Week 8b. Head-movement CAS LX 522 Syntax I. The puzzle so far. Head-order and specifier-order...

Week 8b. Head-movementWeek 8b. Head-movement

CAS LX 522CAS LX 522Syntax ISyntax I

The puzzle so far.The puzzle so far. Head-order Head-order and and specifier-orderspecifier-order parameters can parameters can

derive the some but not all types of language:derive the some but not all types of language: SVOSVO (spec-initial, head-initial)(spec-initial, head-initial) (English) (English) SOVSOV (spec-initial, head-final)(spec-initial, head-final) (Japanese) (Japanese) VOSVOS (spec-final, head-initial)(spec-final, head-initial) (Malagasy) (Malagasy) OVSOVS (spec-final, head-final)(spec-final, head-final) (Hixkaryana) (Hixkaryana) VSOVSO ((??)) (Irish, Arabic) (Irish, Arabic)

Relative verb-adverb position, French v. Relative verb-adverb position, French v. English:English: French: French: Je Je mangemange souventsouvent des pommes. des pommes. English:English: I I oftenoften eateat apples. apples.

Auxiliary inversion in English yes-no questions:Auxiliary inversion in English yes-no questions: Bill should eat his peas. Should Bill eat his peas?Bill should eat his peas. Should Bill eat his peas?

MovementMovement We start with the question of where We start with the question of where shouldshould is in: is in:

Should Bill eat his peas?Should Bill eat his peas? There is one position in our sentence structures There is one position in our sentence structures

so far that is to the left of the subject, the one so far that is to the left of the subject, the one where the complementizer where the complementizer thatthat goes (C): goes (C): I said I said thatthat Bill should eat his peas. Bill should eat his peas.

This is not where we expect This is not where we expect shouldshould to be, to be, though. It is, after all, a modal, of category I. It though. It is, after all, a modal, of category I. It is notis not a complementizer. a complementizer.

Also notice that if we embed this question, Also notice that if we embed this question, shouldshould stays after the subject, and stays after the subject, and if if is in C:is in C: I wonder I wonder ifif Bill Bill shouldshould eat his peas. eat his peas.

MovementMovement

All of this suggests that the way to look All of this suggests that the way to look at this is that we start with the at this is that we start with the sentence…sentence… Bill should eat his peasBill should eat his peas

……as usual, and if we’re forming a yes-no as usual, and if we’re forming a yes-no question, we follow this up by question, we follow this up by movingmoving shouldshould to the position of C. If we can’t to the position of C. If we can’t move it (in an embedded question, move it (in an embedded question, there’s already something there’s already something inin C: C: ifif), it ), it stays put.stays put.

FrenchFrench

Jean mange souvent des pommes.Jean mange souvent des pommes.Jean eats often of.the applesJean eats often of.the apples‘Jean often eat apples.’‘Jean often eat apples.’

If we suppose that the French If we suppose that the French sentence starts out just like the sentence starts out just like the English sentence, we have the English sentence, we have the underlying representation underlying representation shown here.shown here.

What needs to happen to get the What needs to happen to get the correct surface word order?correct surface word order?

Vmange

VP

VP

despommes

PP

I

I

IP

Jean

DP

[PRES]

APsouvent

FrenchFrench




Vmange

VP

VP

despommes

PP

I

I

IP

Jean

DP

[PRES]

APsouvent

Wait! But isn’t that inexcusably Anglo-centric? If you (or Chomsky) were a native speaker of French, would the French sentence

structure be considered to be basic?

FrenchFrench




Vmange

VP

VP

despommes

PP

I

I

IP

Jean

DP

[PRES]

APsouvent

Wait! But isn’t that inexcusably Anglo-centric? If you (or Chomsky) were a native speaker of French, would the French sentence

structure be considered to be basic?

