1. Week 14. Finishing up from last time and some commentary… CAS LX 522 Syntax I

2. Previously, in LX522, … Lexicon: holds the pieces that our sentences are built from, lexical items, bundled properties like [N], [past], etc. Lexicon: holds the pieces that our sentences are built from, lexical items, bundled properties like [N], [past], etc. DS: Assembled from lexical items and conforming to X-bar theory, matching up predicates (  -assigners) and arguments. DS: Assembled from lexical items and conforming to X-bar theory, matching up predicates (  -assigners) and arguments. SS/LF: Parts of the tree are moved around in order to satisfy requirements imposed by the lexical items that were not already satisfied at DS. SS/LF: Parts of the tree are moved around in order to satisfy requirements imposed by the lexical items that were not already satisfied at DS. SS: Some requirements must be satisfied by SS (“overt”), others just need to be satisfied (by LF). Those that don’t need to be satisfied by SS generally wait (“procrastinate”) until after SS (“covert”). SS: Some requirements must be satisfied by SS (“overt”), others just need to be satisfied (by LF). Those that don’t need to be satisfied by SS generally wait (“procrastinate”) until after SS (“covert”).

3. Previously, in LX522… Some example requirements: Some example requirements: EPP (T needs a specifier), [+Q]-C needs a T, [+WH]-C needs a [+wh]-specifier, v needs a V, … EPP (T needs a specifier), [+Q]-C needs a T, [+WH]-C needs a [+wh]-specifier, v needs a V, … DPs need Case, quantifiers must bind a variable from outside the clause, wh-words must be in SpecCP, … DPs need Case, quantifiers must bind a variable from outside the clause, wh-words must be in SpecCP, … Constraints on movement: Constraints on movement: Head movement constraint Head movement constraint Subjacency (wh-island constraint, CNP constraint) Subjacency (wh-island constraint, CNP constraint) Proper binding condition (moved element c-commands its trace) Proper binding condition (moved element c-commands its trace) Shortest move (where two movements could both satisfy the same requirement, only the shorter movement is grammatical). Shortest move (where two movements could both satisfy the same requirement, only the shorter movement is grammatical).

4. Specific constructions Now that we’ve got the basics of the theory, let’s look at some other more specific ideas we have about various constructions. Now that we’ve got the basics of the theory, let’s look at some other more specific ideas we have about various constructions.

5. vP and the Agent  -role Recall that in order to properly analyze ditransitive verbs, we needed to suppose that the VP is made of two “shells”, the vP and the VP. The vP is where the Agent  -role is assigned. Recall that in order to properly analyze ditransitive verbs, we needed to suppose that the VP is made of two “shells”, the vP and the VP. The vP is where the Agent  -role is assigned. John j will t j give i the book t i to Mary. John j will t j give i the book t i to Mary. And given that we needed v to assign the Agent  -role in these constructions, we might as well assume that there is only one way that the Agent  -role gets assigned: The Agent  -role is only ever assigned to the specifier of vP. And given that we needed v to assign the Agent  -role in these constructions, we might as well assume that there is only one way that the Agent  -role gets assigned: The Agent  -role is only ever assigned to the specifier of vP.

6. vP and the Agent  -role Whenever there is an Agent  -role (transitives, unergatives, ditransitives), there is also a v to assign it. Whenever there is an Agent  -role (transitives, unergatives, ditransitives), there is also a v to assign it. v v vPvP DP V V VP the sandwich eat DP Bill

7. AgrOP and vP There seems to be a correlation between a verb being able to assign accusative Case to its object and there being an external argument (Agent). (Burzio’s Generalization). There seems to be a correlation between a verb being able to assign accusative Case to its object and there being an external argument (Agent). (Burzio’s Generalization). Translated into our terms, it seems that AgrOP (which is responsible for assigning accusative Case) can only be present if there is a vP assigning the Agent  -role. Translated into our terms, it seems that AgrOP (which is responsible for assigning accusative Case) can only be present if there is a vP assigning the Agent  -role. v v vPvP DP i V V VP the sandwich eat DP Bill AgrO AgrOP titi

