Class Note for LINGUIST 601 at UMass(6)
Class Note for LINGUIST 601 at UMass(6)
Popular in Course
Popular in Department
This 10 page Class Notes was uploaded by an elite notetaker on Friday February 6, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to a course at University of Massachusetts taught by a professor in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 12 views.
Reviews for Class Note for LINGUIST 601 at UMass(6)
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 02/06/15
Introduction to Transformational Grammar LINGUIST 601 September 27 2004 Complement Selection and the Structure of the VP 1 C selection S selection and L selection 11 Categorial Selection 1 Ceselection categorial selection 7 certain heads impose particular demands on the category of the XP they combine with These demands are referred to as ceselection Some things we could code using ceselection 2 Imowcan take NPs indicatives SS and interrogative S s a John knows Npthe time b John knows 3 that the world is full of noises c John knows 3 what the time is 3 ask can take NPs and interrogative S s but not indicative S s a John asked me Npthe time b John asked me 3 that the world was full of noises c John asked me 3 what the time was 4 wondercan only take interrogative S s not NPs or indicative SS 9 Paul wonders Npthe time 0 Paul wonders 3 that the world is full of noises c Paul wonders 3 what the time is 5 a A adjectives require PP complements PP fond of the tall student NP fond the tall student N fond tall student AP fond tall b N nouns require PP complements PP queen ofthe blue isle NP queen the blue isle N queen blue isle AP queen que c P prepositions typically require NP complements NP on the brown table N on brown table AP on brown PP on below the brown table We can build ceselection into our system by adding uninterpretable categorial features on heads A head which ceselects subcategorizes for an XP will have an uninterpretable X categorial fea ture indicated as uX For a syntactic derivation to succeed ie converge all the uninterpretable features must be deleted by a matching categorial feature on its complement 12 Semantic Selection Semantic selection is the idea that predicates impose selectional constraints on their complements by imposing constraints on the semantics of the complement For example for the verbs in 4 we could have something like the following 6 a know complement must be a question or a proposition b ask wonder complement must be a question Siselection seems particularly helpful in cases Where an argument of a particular sort is needed but its category is not xed 7 put selects for a location a Bill put the book on the table b Bill put the book under the table c Bill put the book there 1 Bill put the book away e Bill put the book One can imagine theories that only have ciselection theories that only have siselection and also theories that have both ciselection and siselection cf GrimshaW 1979 Certain authors have argued that siselection is the most basic form of selection and that certain aspects of ciselection can be derived from the semantic properties of the relevant head Theo ries that attempt to eliminate ciselection in favor of siselection need and have explanations for contrasts between ask and wonderwhich have similar siselectional needs 8 a John asked me the time b John wondered the time 13 Lexical Selection Sometimes particular heads Will select for particular lexical items notjust particular categories This is called Lexical7selection by Pesetsky l 991 9 a verbs i dependrelyion ii hopeifor iii toyiwith b nouns i loveifor of ii desireifor of c adjectives i proud ashamediof ii similarito iii differentifrom iv consistent 7 with Liselection displays considerable idiosyncrasy Lexical items that are semantically close can 17 select different prepositions There is also unpredictable crosslinguistic variation in this domain Liselection is also found With clausal complements 10 a i She liked the concerto ii She liked hearing the concerto iii She liked to hear the concerto b i She enjoyed the concerto ii She enjoyed hearing the concerto iii She enjoyed to hear the concerto ll a i He succeeded in convincing her ii He succeeded to convince her b i He managed in convincing her ii He managed to convince her The consensus in the literature seems to be that we need seselection augmented with leselection What would traditionally be put under ceselection can be derived from seselection certain princie ples that govern how certain meanings are canonically realized syntactically and other indepen dent properties of the lexical item See Pesetsky 1991 for details 2 S in X theory 21 VP in X etheory In 12 the NP the city is the complement of the verb destroy l 2 The Romans Vp destroyed Np the city What goes into the Spec VP position Let us consider the case of nominalizations 13 The Romans destruction of the city NP NA The Romans N PP destruction A P NP of the city In 13 we see that all the arguments of N occur within its own phrase maximal projection A natural idea within the spirit of crossecategorial symmetry is to extend the idea that all the arguments of a head should occur within its own phrase maximal projection This gives us the tree in 15 for l4 14 The Romans destroyed the city XP NP X39 The Romans X VP 7 A Npapeciiier V39 lt The Romansgt V NPzzommmem destroy the city But there is no The Romans inside the VP Yes there isn t because now it is in the Spec XP Questions 1 What is XP 2 Why does the NP move from Spec VP to Spec XP We will answer Question 1 in this section and Question 2 in the next What about VP Several authors have argued that what we have treated above as a VP 1 6 Vp The Romans yr destroy the city has additional structure and involves another head called V pronounced little v 1 7 Ma The Romans M v0 Vp destroy the city The v0 head is taken to introduce the external argument 7 the argument that comes in at the end and tends to be interpreted as an agent see Kratzer 1996 for arguments in support of this position For our current purposes the difference between 16 and l 7 will not be relevant So in the rest of this handout when I will say VP it will actually correspond to what is often called VP When we start talking about passivization and unaccusativity the difference will become more substantive and the relevance of the decomposition of the VP will become clear 22 What is XP XP S However ifXP S what is X the head ofXP S We know from our discussion of X theory that every XP has to have a head of the same kind ie XP cannot be headed by Y This property is know as endocentricity Now let us consider how we have been analyzing cases like 18 18 Mark believes that Laetitia should kiss Ophelia S Comp S that NP 7 Laetitia Modal VP should V NP kiss Ophelia Neither S nor S are endocentric How can we reformulate S and S so that they are endocentric and t within the X ischema From their distributions we know that VP 75 S So V0 should not be the head of S 0 Approach 1 The element which we have labeled Modal could be head of S This is the most natural approach because i heads are atmost lexical items there may be heads that are smaller than words ii Out of the immediate constituents of S Modal is the only lexical item What then about cases which don t have a modal such as 19a b 19 a Mark believes that Laetitia is kissing Ophelia right now b Mark believes that Laetitia kissed Ophelia yesterday 19a is easier to take care of We canjust create a class ofAuXiIiaryverbs which includes all modal verbs be and one kind of have But cases like 19b pose a greater challenge One option is to say what we have been saying up until now ie the following structure 20 S NP VP Laetitia A V NP kissed Ophelia The immediate problem for this representation is that there is no candidate for the head of S The immediate constituents of S are NP and VP and neither of them are heads So we seem to be stuck At this point we should look back to cases of VPipreposing VPitopicalization We had seen there that some kinds of VPs could be preposed but others couldn t 21 a Vp Kiss Ophelia Laetitia did b Vp Kissed Ophelia Laetitia c Vp Kissed Ophelia Laetitia did What distinguishes the grammatical Zlb from the ungrammatical 21a The grammatical case involve a VP without tensepersonnumber marking The verb appears in its bare form The VP in the ungrammatical case involves a verb marked for tensepersonnumber marking In the case at hand the verb kissed is marked for Past Tense We want to distinguish between these two kinds of VPs and yet also retain a link between them 0 Approach 2 We postulate node In ection where the tensein ectional information associated with a verb could be stored This node ln ection will head a phrase ln ection Phrase lP which will be equivalent to an S IP is also often referred to as the Tense Phrase TP 22 Laetitia kissed Ophelia 23 IP NP 1 Laetitia 10 VP ed A preztifier V Laetitia V sztomplemem kiss Ophelia 0 Clearly there has to be a way for the fed suf x under I0 and the verb kiss to combine In ection Proposal An I0 and a V0 that heads the complement VP of the I0 combine in the phonological output ie when you try to pronounce the above tree the 10 node and the V0 node combine and are pronounced together Cases like Zlb are bad because they would involve topicalization of an I and only full phrases can be moved around Zlc is bad because there are two sets oftenseagreement markings oat ing around while there is only one I0 to supply the information 23 X rules for IP Since we have adopted X itheory the form of the rules will be quite familiar 24 a Iquot gt NPsmm 139 b 139 gt 1 VPCWWW We can now give a new de nition of the notion subject ofa sentence The subject ofa sentence is the NP that occurs in the Spec lP In English and many other languages the subject of a sentence agrees with the verb What it means for a subject to agree with its verb is illustrated in 25 John eats pizza UN John eat pizza 9 I eat pizza fl 1 eats pizza This relationship between the verb and its subject can be stated extremely locally within our new system as the re ex if the Speci erihead relationship 26 Agreement Rule Copy the personinumber features of the NP in Spec IE on the l The personinumber features of an NP are also referred to as its features phiifeatures The features of some pronouns are shown below 27 l lst person singular a b we lst person plural 9 you 2nd person 1 she 3rd person singular e they 3rd person plural In English gender is not part of the verbal agreement system so she and he can be taken to have the same features but in languages where they are part of the agreement system they would also need to be represented 24 What can go under 1quot ln sentences without any auxiliary element the in ection is all there is in 1 However other elements can also appear under I 28 lmustshouldcould eat some waf es Modals a b lam eating some waf es be P l have eaten some waf es today auxiliary have 1 I did not eat the waf es auxiliary do e lwant to eat waf esin nitival to Earlier we saw two syntactic processes 7 VP Topicalization and pseudocleft formation 7 which were sensitive to the presence of in ection Another grammatical process that is sensitive to the presence of in ection is VP Ellipsis VP Ellipsis in English involves a silent tenseless VP together with an overt realization of l 29 Jerry shouldn t leave town Bill should Vpleavetown a b Tyrone isn t eating waf es today but Ken is XPiseaungapples 9 Max hasn t nished his homework but Jose has Vp mshedhishomewmk fl Ana doesn t want to leave but Mona wants to Vpleave e Chunghye doesn t like unicorns but Maribel does Vp likeumcoms Chunghye doesn t like unicorns but Maribel Vp likesumcmns Each ofthe elements in 28 has distinct properties Let us consider them individually To provide contrast we will start by looking at one verbal element that cannot occur in 1 namely a main verb 241 Main Verbs Main verbs have nonitensed forms past participles present participles and in nitival forms 30 a Talvin ate the pizza b Talvin has eaten the pizza past participle c Talvin is eating the pizza present participle fl Talvin wants to eat the pizza in nitival form When negated or questioned a form ofthe verb do is needed Otherwise the sentence is ungrami matical 31 Talvin didn t eat the pizza 9 E Talvin eatn t the pizza Did Talvin eat the pizza Pd 9 Eat Talvin the pizza e Why did Talvin eat the pizza f Why ate Talvin the pizza Cases such as these can be explained by noting that the presence of the negation disrupts the local relationship needed by the l0 and the V0 in order to combine together 1 Crucially main verbs stay in V0 and do not move to l The verb do comes in and saves the day by giving a realization to the suf x in l which could not have been pronounced on its own This process is called do support 242 Modals Modals are set apart by the fact that they can never occur in nonitensed environments 32 a Talvin wants to mustshouldcould win this game b To mustshouldcould play baseball is fun Modals invert in questions and precede negationZ 33 a Mustshouldcould Talvin win this game b Why mustshouldcould Talvin win this game c Talvin mustshouldcould not win this game The facts follow if we assume that Modal verbs are always generated in a Tensed I Since modal verbs are generated in 1 they can realize whatever features I0 has and the I0 does not need to be close to V0 1The structure is something like I0 Negation PWhere do adverbs go 2In fact dorsupport is not a possibility here 243 Auxiliaries be and havepwfm Unlike Modals auxiliaries can occur in noni nite environments 34 a Talvin wants to be popular b Talvin wants to have been popular However like modals auxiliaries invert in questions and precede negation 3 35 Is Talvin winning this game 3 Has Talvin won this game Why is Talvin winning this game lo Why has Talvin won this game e Talvin isn t winning this game f Talvin hasn t won this game The above examples suggest that the auxiliaries havebe are generated in V0 like main verbs but can move up to l0 unlike main verbs 4 o to only occurs in itense l 0 do only occurs in tense I0 when the l0 is unable to combine locally with V05 25 S in X theory 5 as it stands is an exocentric projection ie it is not headed by a head of its own category Actually things are even worse It is quite unclear whether 539 has a head 36 S Comp S that Tim is nuts A neat solution and one that is compatible with X itheory is to take Comp as the head of S In fact this solution is forced upon us since the only potential head among the immediate constituents of S is Comp We cannot look inside the SlP for a head because the IP is a complete phrase by itself Assuming the IP to be a complement of Comp we have the following tree 37 CP Speci er C Comp lP that Tim is nuts 3Dorsupport is not a possibility here either Consider what happens with have to possessive have 4What does the tree look like now 5What about the other do What goes into the Spec CP We will answer this question when we discuss Whemovement questions relative clauses etc We now move to discuss why the NP in Spec VP moves to Spec 1P The answer lies in the domain of Case Theory and AeMovement References Grimshaw J 1979 Complement Selection and the Lexicon Linguistic Inquiry 102 2797326 Kratzer A 1996 Severing the External Argument from Its Verb in J Rooryck and L Zaring eds Phrase Structure and the Lexicon Kluwer Pesetsky D 1991 Zero Syntax Vol2 7 ln nitives unpublished manuscript MIT available from website 10
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'