Well, not necessarily. The verb eat (mange) needs to assign a -role to the object apples (des pommes). It is

easier (the theory is more elegant) if the assignment of -roles happens between sisters (as a result of Merge). That leads us to the same conclusion: the French word order is

derived, the English word order is basic.

FrenchFrench


Of course—the V (Of course—the V (mangemange) ) moves up to the I position.moves up to the I position.

This This alwaysalways happens in French happens in French with a tensed/agreeing verb. with a tensed/agreeing verb. This generally This generally doesn’tdoesn’t happen happen in English.in English.

Hence, the difference in Hence, the difference in “adverb position” (really, of “adverb position” (really, of course, it’s course, it’s verb verb position)position)

Vmange

VP

VP

despommes

PP

V+I

I

Jeanmange+[PRES]

APsouvent

IP

DP

What happens whenWhat happens whenV moves to I?V moves to I?

To show that V attaches to I, To show that V attaches to I, but that I remains primary, but that I remains primary, this is drawn in the tree this is drawn in the tree structure like this.structure like this.

We say that V We say that V head-adjoinshead-adjoins (adjoins, head-to-head) to I.(adjoins, head-to-head) to I.

The head formed this way is The head formed this way is sometimes called a sometimes called a complex complex headhead, (it’s an I with a V , (it’s an I with a V adjoined to it).adjoined to it).

ti

VP

VP

PP

I

IP

DP

mangeAPI

I

Vi[PRES]

V


We should also consider We should also consider what happens to the VP what happens to the VP from which the V moved.from which the V moved.

It is still a VP, it must still It is still a VP, it must still have a head.have a head.

We notate the original We notate the original location of the V by location of the V by writing writing tt (standing for (standing for “trace” left behind by the “trace” left behind by the original V), and we co-original V), and we co-index the V and trace to index the V and trace to indicate their indicate their relationship.relationship.

ti

VP

VP

PP

I

IP

DP

mangeAPI

I

Vi[PRES]

V


Since the VP is still a Since the VP is still a VVP, it P, it still gets a still gets a [V][V] category feature category feature projected up from its head.projected up from its head.

So the trace is still a So the trace is still a verbverb.. In fact, there’s no reason to In fact, there’s no reason to

suppose that any of the suppose that any of the features of the original verb features of the original verb have been removed given that have been removed given that [V][V] is still there. is still there.

We We writewrite it as it as tt, but its , but its contentcontent has not changed. The has not changed. The trace trace tt is really just another is really just another copy (or, well, the original) of copy (or, well, the original) of the verb.the verb.

ti

VP

VP

PP

I

IP

DP

mangeAPI

I

Vi[PRES]

V


What What hashas changed is that changed is that the original verb is now the original verb is now related to a higher related to a higher position in the tree, and position in the tree, and for many purposes, the for many purposes, the top copy in the tree is top copy in the tree is considered to be primary.considered to be primary.

What we have created by What we have created by moving the verb is a moving the verb is a chainchain of positions in the of positions in the tree that the verb has tree that the verb has occupied.occupied.

ti

VP

VP

PP

I

IP

DP

mangeAPI

I

Vi[PRES]

V


When we think of moved When we think of moved elements in tree elements in tree structures, we will often structures, we will often need to consider the need to consider the chainchain of positions; this is of positions; this is usually written like:usually written like:

( V( Vii , , ttii ) )

referring to the two referring to the two positions held by positions held by VVii and and ttii in the structure here.in the structure here.

ti

VP

VP

PP

I

IP

DP

mangeAPI

I

Vi[PRES]

V


Using indices like that is Using indices like that is kind of reminiscent of what kind of reminiscent of what we did when talking about we did when talking about Binding Theory—and it’s not Binding Theory—and it’s not a coincidence.a coincidence.

A fundamental property of A fundamental property of movement is that the moved movement is that the moved element must element must bind bind (c-(c-command, and be coindexed command, and be coindexed with) the trace in the original with) the trace in the original position:position: Movement is only Movement is only upwards.upwards.

ti

VP

VP

PP

I

IP

DP

mangeAPI

I

Vi[PRES]

V


Great.Great. So So does does VVii c-command c-command ttii??