8. ECM and AgrOP In cases where an embedded subject seems to get accusative case from the higher verb (I want Bill off the boat, I consider Bill to be annoying), this is due to raising the embedded subject into the higher clause’s AgrOP, as here. In cases where an embedded subject seems to get accusative case from the higher verb (I want Bill off the boat, I consider Bill to be annoying), this is due to raising the embedded subject into the higher clause’s AgrOP, as here. v v vPvP DP i V V VP Bill want DP I AgrO AgrOP titi P P PP DP the boatoff

9. More on  -roles and vP When there’s an Agent  -role, it is assigned by v in a vP structure. When there’s an Agent  -role, it is assigned by v in a vP structure. We said we might even think of v as having a meaning something like ‘CAUSE’ with the  -role going to the causer in SpecvP. We said we might even think of v as having a meaning something like ‘CAUSE’ with the  -role going to the causer in SpecvP. What about Experiencers (where there is no agentiveness) like John in John knows French, John needs to leave? What about Experiencers (where there is no agentiveness) like John in John knows French, John needs to leave? We’ll basically assume that there’s a vP whenever there is an external argument (generally either Agent or Experiencer—that is, generally cognizant). This one doesn’t mean ‘CAUSE’ of course, it’s a different v. We’ll basically assume that there’s a vP whenever there is an external argument (generally either Agent or Experiencer—that is, generally cognizant). This one doesn’t mean ‘CAUSE’ of course, it’s a different v.

10. Object control verbs Recall that one kind of verb that embeds a clause with PRO is the object control verb (I persuaded John PRO to leave). Recall that one kind of verb that embeds a clause with PRO is the object control verb (I persuaded John PRO to leave). These are like (well, they are) ditransitives, we need the vP structure to even be able to draw them. These are like (well, they are) ditransitives, we need the vP structure to even be able to draw them. You would draw them like this at DS, where DO later raises to SpecAgrOP (above vP) to get case (John persuaded me PRO to leave). You would draw them like this at DS, where DO later raises to SpecAgrOP (above vP) to get case (John persuaded me PRO to leave). TP V V VP DO v v vPvP SUB

11. vP, VP, and adverbs Recall that we needed to assume that V moves to v before SS to account for ditransitive verbs like John gave the book to Mary. Recall that we needed to assume that V moves to v before SS to account for ditransitive verbs like John gave the book to Mary. However, also recall that in English, the verb still has to precede adverbs… However, also recall that in English, the verb still has to precede adverbs… *John cleaned carefully his plate. *John cleaned carefully his plate. IO V V VP DO v v vPvP SUB

12. vP, VP, and adverbs There are lots of intricacies here, but the bottom line seems to be that sometimes you can’t adjoin an adverb to V’ There are lots of intricacies here, but the bottom line seems to be that sometimes you can’t adjoin an adverb to V’ In fact, it is very often when the adverb would separate the verb and an accusative Case marked object, for whatever reason. In fact, it is very often when the adverb would separate the verb and an accusative Case marked object, for whatever reason. But this also tells us that sometimes (usually?) you can attach adverbs to v’ instead. But this also tells us that sometimes (usually?) you can attach adverbs to v’ instead. John intentionally gave the book to Mary. John intentionally gave the book to Mary. John gave the book intentionally to Mary John gave the book intentionally to Mary John threw the book perfectly to Mary. John threw the book perfectly to Mary. John perfectly threw the book to Mary. John perfectly threw the book to Mary. IO V V VP DO v v vPvP SUB

13. Embedded non-finite clauses As mentioned earlier, the policy on embedded non-finite clauses is that they are just TPs unless there is evidence of a CP. As mentioned earlier, the policy on embedded non-finite clauses is that they are just TPs unless there is evidence of a CP. Consider: I know what PRO to buy. Consider: I know what PRO to buy. We have evidence of a CP here, since what must be occupying SpecCP in the lower clause. We have evidence of a CP here, since what must be occupying SpecCP in the lower clause.

14. Embedded non-finite clauses The subject of a finite clause can get nominative case in its clause. The subject of a finite clause can get nominative case in its clause. Subject moves to SpecAgrSP in a finite clause, gets case. Subject moves to SpecAgrSP in a finite clause, gets case. In a non-finite clause, nominative case is not available to the subject. In a non-finite clause, nominative case is not available to the subject. Policy: Nonfinite clauses do not have AgrSP. Policy: Nonfinite clauses do not have AgrSP. Note: Nothing prevents a nonfinite verb from assigning accusative case, so AgrOP can be in a nonfinite clause (plus, the evidence from French in favor of AgrOP in the first place was about nonfinite clauses). Note: Nothing prevents a nonfinite verb from assigning accusative case, so AgrOP can be in a nonfinite clause (plus, the evidence from French in favor of AgrOP in the first place was about nonfinite clauses).

