1. Installment 11b. Still more loose ends about A-movement (Chapter 8, more or less) CAS LX 522 Syntax I

2. Recap: V2 languages There are a number of languages that are classified as “verb second” or “V2” languages. They are so called because in general the (tensed) verb must be second, after the first major constituent in the sentence. There are a number of languages that are classified as “verb second” or “V2” languages. They are so called because in general the (tensed) verb must be second, after the first major constituent in the sentence. De man heeft een boek gezien gisteren.(Dutch) the man has a book seen yesterday ‘the man has seen a book yesterday.’ De man heeft een boek gezien gisteren.(Dutch) the man has a book seen yesterday ‘the man has seen a book yesterday.’ een boek heeft de man gezien gisteren. een boek heeft de man gezien gisteren. gisteren heeft de man een boek gezien. gisteren heeft de man een boek gezien. Die Kinder haben diesen Film gesehen.(German) the children have this film seen ‘The children have seen this film.’ Die Kinder haben diesen Film gesehen.(German) the children have this film seen ‘The children have seen this film.’ Diesen Film haben die Kinder gesehen. Diesen Film haben die Kinder gesehen.

3. Recap: V2 languages The basic idea we’ll pursue with respect to V2 languages is this: The basic idea we’ll pursue with respect to V2 languages is this: To get the tensed verb higher than the subject (which is sometimes is), we move the verb to T, and then T (with the verb) to C. To get the tensed verb higher than the subject (which is sometimes is), we move the verb to T, and then T (with the verb) to C. To put C into “second position”, we move some phrase into SpecCP. To put C into “second position”, we move some phrase into SpecCP. The “first phrase” in V2 languages is generally interpreted as the topic of the sentences. So, we say that the topic (whatever it is going to be) has a feature that marks it as such: An interpretable [top] feature. The “first phrase” in V2 languages is generally interpreted as the topic of the sentences. So, we say that the topic (whatever it is going to be) has a feature that marks it as such: An interpretable [top] feature. TP C C+T+V+v CP DP diesen Roman [top]

4. Recap: V2 languages The way our system works (movement happens in order to check strong uninterpretable features), we implement this as follows: The way our system works (movement happens in order to check strong uninterpretable features), we implement this as follows: Because the verb moves to T, we need there to be a strong feature checked between T and v. Because the verb moves to T, we need there to be a strong feature checked between T and v. This is common cross-linguistically. Recall French,where the highest verbal head (the v, or an auxiliary) moves to T. This is common cross-linguistically. Recall French,where the highest verbal head (the v, or an auxiliary) moves to T. This explained why verbs always precede adverbs and negation in French. This explained why verbs always precede adverbs and negation in French. Since the [tense] feature of T values the [uInfl:] feature of the highest verbal head, we say that in French, when [tense] values [uInfl:], the feature is strong. Since the [tense] feature of T values the [uInfl:] feature of the highest verbal head, we say that in French, when [tense] values [uInfl:], the feature is strong. VP vPvP T T [past] v v [uInfl:past*] V

5. Recap: V2 languages So, v starts out with a [uInfl:] feature. So, v starts out with a [uInfl:] feature. v always starts out with a [uInfl:] feature. v always starts out with a [uInfl:] feature. We Merge T, and the [tense] feature (e.g., [past] = [tense:past]) matches and values the [uInfl:] feature. We Merge T, and the [tense] feature (e.g., [past] = [tense:past]) matches and values the [uInfl:] feature. What differentiates French and English is that when [tense] values [uInfl:], the valued [uInfl:] feature is strong. What differentiates French and English is that when [tense] values [uInfl:], the valued [uInfl:] feature is strong. In English, it is not strong except in one case: if the [uInfl:] feature is one an auxiliary (Perf, Prog, Pass), then a [uInfl:] feature valued by [tense] is strong. In English, it is not strong except in one case: if the [uInfl:] feature is one an auxiliary (Perf, Prog, Pass), then a [uInfl:] feature valued by [tense] is strong. Auxiliaries precede negation and adverbs, main verbs do not. Auxiliaries precede negation and adverbs, main verbs do not. VP vPvP v T T T [past] v [uInfl:past*] V

