UNIT 2: The Structure of Phrases and Clauses English Syntax Ricardo de Souza.

UNIT 2: The Structure of Phrases and Clauses English Syntax Ricardo de Souza

Theta-Theory (θ-Theory) Relational Concepts. Argument Structure. Predication

Theta-Theory (θ-Theory): Verbs and their θ-grids VERB c-selectionConstituent selection, or c-selection. s-selectionSemantic selection, or s-selection.

Theta-Theory (θ-Theory): Verbs and their θ-grids SLEEP c-selectionNP s-selectionAgent

Theta-Theory (θ-Theory): Verbs and their θ-grids SLEEP Our children slept. ?Our ideas slept.

Theta-Theory (θ-Theory): Verbs and their θ-grids SEE Our children saw the concert. Our children saw that the band isn’t that good. *That the band isn’t that good saw our children.

Theta-Theory (θ-Theory): Verbs and their θ-grids SEE c-selectionNPNP/CP s-selectionAgentTheme

Theta-Theory (θ-Theory): Verbs and their θ-grids SEND c-selectionNP PP s-selectionAgentThemeGoal c-selectionNP s-selectionAgentGoalTheme

Theta-Theory (θ-Theory): Verbs and their θ-grids SEND They sent their children to a boarding school. They sent flowers to their wives. They sent their wives flowers * They sent a boarding school their children.

Theta-Theory (θ-Theory) Arguments. Adjuncts.

Theta-Theory (θ-Theory) They slept in a tent. They slept well. They saw that the band isn’t that good yesterday. They sent their wives flowers on their wedding anniversaries.

The Theta Criterion Each argument must be associated with one and only one theta-role. Each theta-role must be associated with one and only one argument. p. 28

Corollaries of the Theta Criterion A predicator’s (e.g. a lexical verb) θ-grid must be saturated. A predicator’s (e.g. a lexical verb) θ-grid must not be either over-saturated or under-saturated.

Corollaries of the Theta Criterion *She slept her bed. ?She slept her baby. *They saw that the band isn’t that good the singer. *They saw. *Robert sent flowers to his wife a box of candy. *Robert sent to his wife.

Corollaries of the Theta Criterion Locality and Minimality in θ-marking [ NP Mary] showed [ NP her sister] [ CP why [ NP Louise] had destroyed [ NP the painting]]. [ NP; Θ: AGT Mary] showed [ NP; Θ: RECEIVER her sister] [ CP; Θ: THM why Louise had destroyed the painting]. [ NP Mary] showed [ NP her sister] [ CP why [ NP; Θ: AGT Louise] had destroyed [ NP; Θ: THM the painting]].

Corollaries of the Theta Criterion Locality and Minimality in θ-marking *[ NP Mary] showed [ NP her sister] [ NP the painting] [ CP why [ NP Louise] had destroyed].*[ NP Mary] showed [ NP her sister] [ NP the painting] [ CP why [ NP Louise] had destroyed]. *[ NP; Θ: AGT Mary] showed [ NP; Θ: RECEIVER her sister] [ NP; Θ: THM the painting] [ CP; Θ: ?? why Louise had destroyed the painting].*[ NP; Θ: AGT Mary] showed [ NP; Θ: RECEIVER her sister] [ NP; Θ: THM the painting] [ CP; Θ: ?? why Louise had destroyed the painting]. *[ NP Mary] showed [ NP her sister] [ NP the painting] [ CP why [ NP; Θ: AGT Louise] had destroyed [ ?? ; Θ: THM ]].*[ NP Mary] showed [ NP her sister] [ NP the painting] [ CP why [ NP; Θ: AGT Louise] had destroyed [ ?? ; Θ: THM ]].

Corollaries of the Theta Criterion Introduction to trace theory and movement Which painting did Mary say that Louise had destroyed?Which painting did Mary say that Louise had destroyed? Which painting did [ NP; Θ: AGT Mary say [ CP; Θ: THM that Louise had destroyed?Which painting did [ NP; Θ: AGT Mary say [ CP; Θ: THM that Louise had destroyed?

