

the dative But the two constructions have slightly

different semantic properties The goal of the DO must be a recipient

*I sent London a letter (I sent a letter to London) The goal of the dative cannot be an inaliable

possessor *I gave a new engine to the car (I gave the car a

new engine)

4) Where does the theme in the dative construction get its Case from? A) the preposition to B) the abstract ‘goal’ verb C) the abstract ‘agentive’ verb D) the finite inflection

Prepositional verbs take a PP argument in complement position The preposition

assigns Case to its object

The verb moves to support the abstract verb

The preposition may optionally incorporate into the verb The verb and preposition

move to support the abstract verb

The preposition cannot assign Case to its complement

So this must move to the specifier of VP

The abstract verb assigns it Case

This is why prepositional verbs can passivise

The chimney was looked up

A phrasal verb takes a PP complement and has a theme in specifier position The verb moves to

support the abstract verb The preposition is stranded

The abstract verb assigns Case to the theme

The preposition can optionally incorporate into the verb They move to support

the abstract verb The preposition is in front

of the theme He looked up the word

The theme still gets Case from the abstract verb

5) Which of the following involves a phrasal verb A) the bed was slept in B) the police looked into the matter C) the customers were put right off D) he went right into the house

Clausal arguments of verbs occupy the theme position Specifier of the contentful

verb Clausal arguments are

mostly CPs Finite clauses Infinitives with for

complementisers Control clauses (with PRO

subjects)

Exceptional clauses have no CP but are just IPs CP is a barrier to Case

assignment So only exceptional clauses

allow their subjects to be Case marked from outside

The accusative Case is assigned by the abstract verb associated with the exceptional verb

Raising clauses are like exceptional clauses

But as there is no abstract verb to assign Case, the subject has to raise

6) In which of the following is the embedded clause not a CP? A) he tried [to leave] B) it seems [he left] C) [for him to leave] would be nice D) he seems [to have left]

Tense in English is a null morpheme of the category ‘v’ (little v)

It always follows I He may -pres smile

Verb moves to support tense Him to -anaphoric smile

Verb moves to support tense He –ed -past smile

Verb moves to support tense and inflection

Negation (not) is best analysed as an adverbial rather than a head It has a range of positions within the little v

part of sentence structure Above VP and below I

He may (not) have (not) been (not) seen It has no effect on auxiliary selection

He has seen Bill He has not seen Bill

Two restrictions on negation It cannot precede I It cannot follow V

Therefore in the presence of negation, the verb cannot move to I as negation must be between them

In this case, do is inserted to support I * he smile1-ed not t1 * he not smile1-ed t1 He did not smile

7) In which of the following will the tense morpheme be supported by the inserted auxiliary have? A) he may - -en go B) him to - -ing go C) he –ed - go D) we - - go

VP adverbials adjoin to VP and so are closer to the verb than sentential adverbials

Sentential adverbials adjoin to the phrase headed by tense (little vP) or to I’ and so are further from the verb He will certainly quickly hide the evidence * he will quickly certainly hide the evidence

Although VP adverbials adjoin to VP, they are forced to adjoin to I’ when the verb moves to I Adverbials cannot immediately follow the

verb VP adverbials prefer to be adjoined to VP

8) In which of the following is the adverbial not adjoined to I’? A) he really should see a doctor B) she quickly drank the coffee C) they certainly saw the accident D) he is obviously going to phone the

police

There are four types of gerund Acc-ing him writing a letter PRO-ing PRO writing a letter Poss-ing his writing a letter Ing-of his writing of the letter

We analysed only the last two

‘-ing’ nominalises verbs by Taking a VP complement Projecting an NP

It is a bound morpheme, so the verb moves to support it

Which type of VP it takes as its complement determines which type of gerund we get

-ing-of -ing takes the content VP

as its complement There is no agentive verb

to assign the theme Case So of is inserted

Any determiner is possible

A possessor is possible with a possessive determiner

Poss-ing -ing takes the full thematic

VP as a complement So there is an agentive verb And an agent

The theme gets Case from the agentive verb

So no of insertion The agent needs Case

So no other determiner than the possessive is possible

9) which gerund can be modified by an adjective? A) poss-ing B) acc-ing C) ing-of D) PRO-ing

Three movements make use of the front of the clause Topicalisation

These paintings1, I really like t1

Focus fronting (it was) JOHN1 I saw t1

Negative fronting Nothing1 could I see t1

Topicalisaton Adjoins the topic to the

highest possible clausal projection

CP in main clauses Not CP in embedded

clauses Adjunction is recursive

So there can be more than one topic

Focus fronting Focus is moved to specifier

of a functional projection between C and IP

There can only be one focus This projection must be like

IP as it is the complement of the complementiser

But it isn’t IP as its complement is IP

Negative fronting The fronted negative

moves to the same position as the focus

But this makes the clause negative

So there must be a head of iP for the negative to agree with

So the auxiliary inverts

10) In a main clause with both a topic and a fronted focus, what will their order be? A) the topic will precede the focus B) the focus will precede the topic C) they can be placed in any order D) the sentence will be ungrammatical

as they occupy the same position

Binding theory Principle A

An anaphor must be bound in its smallest binding domain

John1 likes himself1 * Mary1 likes himself2 * John1’s mother likes

himself1 * John1 thinks Mary likes

himself1

Anaphor e.g. Himself

Bound = coindexed with and c-commanded by something

C-command = an element c-commands its sister and everything inside its sister

Binding domain = a category with a subject

Binding theory Principle B

A pronominal must be free in its smallest binding domain

* John1 likes him1 Mary1 likes him2 John1’s mother likes him1 John1 thinks Mary likes him1

Pronominal = Him

Free = not bound

Reflexivity Principle A

A reflexive marked verb must be reflexive

* Mary likes himself Principle B

A reflexive verb must be reflexive marked

* John1 likes him1

Reflexive marking = morphologically marked by reflexive morpheme E.g. -self

Reflexive verb = a verb with two or more arguments referring to the same thing E.g. He shaved

himself

11) According to Binding theory, which of the following sentences is ungrammatical because the anaphor is not bound? A) * John1 thinks Mary likes himself1 B) * John1 saw Mary’s picture of himself1 C) * John1 saw him1 D) * John1’s mother saw himself1

Universal grammar is the idea that there are grammatical principles which underlie all human languages

Arguments There are language universals Human languages are translatable The species specificity argument The poverty of the stimulus argument The fact of child language acquisition

Principles and Parameters theory Principles = underlying universals (not

learned) Parameters = variable parts of the

grammar which allow languages to differ and which must be acquired

12) which of the following X-bar statements constitutes a parameter setting? A) A phrase has a head B) The mother of the specifier is XP C) The head precedes its complement D) The sister of the complement is the

head

Answers will be given in the lecture