1 Principles & Parameters Approach in Linguistics II Bibhuti Bhusan Mahapatra

2 X-Bar Theory Every Phrase has a head of which it is the projection. Every head can take a complement and a specifier in its maximal projection. XP Specifier X’ X Complement

3 Projection principle Representations at each syntactic level (i.e., LF, and D- and S- structure) are projected from the lexicon, in that they observe the subcategorization properties of lexical item.

4 Theta criterion All complements of a head are theta positions Each Argument bears one and only one  -role, and each theta role is assigned to one and only one argument. An argument is assigned theta role by virtue of the theta position that it or its trace occupies

5 The Empty element PRO 1)i. The students know that Bill visited Paris. ii. The students want that Bill visit Paris. iii. The students prefer for Bill to visit Paris. iv. The students want Ø Bill to visit Paris. v. The students want Ø PRO to visit Paris. 2) [… know [ COMP that [ NP Bill INFL [ VP visit Paris]]]] 3) [… want [ COMP Ø [ NP PRO INFL [ VP visit Paris]]]]  When INFL = [-Tense] and COMP ≠ for in syntactic representations, then the NP subject of the embedded clause may and normally must be PRO, otherwise it cannot be PRO.

6 The empty element ‘trace’ 4)I. John knows Bill saw Mary ii. John knows who Bill saw. 5)[… knows [ COMP who i [ NP Bill INFL [ VP saw t i ]]]] 6)i. It is unclear who(m) Bill saw. ii. It is unclear who(m) PRO to see. iii. It is unclear what PRO to do. 7) […unclear [ COMP who i [ NP PRO INFL [ VP to see t i ]]]]  A trace is a result of move-⍺.

7 PRO is invisible to PF rules 8)i)The students want PRO to visit Paris. ii) The students wanna visit Paris. iii) The students want Bill to visit Paris. iv) *The students wanna Bill visit Paris. want+to  wanna  The phonological rules of PF-component do not “see” the abstract features of PRO.

8 Thank You