X c-commands YX c-commands Y iff:iff: (i) X excludes Y, and(i) X excludes Y, and (ii) Any node that(ii) Any node that

dominates X alsodominates X alsodominates Y.dominates Y. ti

VP

VP

PP

I

IP

DP

mangeAPI

I

Vi[PRES]

V



X c-commands YX c-commands Y iff:iff: (i) (i) X excludes YX excludes Y, and, and (ii) Any node that(ii) Any node that

dominates X alsodominates X alsodominates Y.dominates Y. ti

VP

VP

PP

I

IP

DP

mangeAPI

I

Vi[PRES]

V

Vi excludes I. I is not

dominated by any segment of Vi.



X c-commands YX c-commands Y iff:iff: (i) (i) X excludes YX excludes Y, and, and (ii) (ii) Any node thatAny node that

dominates X alsodominates X alsodominates Ydominates Y.. ti

VP

VP

PP

I

IP

DP

mangeAPI

I

Vi[PRES]

V

The only nodes that dominate Vi are I and IP. I does not dominate Vi because there is a segment of I that

does not dominate Vi. Both IP and I dominate ti as well. So any node

that dominates Vi also dominates ti.

AuxiliariesAuxiliaries English has two auxiliary (“helping”) English has two auxiliary (“helping”)

verbs verbs havehave and and bebe, which cannot serve as , which cannot serve as the main verbs of a sentence but generally the main verbs of a sentence but generally serve to indicate differences in verbal serve to indicate differences in verbal aspect (progressive, past perfect, …).aspect (progressive, past perfect, …).

The auxiliary verbs often The auxiliary verbs often appear appear in I. in I. Radford has had us up until now drawing Radford has had us up until now drawing them as if they exemplify the category I.them as if they exemplify the category I.

But really, these But really, these auxiliary verbs auxiliary verbs areare verbs verbs, , they just have special properties. Among they just have special properties. Among these properties: these properties: they can move to Ithey can move to I..

Auxiliary Auxiliary verbsverbs

The reason we can’t assume the The reason we can’t assume the auxiliaries auxiliaries have have and and bebe:: I I amam not singing. not singing. I will not I will not bebe singing. singing. I will not I will not havehave beenbeen singing singing..

Rather, it looks like the Rather, it looks like the topmosttopmost one one moves to I, so long as nothing else is moves to I, so long as nothing else is in I.in I.

A word on auxiliariesA word on auxiliaries The underlying The underlying

structure of a structure of a sentence with an sentence with an auxiliary verb would auxiliary verb would be something like be something like this, where the this, where the auxiliary verb heads a auxiliary verb heads a VP, and takes the VP, and takes the main verb’s VP as its main verb’s VP as its complement.complement.

VPI

I

IP

DP

-edVP

V

V

…eaten

have

A word on auxiliariesA word on auxiliaries The underlying The underlying

structure of a structure of a sentence with an sentence with an auxiliary verb would auxiliary verb would be something like be something like this, where the this, where the auxiliary verb heads a auxiliary verb heads a VP, and takes the VP, and takes the main verb’s VP as its main verb’s VP as its complement.complement.

VP

I

IP

DP

VP

V

V

…eaten

tihaveI

I

Vi[PAST]

Why does V move to I?Why does V move to I? If there is something in I already, like a modal, If there is something in I already, like a modal,

then even an auxiliary verb doesn’t move up to then even an auxiliary verb doesn’t move up to I.I. John John mightmight not be eating apples. not be eating apples.

If there is more than one auxiliary, only the If there is more than one auxiliary, only the topmost one seems to be move to I.topmost one seems to be move to I. John John hashas not not beenbeen eating apples. eating apples.