15. Object wh-phrases and Case Movement must always be upwards. Movement must always be upwards. Wh-objects like what (in What should I buy?) are DPs, and need to get Case like any other DP. Wh-objects like what (in What should I buy?) are DPs, and need to get Case like any other DP. Wh-movement to SpecCP happens before SS (in English). Objects don’t need to get Case (move to SpecAgrOP) until after SS. Wh-movement to SpecCP happens before SS (in English). Objects don’t need to get Case (move to SpecAgrOP) until after SS. But if the wh-word is already in SpecCP, it can’t move back down to SpecAgrOP. But if the wh-word is already in SpecCP, it can’t move back down to SpecAgrOP. The only option is for the object to stop off in SpecAgrOP on its way up to SpecCP. The only option is for the object to stop off in SpecAgrOP on its way up to SpecCP.

16. Passives The effect of passivizing a verb like eat is that it loses the external  -role (vP) and the ability to assign accusative Case (AgrOP). The effect of passivizing a verb like eat is that it loses the external  -role (vP) and the ability to assign accusative Case (AgrOP). So, a passive form a verb is drawn (at DS) without vP and, thus, without the associated AgrOP. So, a passive form a verb is drawn (at DS) without vP and, thus, without the associated AgrOP. Remember: AgrOP goes with vP—you don’t have AgrOP without vP. Remember: AgrOP goes with vP—you don’t have AgrOP without vP.

17. Auxiliaries, tense, & aspect -ing is an Asp (the progressive), selected by be. -ing is an Asp (the progressive), selected by be. Others would include -en (the perfect), selected by have, and -en (the passive), selected by be. Others would include -en (the perfect), selected by have, and -en (the passive), selected by be. Auxiliaries (be, have) head their own VP, but don’t assign  -roles to arguments, so nothing starts out in their specifier. Auxiliaries (be, have) head their own VP, but don’t assign  -roles to arguments, so nothing starts out in their specifier. This tree does not show the vP for write, but the “official structure” should have they starting in SpecvP, getting the Agent  -role. This tree does not show the vP for write, but the “official structure” should have they starting in SpecvP, getting the Agent  -role.

18. Relative clauses The structure of a relative clause is like this. The structure of a relative clause is like this. A [+Q, +WH] CP is adjoined inside the NP, like an adjective, or a PP modifier. A [+Q, +WH] CP is adjoined inside the NP, like an adjective, or a PP modifier. C [+WH] [+Q] C CP TP I met t i N man N NP D the D DP SS N DP i who

19. Op Relative clauses can also make use of Op, the silent wh-word. Relative clauses can also make use of Op, the silent wh-word. That is, the book which Mary read and the book Mary read are really exactly the same except that in one case you pronounce the wh-word, and in the other, you don’t. That is, the book which Mary read and the book Mary read are really exactly the same except that in one case you pronounce the wh-word, and in the other, you don’t. the book [ CP which i Mary read t i ] the book [ CP which i Mary read t i ] the book [ CP Op i (that) Mary read t i ] the book [ CP Op i (that) Mary read t i ]

20. Op, DFC, & Recoverability The Doubly-Filled COMP filter is the traditional “explanation” for why *the book which that Mary read is bad. The Doubly-Filled COMP filter is the traditional “explanation” for why *the book which that Mary read is bad. Doubly-Filled COMP filter: *[ CP wh-word if/that/for…] Doubly-Filled COMP filter: *[ CP wh-word if/that/for…] Recoverability condition: The content of a null category must be recoverable. Recoverability condition: The content of a null category must be recoverable. the place [Op i (that) Mary bought that book t i ] the place [Op i (that) Mary bought that book t i ] the day [Op i (that) Mary bought that book t i ] the day [Op i (that) Mary bought that book t i ] the reason [Op i (that) Mary bought that book t i ] the reason [Op i (that) Mary bought that book t i ] the way [Op i (that) Mary bought that book t i ] the way [Op i (that) Mary bought that book t i ] This is why you can’t just ask a regular wh-question with Op. This is why you can’t just ask a regular wh-question with Op.