Corollaries of the Theta Criterion Introduction to trace theory and movement Which painting did Mary say [CP Θ: THM that [NP; Θ: AGT Louise ] had destroyed [??; Θ: THM t] ?Which painting did Mary say [CP Θ: THM that [NP; Θ: AGT Louise ] had destroyed [??; Θ: THM t] ? [NP; Θ: THM Which painting] did Mary say [CP; Θ: THM that [NP; Θ: AGT Louise ] had destroyed [NP; Θ: THM t] ?[NP; Θ: THM Which painting] did Mary say [CP; Θ: THM that [NP; Θ: AGT Louise ] had destroyed [NP; Θ: THM t] ? [NP; Θ: THM Which painting] did Mary say [CP; Θ: THM that [NP; Θ: AGT Louise ] had destroyed?[NP; Θ: THM Which painting] did Mary say [CP; Θ: THM that [NP; Θ: AGT Louise ] had destroyed? [NP; Θ: THM Which painting i ] did Mary say [CP; Θ: THM that [NP; Θ: AGT Louise ] had destroyed [NP; Θ: THM t i ] ?[NP; Θ: THM Which painting i ] did Mary say [CP; Θ: THM that [NP; Θ: AGT Louise ] had destroyed [NP; Θ: THM t i ] ?

Corollaries of the Theta Criterion Introduction to the empty category PRO PRO is a specialized NP.PRO is a specialized NP. In English, PRO is only licensed if INFL=[- finite].In English, PRO is only licensed if INFL=[- finite]. PRO’s reference to an antecedent can be controlled by semantic properties of matrix clause verb.PRO’s reference to an antecedent can be controlled by semantic properties of matrix clause verb.

Corollaries of the Theta Criterion Introduction to the empty category PRO [ NP I] persuaded [ NP John] [ CP [ NP PRO] to buy [ NP a new bicycle]].[ NP I] persuaded [ NP John] [ CP [ NP PRO] to buy [ NP a new bicycle]].

Corollaries of the Theta Criterion Introduction to the empty category PRO Object controlled PRO:Object controlled PRO: I persuaded John PRO i to buy a new bicycle.I persuaded John PRO i to buy a new bicycle. I persuaded John i PRO i to buy a new bicycle.I persuaded John i PRO i to buy a new bicycle.

Corollaries of the Theta Criterion Introduction to the empty category PRO Subject controlled PRO:Subject controlled PRO: I promised John PRO i to buy a new bicycle.I promised John PRO i to buy a new bicycle. I i promised John PRO i to buy a new bicycle.I i promised John PRO i to buy a new bicycle.

Non-Verbal θ-Role Assigners Deverbal nouns.Deverbal nouns. AdjectivesAdjectives Some prepositions.Some prepositions.

Non θ-Role Assigners The copula.The copula. Other copular verbs.Other copular verbs.

Noun Phrases That Are Not θ- Marked Adjunct NPs.Adjunct NPs. Expletive IT.Expletive IT. Expletive THERE.Expletive THERE.

The Architecture of Phrases: X-Bar Syntax An endocentric (head centered) view of phrase structure.An endocentric (head centered) view of phrase structure. An architecture that predicts relationships between heads and other elements within a constituent.An architecture that predicts relationships between heads and other elements within a constituent. A recursive view of syntax.A recursive view of syntax.

The Architecture of Phrases: X-Bar Syntax Take X, any given lexical or functional head.Take X, any given lexical or functional head. X 0 is a minimum projection.X 0 is a minimum projection. X’= X 0 – Compl(X). X’ is an intermediate projection.X’= X 0 – Compl(X). X’ is an intermediate projection. XP= Spec(X) – X’. XP (or X’’) is a maximum projection.XP= Spec(X) – X’. XP (or X’’) is a maximum projection.