Only the auxiliaries that Only the auxiliaries that makemake it to I are it to I are inflected for tense (past, present).inflected for tense (past, present).

This all suggests that the view This all suggests that the view this movement this movement happens to solve some problem that I hashappens to solve some problem that I has.. If I needs something, auxiliaries can help by moving If I needs something, auxiliaries can help by moving

to I, but once the need is met, no other auxiliaries to I, but once the need is met, no other auxiliaries need to move. (We’ll come back to this)need to move. (We’ll come back to this)

English yes-no questionsEnglish yes-no questions

Now, let’s go back and think about Now, let’s go back and think about English yes-no questions, which we took English yes-no questions, which we took originally to be motivation that movement originally to be motivation that movement occurs.occurs. Bill Bill willwill buy cheese. buy cheese. WillWill Bill buy cheese? Bill buy cheese?

What’s happening here? It is reasonable What’s happening here? It is reasonable to think that the modal to think that the modal willwill, which starts , which starts out in I, moves to C in questions.out in I, moves to C in questions. WillWillii Bill Bill ttii buy cheese? buy cheese?

English yes-no questionsEnglish yes-no questions Why move I to C?Why move I to C? Since it seems to happen in Since it seems to happen in

questions and not in questions and not in statements, and since C is statements, and since C is often thought to be the part often thought to be the part of the structure where of the structure where “clause type” (question, “clause type” (question, statement, imperative, etc.) statement, imperative, etc.) is recorded, this movement is recorded, this movement seems to be driven by the seems to be driven by the C C we find in questionswe find in questions..

We write this as C as being We write this as C as being [+Q].[+Q].

ti

VP

I

IP

DP

CP

Bill

buy cheese

[+Q]

Iwill

C

C

Ii

ØØ+Q+Q

Incidentally, lots of languages have an Incidentally, lots of languages have an audible audible question morpheme, which question morpheme, which adds plausibility to our assumption adds plausibility to our assumption that English has a question morpheme that English has a question morpheme in C that is just null.in C that is just null. Akira ga hon o kaimasita Akira ga hon o kaimasita kaka??

(Japanese)(Japanese)Akira top book acc bought Akira top book acc bought QQ‘Did Akira buy the book?’‘Did Akira buy the book?’

English yes-no questionsEnglish yes-no questions Also notice that if there is an Also notice that if there is an overtovert

question morpheme there in English question morpheme there in English (which happens in embedded questions), (which happens in embedded questions), there is no need to move I to C:there is no need to move I to C: I asked if Bill will buy cheese.I asked if Bill will buy cheese. *I asked (if) will Bill buy cheese.*I asked (if) will Bill buy cheese.

Incidentally, Incidentally, ifif is also [+Q]—this indicates is also [+Q]—this indicates “interrogative”, and both “interrogative”, and both ØØ+Q+Q and and ifif mark mark interrogative clauses. But interrogative clauses. But ifif doesn’t cause doesn’t cause I to move to C.I to move to C.

I to CI to C

In English, anything that would be in In English, anything that would be in I moves to C. So, modals and I moves to C. So, modals and auxiliaries all “invert” around the auxiliaries all “invert” around the subject:subject: WillWill Bill buy cheese? Bill buy cheese? IsIs Bill buying cheese? Bill buying cheese? HasHas Bill bought cheese? Bill bought cheese?

But main verbs never raise to I in But main verbs never raise to I in English. Consider then:English. Consider then: DidDid Bill buy cheese? Bill buy cheese?

I to CI to C DidDid Bill buy cheese? Bill buy cheese?

Why is there a Why is there a dodo there? Before, we only saw there? Before, we only saw dodo in sentences with in sentences with notnot, inserted because the , inserted because the tense affix couldn’t “reach” the verb, blocked tense affix couldn’t “reach” the verb, blocked by by notnot..