21. Summarizing some: DS Lexical items must be arranged in conformance with the  -criterion and X-bar theory. Lexical items must be arranged in conformance with the  -criterion and X-bar theory. Agent  -role is assigned by v. Agent  -role is assigned by v. AgrOP is only there if there is a vP as well. AgrOP is only there if there is a vP as well. Auxiliaries head their own VP and take AspP as a complement. Auxiliaries head their own VP and take AspP as a complement. Finite clauses and main clauses always have a C and a T. Finite clauses and main clauses always have a C and a T. Embedded nonfinite clauses only have a C if there is overt evidence for one. Embedded nonfinite clauses only have a C if there is overt evidence for one. Nonfinite clauses do not have AgrSP. Nonfinite clauses do not have AgrSP.

22. Summarizing some: SS Universally (by SS in all languages): Universally (by SS in all languages): SpecTP must be filled (EPP). SpecTP must be filled (EPP). Move the closest eligible DP. Move the closest eligible DP. v moves to V. v moves to V. Special head movements (by SS in some languages). Special head movements (by SS in some languages). Main clause [+Q] C: T moves to C. (English) Main clause [+Q] C: T moves to C. (English) Finite T: V moves to T (French, not English) Finite T: V moves to T (French, not English)

23. Summarizing some: SS/LF Languages can choose whether other things happen overtly (by SS) or just by LF. Languages can choose whether other things happen overtly (by SS) or just by LF. SpecCP must be filled with a wh-phrase [+Q,+WH] C. SpecCP must be filled with a wh-phrase [+Q,+WH] C. All wh-phrases must be in SpecCP for [+Q, +WH] C All wh-phrases must be in SpecCP for [+Q, +WH] C All quantifiers must bind a (case-marked) trace (moved to adjoin to AgrSP). All quantifiers must bind a (case-marked) trace (moved to adjoin to AgrSP). Object to SpecAgrOP for Case Object to SpecAgrOP for Case Subject to SpecAgrSP for Case Subject to SpecAgrSP for Case

24. So when is there a vP? When is there an AgrOP? If the verb assigns accusative Case, there is an AgrOP, and below that a vP (B’s G) assigning an external  -role. If the verb assigns accusative Case, there is an AgrOP, and below that a vP (B’s G) assigning an external  -role. Transitive active verbs have vP and AgrOP. Transitive active verbs have vP and AgrOP. Intransitive verbs don’t have AgrOP (they don’t assign accusative Case—there’s no object). Intransitive verbs can have vP though, if they assign an Agent/Experiencer  -role. Intransitive verbs don’t have AgrOP (they don’t assign accusative Case—there’s no object). Intransitive verbs can have vP though, if they assign an Agent/Experiencer  -role. Passives and unaccusatives don’t have vP (and of course no AgrOP either, since they’re intransitive and don’t assign accusative Case). Passives and unaccusatives don’t have vP (and of course no AgrOP either, since they’re intransitive and don’t assign accusative Case).

25. When is there an AgrSP? When is there a CP? AgrSP AgrSP AgrSP is the structural correlate to “assigns nominative Case.” AgrSP is the structural correlate to “assigns nominative Case.” Finite verbs assigning nominative Case; hence finite sentences have AgrSP. Finite verbs assigning nominative Case; hence finite sentences have AgrSP. Nonfinite verbs do not assign Case to the subject; hence nonfinite verbs do not have AgrSP, they are just TPs. Nonfinite verbs do not assign Case to the subject; hence nonfinite verbs do not have AgrSP, they are just TPs. CP CP As announced before, finite clauses are always assumed to be CPs; nonfinite clauses are assumed to be TPs except if there is direct evidence that it is a CP (for example, a wh- word, or overt C: I know what to do, I want for John to leave). As announced before, finite clauses are always assumed to be CPs; nonfinite clauses are assumed to be TPs except if there is direct evidence that it is a CP (for example, a wh- word, or overt C: I know what to do, I want for John to leave).