The Architecture of Phrases: X-Bar Syntax XCompl(X) X’ Spec (X) XP

The Architecture of Phrases: X-Bar Syntax N PP N’Spec NP book P about NP grammar DET the

An endocentric (head centered) view of phrase structure.An endocentric (head centered) view of phrase structure.

The Architecture of Phrases: X-Bar Syntax That book of poems is fabulous.That book of poems is fabulous. *That book of poems are fabulous.*That book of poems are fabulous.

The Architecture of Phrases: X-Bar Syntax N’ CP N’Spec NP book P about NP grammar DET the N PP that the teacher recommended

The Architecture of Phrases: X-Bar Syntax A complement is the head’s sister.A complement is the head’s sister. An architecture that predicts relationships between heads and other elements within a constituent.An architecture that predicts relationships between heads and other elements within a constituent. An adjunct is the sister of X-bar.An adjunct is the sister of X-bar.

The Architecture of Phrases: X-Bar Syntax N PP N’ Spec NP book P about NP grammar DET the Spec DET the N’ NPP P of NP semitic languages

The Architecture of Phrases: X-Bar Syntax A recursive view of syntax.A recursive view of syntax.

The Architecture of Clauses I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V study NP grammar NP Helen

I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V’ study NP last term NP Helen V NP grammar

The Architecture of Phrases: X-Bar Syntax Helen studied grammar last term.Helen studied grammar last term. *Helen studied last term grammar.*Helen studied last term grammar.

The Architecture of Phrases: X-Bar Syntax A complement is the head’s sister.A complement is the head’s sister. In VPs an argument (θ-marked constituent) is normally the complement.In VPs an argument (θ-marked constituent) is normally the complement. In VPs, an adjunct is a sister of V’.In VPs, an adjunct is a sister of V’.

The Complementizer Phrase I VP I’ Spec IP [+past] V think CP NP DET Helen C that IP SpecI’ I [+past] VP syntax be V AdjP easy

The Complementizer Phrase IVP I’ Spec IP [+past] V shocked NP that NP IP Spec I’ I [+past] VP John CP C V resign PRN us

Clauses are CPs I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V study NP grammar NP Helen C’ C CP Spec

Questions: I-to-C Movement I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V study NP grammar NP Helen C’ C CP Spec

I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V study NP grammar NP Helen C’ C CP Spec

I VP I’Spec IP tV study NP grammar NP Helen C’ C CP Spec did

Questions: WH Movement I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V study NP grammar NP Helen C’ C CP Spec

I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V study NP grammar NP Helen C’ C CP Spec

I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V study NP ? NP Helen C’ C CP Spec

I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V study NP t NP Helen C’ C CP Spec What

I VP I’Spec IP t V study NP t NP Helen C’ C CP Spec What did

Agreement: Setting the Problem I VP I’Spec IP ? V’PP after lunch NP the teacher V PP talk to his students

Agreement: Setting the Problem The teacher talks to his students after lunch.The teacher talks to his students after lunch. The teacher talked to his student after lunchThe teacher talked to his student after lunch *The teacher talk to his student after lunch.*The teacher talk to his student after lunch. *The teacher ed talk to his student after lunch.*The teacher ed talk to his student after lunch. The teachers talk to their student after lunchThe teachers talk to their student after lunch

Agreement I... I’ Spec IP NP [number] [person] [number] [person] [+/-finite]

Agreement I... I’ Spec IP [ NP the teacher] [number: -pl] [person: 3rd] [number: -pl] [person: 3rd] [+/-finite]

Agreement: Some Proposals Agreement takes place between SPEC(X) and X.Agreement takes place between SPEC(X) and X. Agreement involves specific features such as: [number], [person], and [gender].Agreement involves specific features such as: [number], [person], and [gender]. In contemporary theory, such features are called phi-features, or φ-features.In contemporary theory, such features are called phi-features, or φ-features. The relevant φ-features in English are [number] and [person].The relevant φ-features in English are [number] and [person].