What seems to be the case is that if I moves to What seems to be the case is that if I moves to C (that is, the past tense suffix C (that is, the past tense suffix -ed -ed in this in this case), it also gets too far away from the verb case), it also gets too far away from the verb (now (now BillBill is between the suffix and the verb), is between the suffix and the verb), and and DoDo-insertion is required for pronunciation.-insertion is required for pronunciation. -ed-edii Bill Bill ttii buy cheese? buy cheese?

NegationNegation We’ve used negation as a test to see if the We’ve used negation as a test to see if the

verb/auxiliary appears before it or after it as verb/auxiliary appears before it or after it as an indication of whether the verb has raised an indication of whether the verb has raised or not. We’ve also used adverbs (like or not. We’ve also used adverbs (like oftenoften) ) this way.this way.

Negation acts different from adverbs. For Negation acts different from adverbs. For example, negation keeps the tense affix from example, negation keeps the tense affix from being pronounced with a verb (in English), being pronounced with a verb (in English), but adverbs don’t:but adverbs don’t: Bill Bill diddid notnot buy cheese. buy cheese. Bill Bill nevernever buys cheese. buys cheese. Bill Bill quicklyquickly bought cheese. bought cheese.

Yet, both come between I and V in the Yet, both come between I and V in the underlying structure.underlying structure.

NegPNegP

A common view of negation is that it A common view of negation is that it has its own projection, a NegP, headed has its own projection, a NegP, headed by a negative morpheme. For example, by a negative morpheme. For example, something like this.something like this.

Interestingly, negation sometimes Interestingly, negation sometimes comes “in two parts”, with two comes “in two parts”, with two morphemes implicated in negation. morphemes implicated in negation. NegP has in principle two positions NegP has in principle two positions available for negative morphemes, its available for negative morphemes, its specifier and its head.specifier and its head.

Standard French Standard French ne…pasne…pas is an example is an example of this which we’ll look at now.of this which we’ll look at now.

Neg

NegP

Neg

French negationFrench negation In standard French, the negation of a In standard French, the negation of a

sentence generally involves a morpheme sentence generally involves a morpheme nene placed before the tensed verb and a placed before the tensed verb and a morpheme morpheme paspas placed after it, as in: placed after it, as in: Jean Jean nene mange mange paspas des pommes. des pommes.

Jean Jean NENE eats eats NOTNOT of.the apples of.the apples‘Jean doesn’t eat apples.’‘Jean doesn’t eat apples.’

However, English gives us reason to However, English gives us reason to believe (assuming NegP is in the same believe (assuming NegP is in the same place in the tree in both languages) that place in the tree in both languages) that NegP comes between IP and VP:NegP comes between IP and VP: Bill will Bill will notnot eat apples. eat apples.

French negationFrench negation

A common view of how French A common view of how French negation looks at DS is like negation looks at DS is like this, with this, with nene being a morpheme being a morpheme of category Neg, heading a of category Neg, heading a NegP with NegP with paspas in its specifier.in its specifier.

For the moment, we won’t For the moment, we won’t concern ourselves with the concern ourselves with the categorial status of categorial status of paspas; clearly ; clearly it must be an XP of some kind it must be an XP of some kind itself, maybe also of category itself, maybe also of category Neg, but it never heads the Neg, but it never heads the main NegP in a sentence. I’ll main NegP in a sentence. I’ll write it just as write it just as paspas in the in the specifier.specifier.

V

VP

PP

I

I

IP

DP

[PRES]

Neg

Neg

NegP

pas

ne


How do we get the correct How do we get the correct word order?word order?

We know that V needs to We know that V needs to move to I, but wouldn’t this move to I, but wouldn’t this yield:yield: Jean mange pas ne des Jean mange pas ne des

pommes.pommes.??

You’d think so, yet the facts You’d think so, yet the facts tell us that we actually get:tell us that we actually get: Jean ne mange pas des Jean ne mange pas des

pommes.pommes.