6. Reminder: Strong features Strong features are uninterpretable features that can only be checked when they are local to (a sister of) the feature that checks them. Strong features are uninterpretable features that can only be checked when they are local to (a sister of) the feature that checks them. Strong features very often = something must move. Strong features very often = something must move. A feature gets to be strong in one of two ways: A feature gets to be strong in one of two ways: An inherently strong feature of the lexical item. An inherently strong feature of the lexical item. v has a strong [uV*] feature. v has a strong [uV*] feature. T has a strong [uD*] feature. T has a strong [uD*] feature. eat (V) has a strong [uD*] feature (associated with the Theme  -role). eat (V) has a strong [uD*] feature (associated with the Theme  -role). A feature that becomes strong when valued. A feature that becomes strong when valued. Prog has a weak [uInfl:] feature. When valued by [tense], it becomes strong. (In English, Aux moves to T: I am not eating green eggs & ham) Prog has a weak [uInfl:] feature. When valued by [tense], it becomes strong. (In English, Aux moves to T: I am not eating green eggs & ham) T has a weak [uclause-type:] feature. When valued by [clause- type:Q], it becomes strong. (In English, T moves to C in questions: Would you eat them on a train?) T has a weak [uclause-type:] feature. When valued by [clause- type:Q], it becomes strong. (In English, T moves to C in questions: Would you eat them on a train?)

7. Recap: V2 languages To account for the fact that v moves to T and then T moves to C in German: a feature that C values on T is valued as strong. To account for the fact that v moves to T and then T moves to C in German: a feature that C values on T is valued as strong. [uclause-type:] is a perfect candidate. [uclause-type:] is a perfect candidate. So, when [uclause-type:] is valued by C in German, it is valued as strong, and so T moves to C. So, when [uclause-type:] is valued by C in German, it is valued as strong, and so T moves to C. VP vPvP v T T T [past, uclause-type:decl*] v [uInfl:past*] V TPTP C Subject C [decl]

8. Recap: V2 languages To account for the fact that v moves to T and then T moves to C in German: a feature that C values on T is valued as strong. To account for the fact that v moves to T and then T moves to C in German: a feature that C values on T is valued as strong. [uclause-type:] is a perfect candidate. [uclause-type:] is a perfect candidate. So, when [uclause-type:] is valued by C in German, it is valued as strong, and so T moves to C. So, when [uclause-type:] is valued by C in German, it is valued as strong, and so T moves to C. VP vPvP v T T T [past, uclause-type:decl*] v [uInfl:past*] V TPTP C Subject C [decl] C

9. Recap: V2 languages To account for the fact that the topic moves into SpecCP, we say that C has a [utop*] feature. Whatever is the topic in the sentence will have a feature designating that, [top]. To account for the fact that the topic moves into SpecCP, we say that C has a [utop*] feature. Whatever is the topic in the sentence will have a feature designating that, [top]. Just like the EPP feature ([uD*]) of T forces the subject into SpecTP, the [utop*] feature of C will force movement of the topic into SpecCP. Just like the EPP feature ([uD*]) of T forces the subject into SpecTP, the [utop*] feature of C will force movement of the topic into SpecCP. VP vPvP v T T T v V TPTP C Subject [top] C [decl, utop*] C

10. Recap: V2 languages To account for the fact that the topic moves into SpecCP, we say that C has a [utop*] feature. Whatever is the topic in the sentence will have a feature designating that, [top]. To account for the fact that the topic moves into SpecCP, we say that C has a [utop*] feature. Whatever is the topic in the sentence will have a feature designating that, [top]. Just like the EPP feature ([uD*]) of T forces the subject into SpecTP, the [utop*] feature of C will force movement of the topic into SpecCP. Just like the EPP feature ([uD*]) of T forces the subject into SpecTP, the [utop*] feature of C will force movement of the topic into SpecCP. VP vPvP v T T T v V TPTP C C [decl, utop*] C CPCP Subject [top]

11. Embedded clauses Will John arrive late? Will John arrive late? T moves to C in English questions. T moves to C in English questions. [uclause-type:] on T is strong when valued by [Q] on C. [uclause-type:] on T is strong when valued by [Q] on C. I wonder [ CP if John will arrive late ]. I wonder [ CP if John will arrive late ]. T does not move to C in embedded questions. T does not move to C in embedded questions. Perhaps because C is “filled” already (by if). Perhaps because C is “filled” already (by if). Intuition: We need to be able to tell when C is [Q]— if nothing is pronounced there, we move T there to signal that C is [Q]. Intuition: We need to be able to tell when C is [Q]— if nothing is pronounced there, we move T there to signal that C is [Q]. Er sagte [ CP dass ich schon letztes Jahr diesen Roman las ] he said that I already last year this book read ‘He said that I read this book already last year.’ Er sagte [ CP dass ich schon letztes Jahr diesen Roman las ] he said that I already last year this book read ‘He said that I read this book already last year.’ If C is filled in German (dass), T does not move to C. If C is filled in German (dass), T does not move to C. Also notice that when T does not move to C, the verb is at the end. Also notice that when T does not move to C, the verb is at the end. German appears to be a head-final language. German appears to be a head-final language.