Agreement: Some Proposals Languages vary with respect to AGR feature strength.Languages vary with respect to AGR feature strength. Languages can be considered “strong AGR” [+AGR], or “weak AGR” [-AGR].Languages can be considered “strong AGR” [+AGR], or “weak AGR” [-AGR]. English can be considered [-AGR], whereas French, for example, is [+AGR].English can be considered [-AGR], whereas French, for example, is [+AGR]. In English, morphologically relevant agreement is seen when there is a combination of the φ-features [number:- pl]; [person:3rd], and the tense feature [+finite = [-past]].In English, morphologically relevant agreement is seen when there is a combination of the φ-features [number:- pl]; [person:3rd], and the tense feature [+finite = [-past]].

Just to recollect... The teacher talks to his students after lunch.The teacher talks to his students after lunch. *The teacher talk to his student after lunch.*The teacher talk to his student after lunch. The teachers talk to their student after lunchThe teachers talk to their student after lunch

The Ban on Stray Affixes... *The teacher s talk to his student after lunch.*The teacher s talk to his student after lunch. *The teacher ed talk to his student after lunch.*The teacher ed talk to his student after lunch.

...And Agreement Related Movement Affix lowering.Affix lowering. Verb raising.Verb raising.

Agreement and Affix Lowering I AdvP I’Spec IP [-past] Adv often VP V NP Louise [number: -pl] NP read this book [person: 3rd] [number: -pl] [person: 3rd]

Agreement and Affix Lowering I AdvP I’Spec IP [-past] Adv often VP V NP Louise NP read this book [number: -pl] [person: 3rd] s

Agreement and Affix Lowering I AdvP I’Spec IP [-past] Adv often VP V NP Louise NP read this book s t

Affix Lowering & Verb Raising: Some Proposals In [-AGR] languages, affixes lower to V.In [-AGR] languages, affixes lower to V. In [+AGR] languages, Vs raise to I.In [+AGR] languages, Vs raise to I. Check French data on p. 90, sentence 162(a). In English, a [-AGR] language, verbal morphemes which are not VP heads also raise to I.In English, a [-AGR] language, verbal morphemes which are not VP heads also raise to I.

Agreement and Auxiliary Verb Raising I AdvP I’ Spec IP [-past] Adv often Perf P Perf NP Louise [number: -pl] VP HAVE+ {en} this book [person: 3rd] [number: -pl] [person: 3rd] NP V read

Agreement and Auxiliary Verb Raising I AdvP I’ Spec IP [-past] Adv often Perf P Perf NP Louise s VP HAVE+ {en} this book [number: -pl] [person: 3rd] NP V read

Agreement and Auxiliary Verb Raising I AdvP I’ Spec IP [-past] Adv often Perf P Perf NP Louise s VP HA this book [number: -pl] [person: 3rd] NP V read t

Just to recollect Louise will often read this book.Louise will often read this book. Louise often reads this bookLouise often reads this book *Louise reads often this book.*Louise reads often this book. *Louise often has read this book.*Louise often has read this book. Louise has often read this bookLouise has often read this book

Agreement and The Copula The Copula (Verb to BE) is an exceptional verb. As we have seen, it does not assign θ- roles. Also, it is a head of VP that raises to I in English.

Agreement and The Copula Louise is often interested in this sort of book. *Louise often is interested in this sort of book.