V

VP

PP

I

I

IP

DP

[PRES]

Neg

Neg

NegP

pas

ne


Suppose, however, that Suppose, however, that the verb moves the verb moves firstfirst to to Neg, and Neg, and thenthen moves up moves up to I…to I…

What will happen first is What will happen first is that the V will head-that the V will head-adjoin to Neg, creating a adjoin to Neg, creating a complex head…complex head…

V

VP

PP

I

I

IP

DP

[PRES]

Neg

Neg

NegP

pas

ne


Note that we take Note that we take nene to be to be a a prefixprefix (not a (not a suffixsuffix), ), which means when we which means when we create the complex head, create the complex head, the verb adjoins on the the verb adjoins on the right.right.

Now, the verb still needs Now, the verb still needs to move to I, but it is to move to I, but it is attached to the Neg now… attached to the Neg now… so the Neg moves to I.so the Neg moves to I.

Complex heads move Complex heads move as a as a unitunit. You can’t “dis-attach” . You can’t “dis-attach” a head from a complex a head from a complex head.head.

ti

VP

PP

I

I

IP

DP

[PRES]

Neg

NegP

pas

neNeg

Neg

Vi


This final movement This final movement ends up with the verb ends up with the verb close enough to the close enough to the tense suffix to satisfy the tense suffix to satisfy the requirement that tense requirement that tense have a verbal host, while have a verbal host, while at the same time “taking at the same time “taking nene along” to get us the along” to get us the right word order.right word order. Jean ne mange pas…Jean ne mange pas…

ti

VP

PP

I

I

IP

DP

[PRES]Neg

NegP

pas

neNeg

Negj

Vi

I

tj

French negationFrench negation So, we see that assuming that So, we see that assuming that nene is the is the

head of NegP in French (with head of NegP in French (with paspas in the in the specifier), and assuming that the verb specifier), and assuming that the verb “stops off” to attach to Neg before moving “stops off” to attach to Neg before moving (now as a part of the complex Neg head) (now as a part of the complex Neg head) up to I, we get the right word order.up to I, we get the right word order.

Note that, since Note that, since **Jean mange pas ne des Jean mange pas ne des pommespommes is ungrammatical, we also know is ungrammatical, we also know that the verb that the verb hashas to stop off at Neg on the to stop off at Neg on the way up.way up.

Head Movement Head Movement ConstraintConstraint

This is an example which motivated the This is an example which motivated the hypothesis that head movement is hypothesis that head movement is constrained by the constrained by the Head Movement Head Movement ConstraintConstraint (or (or HMCHMC) which says that when ) which says that when a head moves to another head, it cannot a head moves to another head, it cannot “skip” over a head inbetween. So, the “skip” over a head inbetween. So, the reason the verb stops at Neg is because reason the verb stops at Neg is because Neg is between where V began and I.Neg is between where V began and I.

Head Movement ConstraintHead Movement ConstraintA head cannot move A head cannot move overover another head. another head.

Colloquial French?Colloquial French? It turns out that the negation morpheme It turns out that the negation morpheme nene

that we suppose is the head of the NegP that we suppose is the head of the NegP projection is actually generally optional (or projection is actually generally optional (or even preferentially omitted in colloquial even preferentially omitted in colloquial French)—yet French)—yet paspas doesn’t act any doesn’t act any differently (i.e. it doesn’t get “picked up” differently (i.e. it doesn’t get “picked up” by the verb on the way up to I instead of by the verb on the way up to I instead of nene).).

What this suggests is that colloquial What this suggests is that colloquial French has a French has a nullnull morpheme which is the morpheme which is the head of NegP—that head of NegP—that paspas is still in is still in SpecNegP, but the head is SpecNegP, but the head is ØØ instead of instead of nene..

English negationEnglish negation

A common view of English negation is A common view of English negation is actually an extension of this: Many actually an extension of this: Many researchers consider researchers consider notnot to be in the to be in the specifier of NegP, with a null head.specifier of NegP, with a null head.