12. Interlude: what we’re doing Remember, what we’re doing is trying to describe our knowledge of language. Remember, what we’re doing is trying to describe our knowledge of language. We believe that the intricacies of human language are actually too complicated to learn, that we’re in fact describing a kind of system that is genetically “built- in”, sort of like our vision system. We believe that the intricacies of human language are actually too complicated to learn, that we’re in fact describing a kind of system that is genetically “built- in”, sort of like our vision system. If that’s the case, the same system must underlie all human languages, and the differences must be relatively minor. If that’s the case, the same system must underlie all human languages, and the differences must be relatively minor. We’re identifying a few “parameters of variation”— ways in which human languages can differ. We’re identifying a few “parameters of variation”— ways in which human languages can differ.

13. Interlude: what we’re doing What we’re saying here is that languages can differ in a few small respects, and we can account for that: What we’re saying here is that languages can differ in a few small respects, and we can account for that: Headedness: heads come before complements in some languages (English), and after complements in others (Japanese, German). Headedness: heads come before complements in some languages (English), and after complements in others (Japanese, German). Verb-raising: some languages move v to T (French), others don’t. (Under what conditions does T value [uInfl:] as strong?) Verb-raising: some languages move v to T (French), others don’t. (Under what conditions does T value [uInfl:] as strong?) V2: some languages move v all the way to C (through T), and topicalize something, yielding the V2 pattern. (Under what conditions does C have a [utop*] feature and value [uclause-type:] as strong?) V2: some languages move v all the way to C (through T), and topicalize something, yielding the V2 pattern. (Under what conditions does C have a [utop*] feature and value [uclause-type:] as strong?) EPP: VSO languages seem to move v up to T, but don’t move the subject to SpecTP, yielding VSO. (Does T have a [uD*] feature?) EPP: VSO languages seem to move v up to T, but don’t move the subject to SpecTP, yielding VSO. (Does T have a [uD*] feature?)

14. V2…step 1 V moves to v. V moves to v. Perf moves to T. Perf moves to T. T moves to C. T moves to C. V gelesen VP DP diesen Roman v v vPvP T TP DP ich v C C Ø [Decl] C Perf+T habe [Decl*] PerfP

15. V2…step 2a The object is marked as topic. The object is marked as topic. C has a [utop*] feature. C has a [utop*] feature. V gelesen VP DP diesen Roman [top] v v vPvP T TP DP ich v C C Ø [Decl, utop*] C Perf+T habe [Decl*] PerfP

16. V2…step 2b The object moves up to SpecTP. The object moves up to SpecTP. The tensed verb is now in second position. The tensed verb is now in second position. V gelesen VP v v vPvP T TP DP ich v C C Ø [Decl, utop*] C Perf+T habe [Decl*] PerfP CP DP diesen Roman [top]

17. I saw Jack open the fridge Given what we have so far, what can we make of I saw Jack open the fridge? Given what we have so far, what can we make of I saw Jack open the fridge? This is a little bit like I want Jack to open the fridge, so let’s start there. This is a little bit like I want Jack to open the fridge, so let’s start there. What kind of verb is want? What kind of verb is want? What is the case of Jack, and how is it checked? What is the case of Jack, and how is it checked? What kind of embedded clause is this (CP or TP)? What kind of embedded clause is this (CP or TP)?