Cyclic Copula Movement in Questions I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V be NP a good student NP Helen C’ C CP Spec

Cyclic Copula Movement in Questions I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V be NP a good student NP Helen C’ C CP Spec [number: -pl] [person: 3rd] [number: -pl] [person: 3rd]

Cyclic Copula Movement in Questions I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V be NP a good student NP Helen C’ C CP Spec

Cyclic Copula Movement in Questions I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V NP a good student NP Helen C’ C CP Spec

Cyclic Copula Movement in Questions I VP I’Spec IP was V NP a good student NP Helen C’ C CP Spec t

Cyclic Copula Movement in Questions I VP I’Spec IP V NP a good student NP Helen C’ C CP Spec t

Cyclic Copula Movement in Questions I VP I’Spec IP V NP a good student NP Helen C’ C CP Spec t t was

Case Theory: Brief Overview Case is a morphosyntactic operation that relates to grammatical relations such as Subject, Object and Oblique. Pronouns are morphologically marked for case in English. All NPs are abstractly marked for case.

The Case Filter in English All overt NPs must be case-assigned. PRO must not be case-assigned.

Case Theory: Brief Overview Case is an essential operation for NP licensing. NPs must be licensed to become interpretable. NPs must abide by case assignment principles to generate grammatical clauses.

Case Assignment in English A [+finite] Inflection assigns NOMINATIVE case to SPEC(IP). Most transitive verbs assign ACCUSATIVE case to their complements. Prepositions assign ACCUSATIVE case to their complements. NPs in DET position inherit GENITIVE case.

Case Theory: Some Facts I want to succeed in this task. I want Mary to succeed in this task. I want her to succeed in this task. To succeed in this task is nearly impossible. For us to succeed in this task is nearly impossible.

Case Theory: Some Facts *Me want to succeed in this task. *I want she to succeed in this task. *We to succeed in this task is nearly impossible. *For we to succeed in this task is nearly impossible.

Case Assignment I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V see NP Bill NP Helen

I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V see NP Bill NP Helen ACC

I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V see NP Bill NP Helen ACCNOM

I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V see NP Bill NP She ACCNOM

I VP I’Spec IP [+past] V see NP him NP She ACCNOM

I VP I’Spec * IP [+past] V see NP he NP Her ACCNOM

Case Assignment IVP I’ Spec IP [+past] V be AdjP Ø NP IP Spec I’ I [- finite] VP CP C impossible V succed PP P in be VP NP this task

Case Assignment IVP I’ Spec IP [+past] V be AdjP Ø NP IP Spec I’ I [- finite] VP PRO CP C impossible V succed PP P in be VP NP this task

Case Assignment IVP I’ Spec IP [+past] V be AdjP Ø NP IP Spec I’ I [- finite] VP PRO CP C impossible V succed PP P in be VP NP this task ACC

Case Assignment IVP I’ Spec IP [+past] V be AdjP Ø NP IP Spec I’ I [- finite] VP PRO CP C impossible V succed PP P in be VP NP it ACC

Case Assignment IVP I’ Spec IP [+past] V be AdjP for NP IP Spec I’ I [- finite] VP PRO CP C impossible V succed PP P in be VP NP it ACC ACC

Case Assignment IVP I’ Spec IP [+past] V be AdjP for NP IP Spec I’ I [- finite] VP us CP C impossible V succed PP P in be VP NP it ACC ACC

Inherent Genitive Case The rich school’s teachers went on a strike.The rich school’s teachers went on a strike. The rich school teachers went on a strike.The rich school teachers went on a strike.

Inherent Genitive Case the VP N’ Spec NP N’ DET NP DET AdjP rich N school N teachers

the VP N’ Spec NP N’ DET NP DET AdjP rich N school N teachers

The rich school teachers… Adj N’ AdjPSpec NP rich N school N teacher DET the N

UNIT 2: The Structure of Phrases and Clauses English Syntax Ricardo de Souza.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "UNIT 2: The Structure of Phrases and Clauses English Syntax Ricardo de Souza."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

UNIT 2: The Structure of Phrases and Clauses English Syntax Ricardo de Souza.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "UNIT 2: The Structure of Phrases and Clauses English Syntax Ricardo de Souza."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback