Lesson 2 language Faculty

Innateness Hypothesis: Babies are equipped with innate language faculty which enables them learning a language. Evidences for existence of Language Faculty: 1- Independent of language learning ability from general intelligence. 2- Uniformity: all children follow the same language learning pattern and learn the same grammar. 3- Rapidity of Acquisition 4- Degenerate Input(poverty of stumulus) 5- Subconscious Process

Principles of UG Universal Grammar principles parameters Example: Considering Echo-questions: Echo Q: He had said who would do that? Non-Echo Q: Who had he said would do that? Two movements: 1- Auxiliary Movement 2- Wh-Movement Why are other possibilities ungrammatical? *Who would he had said do that? *What had he said would he do? *What would he had said he do?

Locality Principle Grammatical operations are local. Auxiliary inversion preposes the closest auxiliary. Wh-movement preposes the closest wh-word.

Parameters Parameters vary from language to language. Children have to learn the parameter. Example: 1-Null-subject Parameter null-subject languages (Farsi) non-null- subject languages (English)

Example 2 Wh-parameter: whether wh- word can be fronted Example 2 Wh-parameter: whether wh- word can be fronted? Chinese : in-situ English Example 3 Head-position Parameter head first: English head last: Korean Desire for change - close the door So Children are just required to learn words and the appropriate values of parameters.

Evidence for setting parameters Positive Negative direct : correction of children errors indirect: non-occurrence of certain types: such as head last Positive : existence of correct structures: children elicit the grammar out of these data. Direct negative evidence doesn’t play an important role: parents do not correct children so frequently and if they do children get discouraged. Secondly children are unresponsive to correction: eg page 19.

Grammatical Categories Categorization of words based on morphology and also syntax Inflectional morphology: different forms of the same word Derivational morphology: different kinds of words Nouns can be pluralized Verbs can be inflected Syntactic evidence for categorization: different distribution in sentence They have no……….. . They can …………. .

Adjectives are used to modify nouns while adverbs modify other types of expressions. Prepositions can be modified by “right” or “straight” But there are still some members of each category which lack some of the properties of that category. Adjectives + ly = adverb But *fastly? He is better at French that you. (more fluent) He speaks French better than you. (more fluently) Solution: substitution of morphologically undetermined word by a regular member.

Functional categories Contentive vs functors Functors (function words): have grammatical information (such as person, gender, case and, etc.) Test: if a word has antonyms then it is a content word. Functors: determiners, complementizer that, auxiliaries

Referentials 1- determiners: the , this, that 2- quantifiers: many, every, each, some Similar to adjectives: are used before nouns Different from adjectives: adjectives can be stacked in front of nouns different distribution

pronouns Function: referring to nouns Determiners and quantifiers can also functions as pronouns: Q-pronoun: Many died in the accident. D-pronoun: I prefer that.

Auxillaries perfect: have 1- aspect aux : progressive: be 2-tense aux: do 3- modal aux: must, would 4- voice: be take different complements can be negated by NOT Different from verbs : can undergo inversion can be used in tag questions

Infinitival to Similar to auxiliaries 1- occupy similar position: both before verbs: It’s vital [that John should … It’s vital [for John to … 2- behave alike in omission of its complement …..but I don’t want to. ….but I should. So Chomsky has classified both of them in the same category called I or INFL which shows the inflectional properties of the sentence. But in newer version, its call Tense.

Infinitival to To has abstract(invisible) tense properties. We believe [the president to have been lying] non-finite tense We believe [the president may have been lying] finite tense Both auxiliary and to are tense markers, however to is a no-finite tense but we can guess the meaning from the context. While auxiliary carries finite tense.

complementisers Complimentisers are used to introduce a complement clause. That : I think [that ….] If : I wonder [if can do his job.] For: I am anxious [for you to receive the best treatment possible] That and if get finite clauses while for is and infinitival complementiser. Regarding their force: if has interrogative force that has declarative force for has irrealis or hypothetical force

Difference between for as a preposition and for as a complementiser. 1- For as a preposition can be intensified by straight or right, but not as a complementiser. The book is right on the table. *I am right anxious for you to get a good treatment. 2- prepositions cannot get an infinitive clause as complement. She was surprised at [there to be nobody to meet her] They can only get a gerund structure as verbal complement. She was surprise at [John being so careless]. 3- The noun complement of for as preposition can be preposed while this cannot be done with for as complementiser. I want vote for Trump. Who do you want to vote for? They were anxious for trump to win the election. *Who were they anxious for to win the election?