[[IPIP John I [ John I [NegPNegP not Ø not ØNEGNEG [ [VPVP is eating lunch]]] is eating lunch]]]

[[IPIP John I [ John I [NegPNegP not Ø not ØNEGNEG+is+isii [ [VPVP ttii eating lunch]]] eating lunch]]]

[[IPIP John [is John [isii+Ø+ØNEGNEG]]jj [ [NegPNegP not not ttjj [ [VPVP ttii eating lunch]]] eating lunch]]]

English negationEnglish negation

[[IPIP John [is John [isii+Ø+ØNEGNEG]]jj [ [NegPNegP not not ttjj [ [VPVP ttii eating eating lunch]]]lunch]]]

However, sometimes English negation does However, sometimes English negation does appear to be the appear to be the head head of NegP—when it’s of NegP—when it’s “contracted” as “contracted” as -n’t-n’t.. IsIsn’tn’t Bill hungry? Bill hungry? Cf. Is Bill not hungry?Cf. Is Bill not hungry?

Notice that when the verb moved to I and then Notice that when the verb moved to I and then to C, it seems to have carried negation along.to C, it seems to have carried negation along.

The Italian DPThe Italian DP

In Italian, in many cases, there is simply In Italian, in many cases, there is simply an option (stylistically governed) as to an option (stylistically governed) as to whether you say whether you say The GianniThe Gianni or just or just GianniGianni::

GianniGianni mi ha telefonato. mi ha telefonato.GianniGianni me has telephoned me has telephoned‘Gianni called me up.’‘Gianni called me up.’

Il GianniIl Gianni mi ha telefonato. mi ha telefonato.the Giannithe Gianni me has telephoned me has telephoned‘Gianni called me up.’‘Gianni called me up.’

The Italian DPThe Italian DP

However, there is a difference with However, there is a difference with respect to the order of adjectives and respect to the order of adjectives and the noun depending on which one you the noun depending on which one you use.use. L’ antica RomaL’ antica Roma

the ancient Romethe ancient Rome‘Ancient Rome’‘Ancient Rome’

*Antica Roma*Antica Roma ancient Rome ancient Rome

Roma anticaRoma anticaRome ancientRome ancient

E’venuto il vecchio Cameresi.came the older Cameresi

*E’venuto vecchio Cameresi. came older CameresiE’venuto Cameresi vecchio.came Cameresi older

The Italian DPThe Italian DP But this makes perfect sense, if But this makes perfect sense, if

what is happening in the cases what is happening in the cases where there is no determiner is where there is no determiner is that the N is moving up to D that the N is moving up to D (just like V moves up to I in the (just like V moves up to I in the main clause), and when there main clause), and when there isis a determiner, the N stays put.a determiner, the N stays put. L’ antica RomaL’ antica Roma

the ancient Romethe ancient Rome

Roma anticaRoma antica *Antica *Antica RomaRomaRome ancientRome ancient ancient Romeancient Rome

ti

NP

…

D+Ni

D

DP

AdjP

NP

Back to VSOBack to VSO Now, let’s return to the question of VSO order Now, let’s return to the question of VSO order

in languages like Irish (remember that?). in languages like Irish (remember that?). Recall that we started off with the observation Recall that we started off with the observation that there isn’t any way to “generate VSO that there isn’t any way to “generate VSO order” at DS using X-bar rules because V and order” at DS using X-bar rules because V and O are sisters at DS.O are sisters at DS.

However, now that we have verb movement at However, now that we have verb movement at our disposal, we could certainly derive VSO our disposal, we could certainly derive VSO like this:like this:

DS:DS: SubjectSubject VerbVerb ObjectObject SS:SS: VerbVerbii SubjectSubject ttii ObjectObject

IrishIrish In support of verb movement, consider:In support of verb movement, consider:

PhógPhóg Máire an lucharachán. Máire an lucharachán.kissedkissed Mary the leprechaun Mary the leprechaun‘Mary kissed the leprechaun.’‘Mary kissed the leprechaun.’

TáTá Máire ag- Máire ag-pógáilpógáil an lucharachán. an lucharachán.IsIs Mary ing- Mary ing-kisskiss the leprechaun the leprechaun‘Mary is kissing the leprechaun.’‘Mary is kissing the leprechaun.’

We find that if an We find that if an auxiliaryauxiliary occupies the verb occupies the verb slot at the beginning of the sentence, the main slot at the beginning of the sentence, the main verb appears between the subject and verb—it verb appears between the subject and verb—it remains, unmoved.remains, unmoved.

This suggests that deriving VSO from SVO is This suggests that deriving VSO from SVO is on the right track.on the right track.

VSO order in IrishVSO order in Irish

Where is the verb moving to, though?Where is the verb moving to, though? The verb ends up to the left of the The verb ends up to the left of the

subject, which in English we took to subject, which in English we took to be movement to C:be movement to C: Will BillWill Bill buy cheese? buy cheese?

A natural thing to suppose is that the A natural thing to suppose is that the verb moves to I and then to C in Irish verb moves to I and then to C in Irish to get VSO order.to get VSO order.


Except, consider these:Except, consider these: AnAn bhfaca tú an madra? bhfaca tú an madra?

QQ See you the dog See you the dog‘Did you see the dog?’‘Did you see the dog?’

Duirt mé Duirt mé gurgur phóg Máire an lucharachán. phóg Máire an lucharachán.Said I Said I thatthat kissed Mary the leprechaun kissed Mary the leprechaun‘I said that Mary kissed the leprechaun.’‘I said that Mary kissed the leprechaun.’

If the verb moves to C, where are If the verb moves to C, where are anan and and gurgur??


In English (and German and other In English (and German and other languages) if there is something languages) if there is something inin C, the C, the verb doesn’t move there (it doesn’t need verb doesn’t move there (it doesn’t need to):to): IsIs Bill hungry? Bill hungry? ShouldShould Bill Bill bebe hungry? hungry? I wonder I wonder ifif Bill Bill isis hungry. hungry.

But in Irish, we see an But in Irish, we see an overtovert complementizer followed by VSO.complementizer followed by VSO.

A VP-internal subject in A VP-internal subject in Irish?Irish?

One possibility that this One possibility that this suggests is that the verb is only suggests is that the verb is only moving to T, but the subject is moving to T, but the subject is actually actually lowerlower than T—and we than T—and we have a place in our tree which have a place in our tree which hasn’t been used yet, the hasn’t been used yet, the specifier of VP.specifier of VP. But what about English? We expect But what about English? We expect

that DS looks pretty much the that DS looks pretty much the same across languages, so why same across languages, so why does the subject seem to start in does the subject seem to start in different places in Irish and different places in Irish and English?English?

ti

V

VP

…

C

C

CP

T+Vi

T

TP

DP

WrapupWrapup So, what we’ve seen is basically that So, what we’ve seen is basically that

there is an operation of there is an operation of head movementhead movement which can take the head of an XP and which can take the head of an XP and attach it (attach it (head-adjoinhead-adjoin) it to a higher ) it to a higher head.head.

This kind of movement cannot skip over This kind of movement cannot skip over intervening heads in the structure intervening heads in the structure ((HMCHMC).).

We’ve seen V-to-I movement, I-to-C We’ve seen V-to-I movement, I-to-C movement, and N-to-D movement as movement, and N-to-D movement as examples of this.examples of this.

Week 8b. Head-movement CAS LX 522 Syntax I. The puzzle so far. Head-order and specifier-order...

Documents

Transcript of Week 8b. Head-movement CAS LX 522 Syntax I. The puzzle so far. Head-order and specifier-order...