26. Variation we’ve seen: English: English: Subject moves to SpecTP overtly. Subject moves to SpecTP overtly. DPs move for case covertly. DPs move for case covertly. (Topmost) auxiliary verb V raises to finite T overtly. (Topmost) auxiliary verb V raises to finite T overtly. Main verb V does not raise higher than v. Main verb V does not raise higher than v. First wh-phrase moves to SpecCP for [+Q, +WH] C overtly. First wh-phrase moves to SpecCP for [+Q, +WH] C overtly. All other wh-phrases move to SpecCP covertly. All other wh-phrases move to SpecCP covertly. All quantifiers move to adjoin to top of the clause (AgrSP or TP) covertly. All quantifiers move to adjoin to top of the clause (AgrSP or TP) covertly. T moves to [+Q] C. T moves to [+Q] C. SVO (head-first) word order. SVO (head-first) word order.

27. Variation we’ve seen: French: French: Subject moves to SpecTP overtly. Subject moves to SpecTP overtly. DPs move for case covertly. DPs move for case covertly. Any kind of V (topmost aux or main V) raises to finite T overtly. Any kind of V (topmost aux or main V) raises to finite T overtly. (Topmost) auxiliary verb V may raise to nonfinite T overtly. (Topmost) auxiliary verb V may raise to nonfinite T overtly. Main verb V may raise to AgrO overtly. Main verb V may raise to AgrO overtly. First wh-phrase moves to SpecCP for [+Q, +WH] C overtly. First wh-phrase moves to SpecCP for [+Q, +WH] C overtly. All other wh-phrases move to SpecCP covertly. All other wh-phrases move to SpecCP covertly. All quantifiers move to adjoin to top of the clause (AgrSP or TP) covertly. All quantifiers move to adjoin to top of the clause (AgrSP or TP) covertly. T moves to [+Q] C. T moves to [+Q] C. SVO (head-first) word order. SVO (head-first) word order.

28. Variation we’ve seen: Irish, Arabic (VSO): Irish, Arabic (VSO): Subject moves to SpecTP overtly. Subject moves to SpecTP overtly. DPs move for case covertly. DPs move for case covertly. (possibly overt of object over visible AgrO in one special case) (possibly overt of object over visible AgrO in one special case) Any kind of V (topmost auxiliary or main V) raises to AgrS. Any kind of V (topmost auxiliary or main V) raises to AgrS. Main verb V may raise to AgrO overtly. Main verb V may raise to AgrO overtly. SVO (head-first) word order. SVO (head-first) word order. German (SOV V2): German (SOV V2): Any kind of V (topmost auxiliary or main V) raises to C in a finite clause. Any kind of V (topmost auxiliary or main V) raises to C in a finite clause. SpecCP must be filled (V2). SpecCP must be filled (V2). SOV (head-final) word order. SOV (head-final) word order.

29. Variation we’ve seen: Japanese: Japanese: All wh-movement to SpecCP covert All wh-movement to SpecCP covert SOV (head-final) word order. SOV (head-final) word order. Possible to (optionally) scramble a DP to adjoin to AgrSP (like QR). Possible to (optionally) scramble a DP to adjoin to AgrSP (like QR).

30. Some sentences from previous finals/practices 2001PF: 2001PF: Every father wants to know what the children are watching. Every father wants to know what the children are watching. What had Bert’s mother said was stolen from the living room? What had Bert’s mother said was stolen from the living room? Ralph’s puppy seems to like to chew the sofa. Ralph’s puppy seems to like to chew the sofa. 2001F: 2001F: What had Bill expected to buy at Wal-Mart? What had Bill expected to buy at Wal-Mart? Every serious linguist will eventually need to know what Chomsky has written. Every serious linguist will eventually need to know what Chomsky has written. My tape of Benton’s last episode appears to have been misplaced. My tape of Benton’s last episode appears to have been misplaced.

31. Some sentences from previous finals/practices 2000PF: 2000PF: Who do you think bought the laptop which Mary said she sold? Who do you think bought the laptop which Mary said she sold? Which student will Mary say took every prerequisite? Which student will Mary say took every prerequisite? Mary said that John’s mother was chosen. Mary said that John’s mother was chosen. 2000F: 2000F: Which test will Mary say that every student took? Which test will Mary say that every student took? Which senator said that Congress will pass which bill? Which senator said that Congress will pass which bill? The pen which Larry’s assistant thought that Artie lost was found under the table. The pen which Larry’s assistant thought that Artie lost was found under the table.

32.                       