Argument Structure Arguments are the complements of a head in a phrase. internal argument vs. external argument Envious: adj, NP+PP Restless :adj, NP Subcategorisation: only internal argument meet: v, [_ NP] give: v, [_NP, NP] [_ NP, NP] Internal arguments are call complement.

Selectional Properties Selectional Properties determine the type and semantic features of complements. He might _____ to Paris. (only verbs that can be followed by to) John eats ______ for lunch.

Structure of a Phrase Phrase: head + complement A phrase is a projection of a predicate Head determine the grammatical properties of its complement. Internal structure of a phrase can be illustrated by: bracketing tree diagram Help you , is a projection of the word help. i.d : HELP has some requirements in itself which needs to be satisfied properly by a suitable complement. Talent should flourished.

Tree Diagram Tree diagrams have some principles: 1- headedness principle: Every syntactic structure is a projection of a head word. 2- Binarity principle: Every syntactic structure is binary-branching

A tree diagram like this one violates both principles. Since: What are you doing? * [Are trying to help you] an incomplete phrase: intermediate projection [Trying to help you]vp a complete phrase [We are trying to help you]TP T requires a subject to be complete.

[We are trying to help you]TP T requires a subject to be a complete phrase. همیشه intermediateها یک spec نیاز دارند تا کامل شوند. Merge میشوند تا یک maximal projection شوند. Straight to the bed

Extended Projection Principle/EPP A finite tense constituent T must be extended into a TP projection containing a subject It is raining. There are three students in the room. Expletive pronouns: pronouns with no intrinsic meaning. They are used just to satisfy the EPP. این نوع ضمایر معنی ندارند. چون نمیتوان تکیه تقابلی بگیرند و پرسشی هم نمیشوند.

Clauses with complementiser SPEAKER A: What are you saying? SPEAKER B: That we are trying to help you One possibility: Violation of headedness and Binarity principles.

To satisfy headedness principle we have to imagine a CP To satisfy headedness principle we have to imagine a CP. (consistency in theory) And also for explaining the grammaticality of [That we are trying to help you]

Testing structure: testing constituency 1- coordination : By coordinating conjunctions: but, or, and [slowly] but [surely] [to go] or [to stay] 1- SPEAKER A: What does he do to keep fit? SPEAKER B: Run up the hill and up the mountain 2- SPEAKER A: What did he do about his bills? SPEAKER B: *Ring up the phone company and [up the electricity company]pp the string up the phone company in (2) is not a constituent. Only constituents of the same type can be coordinated. نمودار درختی نشان دهنده ساختار سازه ای جمله است. اما از کجا تشخیص دهیم که چه ترکیبی از کلمات یک سازه یا یک واحد نحوی را تشکیل میدهد. تا حالا از شم زبانی استفاده میکردیم ولی باید یک روش عینی باشدو در مثال دوم up در واقع قسمتی از فعل است

(a) The chairman has resigned from [the board] and [the company] (b) The chairman has resigned [from the board] and [from the company] (c) The chairman has [resigned from the board] and [gone abroad] (d) The chairman [has resigned from the board] and [is living in Utopia] (e) *The [chairman has resigned from the board] and [company has replaced him] (f) [The chairman has resigned from the board] and [the company has replaced him]

Testing structure: testing constituency 2- Substitution Testing the constituency of a string of words by seeing whether the relevant string can be replaced by (or serve as the antecedent of) a single word. (a) The chairman has resigned from the board, and he is now working for a rival company (b) The press say that the chairman has resigned from the board, and so he has (c) If the Managing Director says the chairman has resigned from the board, he must have done (d) If the chairman has resigned from the board (which you say he has), how come his car is still in the company car park?

Testing structure: testing constituency 3- Preposing Preposing a maximal projection in order to highlight it in some way Constraint: Only the smallest possible Maximal Projection which contains the highlighted material, can be moved (a) I will certainly try to give up smoking (b) Give up smoking I will certainly try to (c) *To give up smoking, I will certainly try because the VP is smaller than the TP containing it.

Nobody had expected that the FBA would assassinate the king of Ruritania (b) *King of Ruritania, nobody had expected that the FBA would assassinate the (c) The king of Ruritania, nobody had expected that the FBA would assassinate (d) *The FBA would assassinate the king of Ruritania, nobody had expected that (e) That the FBA would assassinate the king of Ruritania, nobody had expected

Functional Head Constraint/FHC The complement of a certain type of functional head F (such as a determiner or complementiser) cannot be moved on its own (without also moving F) If we want to focus just on [The king of Ruritania]: a DP; we have to move the entire TP: Maximal Projection, If we want to focus on [the FBA would assassinate the king of Ruritania], FHC dictates that we have to move the entire CP: That the FBA would assassinate the king of Ruritania That’s why b is ungrammatical

Syntactic Relations Phrases and sentences are formed by a series of binary merger operations. Resulting structures can be represented in the form of tree diagrams. Tree diagrams are referred to in the relevant technical literature as phrase- markers. Each node in the tree represents a different constituent of the sentence. Node: the point in the tree which carries a label Terminal node: nodes at the very bottom of the tree Root: the topmost node The number of nodes is the same as the number of constituents or phrases in a sentence Each terminal node carries a lexical item

Syntactic Relations 1- Containment: when a constituent contains or is contained in another constituent. 2-C-command: a constituent X c-commands its sister constituent Y and any constituent which is contained within Y root C-command : has a central role in syntax

Significance of c-command in explanation of anaphors Anaphors: refer to something within the same clause 1- Reflexive anaphors: myself, yourself, themselves 2- Reciprocals: each other, one another Reciprocals cannot refer freely to an entity in outside world but must be bound in the same phrase or sentence. He must feel proud of himself. She must feel proud of himself. unbound

The president may blame himself The president may blame himself. *Supporters of the president may blame himself. Why? C-command condition on binding: A bound constituent must be c-commanded by an appropriate antecedent. To go behind the curtain To flesh out

*Supporters of the president may blame himself. The president doesn’t c-command the PRN himself.

Null Constituents Constituents that do not have overt realization. They have grammatical and semantic features but no phonological representation. 1- Null subject: Pro : null finite subject; in pro-drop languages like Italian and Persian . Reasons for imagining Pro: 1- accounting for our intuition 2- agreement between verb and subject

Null subjects in English 1- imperative null subject 2- truncated null subject : in texting or a style of colloquial English and in diary styles of written English : shortened sentences.: if it is the first word in a sentence. Can’t find my pen think I left it at home *Why do always lose things? 3- non-finite null subject: PRO: big PRO: in non-finite clauses we want [to play the piano]

Big PRO We would like [to stay] We would like [you to stay]

Big PRO The null PRO subject of a control infinitive becomes overt if the infinitive clause is substituted by a finite clause (a) I am sorry [PRO to have kept you waiting] (b) I am sorry [I have kept you waiting] (a) Jim promised [PRO to come to my party] (b) Jim promised [he would come to my party]

BIG PRO PRO is controlled by the subject of the matrix clause. (the subject of the main clause is the antecedent of controller of PRO) We would like PRO to stay = We would like ourselves to stay Verbs like want and like which take an infinitive clause are called Control Verbs. Their embedded clause is called control clause. وقتی pro داشته باشم مرجع آن همان مرجع فاعل است.

Evidence for existence of PRO 1- Substitution: I want [to go home] I want [you to go home] 2- reflexive pronouns Reflexive anaphors should have an antecedent in the same clause. She wants [John to help himself] *They want [John to help themselves]

Evidence for existence of PRO Now, Why is this sentence grammatical? She wants [to help herself] Because herself is bound by an antecedent (PRO) in the same clause. 3- EPP: finite tenses (T) have an [EPP] feature which requires them to have a subject specifier. PRO can satisfy EPP.

Null Auxiliaries All finite clauses with no overt auxiliary have Null Auxiliary. Evidence: 1- coordination He could have helped her, or [she have helped him] the T constituent could in the second clause undergoes a particular form of ellipsis called gapping. چون دستوری است پس حتما دومی هم یک aux دارد Gapping is a grammatical operation by which the head of a phrase is given a null spellout – and so has its phonetic features deleted – when the same item occurs elsewhere within the sentence, and is so called because it leaves an apparent ‘gap’ in the phrase where the head would otherwise have been.)

Null Auxiliaries 2- Existence of HAVE instead of HAS in the second clause He could have helped her, or [she have helped him] 3- Citicisation: I’ve studied the book. You’ve done your duty. I’ve forgotten to lock the door *He could have helped her or she’ve helped him. Why is cliticisation blocked here?

Null Auxiliaries Condition for Cliticisation: Cliticisation of have onto a pronoun is only possible when the two are immediately adjacent, and there is no (overt or null) constituent intervening between the two. *He could have helped her or she’ve helped him.

Null T In finite clauses without any auxiliry All clauses are TPs, headed by an (overt or null) T constituent. I enjoy syntax. I do enjoy syntax. He does enjoy syntax. Has a null t which is semantically present. And determines the tense of the sentenence.

Null T So T is the place of tense, person, and number properties. 3SgPr

Null T If there is an auxiliary in the sentence, these features attach to it. Affix hopping: in pf component, an unattached affix is lowered onto the verbal head below it. وقتی در syntax نمودار درختی جمله ساخته میشود سپس به بخشهای semantic و pf میرود تا به آن phonetic form داده شود. Affix hopping در pf

T is the locus of tense features or auxiliaries. So: Auxiliaries and main verbs occupy different positions. Evidence: comparing the behavior of items that have sometimes the status of auxiliary or verbs For example: causative or experiential HAVE and perfect HAVE. I had an expert check my car. I have checked my car. The doctor had an eye-specialist examine the patient The doctor had the patient examined by an eye-specialist The teacher had three students walk out on her I’ve never had anyone send me flowers دلیل اینکه نمیچسبند این است که یک سازه t بین آنها قرار دراد.

Difference: 1- inversion 2- cliticisation They’ve seen a ghost (= perfect have) *They’ve their car serviced regularly (= causative have). *They’ve students walk out on them sometimes (= experiential have) *They’ve their car serviced regularly. [TP They [T have+Tns] [VP [V seen] a ghost]] (b) [TP They [T Tns] [VP [V have] their car serviced regularly]] (c) [TP They [T Tns] [VP [V have] students walk out on them sometimes]]

Null T in bare infinitive clauses You have to let [John go home]. I have never known [Tom criticise anyone] Verbs like Know, let, see get infinitive particle with null spellout

Null T in bare infinitive clauses Arguments: 1- some bare infinitive clauses have to infinitive counterparts in present-day English I’ve never known [Tom (to) criticise anyone] Tom has never been known [to criticise anyone] A reporter saw [Senator Sleaze leave Benny’s Bunny Bar] Senator Sleaze was seen [to leave Benny’s Bunny Bar]

Null T in bare infinitive clauses Argument 2- cliticisation I can’t let [you have my password] *I can’t let [you’ve my password] I can’t let [TP you [T to] have my password]

Null C in finite clauses The force of a clause is determined by C. We didn’t know [if he had resigned]: interrogative We didn’t know [that he had resigned]: declarative We didn’t know [he had resigned]: declarative Null C assigns declarative force to the clause

Null C in finite clauses

Null C in finite clauses Empirical Evidence: Coordination We didn’t know [he had resigned] or [that he had been accused of corruption] All clauses (including main ones) are headed by a C which assigns declarative force.

Null C in main clauses

Null C in interrogative clauses Even interrogative sentences are headed by a C which assigns interrogative force. Inverted auxiliaries occupy the head C position of CP in questions Evidence: SPEAKER A: What were you going to ask me? SPEAKER B: (a) If you feel like a Coke (b) Do you feel like a Coke? (c) *If do you feel like a Coke? I am so tired but [should I continue my job?]

Null C in non-finite clauses I will arrange [for them to see a specialist] How about this one? I wanted [him to play the piano] Even in this sentence, when the infinitive complement is separated from the verb want in some way, the complement of want is indeed introduced by for I wanted more than anything [for him to play the piano] What I wanted was [for him to play the piano]

Further evidence: Pseudo-clefting She wanted [him to apologise] She wanted more than anything for him to apologise What she really wanted was for him to apologise Further evidence: Pseudo-clefting What I’ll try and arrange is [for you to see a specialist] *What I’ll try and arrange for is [you to see a specialist] What I’ll try and arrange is [PRO to see a specialist] Only a CP like for you to see a specialist can occupy focus position in a pseudo- cleft sentence and a TP like you to see a specialist cannot. The grammaticality of the last one suggests that the embedded must have a CP status.

Defective Clauses: Exceptional case-marking They believe [him to be innocent] We didn’t intend [you to get hurt] A clause with no C.: defective clause The subject gets its accusative case from the verb in matrix clause. So ECM clauses are Tps not Cps. Reason: 1- Coordination: *We didn’t intend [you to hurt him] or [for him to hurt you]

Defective Clauses: Exceptional case-marking 2- Pseudo-clefting Only CPs can be in focus position. *What they believe is [him to be innocent] *What we hadn’t intended was [you to get hurt] 3- passivization The subject of embedded clause can be passivized and made into the subject of the main clause. He is believed to be innocent You weren’t intended to get hurt

If they were CPs, the subject could not pass C and move to the subject of main clause. She wanted [John to apologise] *John was wanted [to apologise]

Case Marking Every NP should be assigned a case by a case marker. Transitive verbs assign Acc case. Accusative Case Assignment Condition: A transitive head assigns accusative case to a noun or pronoun expression which it c-commands. Earliness Principle Operations apply as early in a derivation as possible Some case-markers give Nom and some Acc case.

Case Marking Some complementisers (like that)assign Nom case. I will arrange [for him to meet them] For = transitive complementiser Nominative Case Assignment Condition An intransitive finite complementiser assigns nominative case to a noun or pronoun expression which it c-commands Some complementisers (like that)assign Nom case. He may suspect [that she is lying] In ECM the subject get nominative case but from the verb of the main clause

Null Case Assignment Condition: A null intransitive non-finite complementiser assigns null case to a pronoun which it c-commands The subject of a finite clause get Nom Case from Null C. I will arrange [PRO to see a specialist]

PRO in control clauses get Null Case PRO in control clauses get Null Case. The function of Null Case: It is the Null Case which makes sure that PRO has Null Spell-out.

Null determiners All nominals are projection of a determiner. DP hypothesis: Even bare nominal are headed by a null determiner or quantifier. Italians love opera= the Italians love opera

Coordination: Italians and [the majority of Mediterraneans] love opera Italians love [opera] and [the finer things in life]

Features of a null determiner 1- Third person We linguists take ourselves/*yourselves/*themselves too seriously, don't we/*you/*they? You linguists take yourselves/*ourselves/*themselves too seriously, don't you/*we/*they? Linguists take themselves/*ourselves/*yourselves too seriously, don't they/*we/*you The person properties of a DP are determined by the person features carried by its head determiner.

Features of a null determiner 2- Specific selectional properties Null Determiners select only a plural count noun or singular mass noun. Dogs are not meat. Poetry is my favorite genre. I wrote poems or poetry *I wrote poem

Features of a null determiner 3- Semantic properties The null determiner ø have a generic interpretation. Eggs are fattening = (Eggs in general) Exception: Nominals with a vocative, predicative or exclamative function are not DP Do all syntacticians suffer from asteriskitis, doctor? Dr Dolittle is head of department Poor fool! He thought he’d passed the syntax exam