18. I want Jack to open the fridge We build the vP as usual. We build the vP as usual. Merge open with the fridge (forming VP). Merge open with the fridge (forming VP). Merge v with VP (HoP). Merge v with VP (HoP). Move V to v Move V to v Merge Jack with v. Merge Jack with v. V open VP DP the fridge v v vPvP DP Jack v

19. I want Jack to open the fridge Merge vP and the nonfinite T to. Merge vP and the nonfinite T to. Move Jack up to SpecTP (EPP). Move Jack up to SpecTP (EPP). vPvP T T to TP DP Jack V open VP DP the fridge v v vPvP v

20. I want Jack to open the fridge And then we add the main clause (want, v, T, I, C) And then we add the main clause (want, v, T, I, C) vPvP T T to TP DP Jack V want VP vPvP v v T T [pres] TP DP I CP CØCØ V open VP DP the fridge v v vPvP v

21. I saw Jack open the fridge And then we add the main clause (want, v, T, I, C) And then we add the main clause (want, v, T, I, C) vPvP T T to TP DP Jack V want VP vPvP v v T T [pres] TP DP I CP CØCØ V open VP DP the fridge v v vPvP v What now of I saw Jack open the fridge? What now of I saw Jack open the fridge? Presumably the lower vP is the same. Presumably the lower vP is the same. We have the same verbs, same arguments. We have the same verbs, same arguments. Jack is the Agent of open Jack is the Agent of open The fridge is the Theme. The fridge is the Theme. But there’s no to. So what if there’s just no T? But there’s no to. So what if there’s just no T?

22. I saw Jack open the fridge Does everything work? Does everything work? Does Jack get its case checked? Does Jack get its case checked? From where? From where? Any other unchecked features? Any other unchecked features? It appears that see can take something as small as a vP as its complement. A small clause. It appears that see can take something as small as a vP as its complement. A small clause. V see VP vPvP v v T T [past] TP DP I CP CØCØ V open VP DP the fridge v v vPvP DP Jack v

23. Small clauses There are actually several different kinds of small clauses. A small clause generally consists of a predicate and just enough structure to contain all of its arguments. There are actually several different kinds of small clauses. A small clause generally consists of a predicate and just enough structure to contain all of its arguments. Predicates can be found with several different categories. A predicate is something like a property (or a relation) that can be attributed to something (or some things). Predicates can be found with several different categories. A predicate is something like a property (or a relation) that can be attributed to something (or some things). I saw Bill open the fridge. I saw Bill open the fridge. I consider Bill incompetent. I consider Bill incompetent. I saw Bill in the garden. I saw Bill in the garden. I consider Bill a friend. I consider Bill a friend.

24. I saw Bill in the garden In can be considered a predicate, relating two arguments. In can be considered a predicate, relating two arguments. (true when the first is “contained” in the second) (true when the first is “contained” in the second) Of course, this can also mean that I did some seeing in the garden, and that seeing was a seeing of Bill—but that’s not the meaning we’re after. The meaning we’re after here is the one that can be paraphrased as: I saw that Bill was in the garden. Of course, this can also mean that I did some seeing in the garden, and that seeing was a seeing of Bill—but that’s not the meaning we’re after. The meaning we’re after here is the one that can be paraphrased as: I saw that Bill was in the garden. DP the garden P P in PP DP Bill

25. I saw Bill in the garden As with I saw Bill open the fridge, see seems to be able to take a small clause as it complement. As with I saw Bill open the fridge, see seems to be able to take a small clause as it complement. DP the garden P P in PP DP Bill V see VP vPvP v v T T [past] TP DP I CP CØCØ

26. I consider Bill incompetent We’ve seen small clauses with verbs… We’ve seen small clauses with verbs… I heard [ vP Bill drive away ]. I heard [ vP Bill drive away ]. …and with prepositions… …and with prepositions… I heard [ PP Bill in the kitchen ]. I heard [ PP Bill in the kitchen ]. …but things get a little bit funny when we consider small clauses with nominal predicates and adjectives… …but things get a little bit funny when we consider small clauses with nominal predicates and adjectives… I consider [ Bill a friend ]. I consider [ Bill a friend ]. I consider [ Bill incompetent ]. I consider [ Bill incompetent ]. …and even with unaccusative verbs… …and even with unaccusative verbs… I saw [ vP the ice melt ] I saw [ vP the ice melt ]

27. I saw the ice melt With an unaccusative verb like melt, we would start off with this vP. With an unaccusative verb like melt, we would start off with this vP. See the problem? See the problem? V melt VP DP the ice vPvP v v

28. *I saw melt the ice Something isn’t quite right here. Something isn’t quite right here. In order not to complicate things too much, we will not pursue the solution very far, but just as an exercise, let’s think about what we would need to say. In order not to complicate things too much, we will not pursue the solution very far, but just as an exercise, let’s think about what we would need to say. V melt VP DP the ice vPvP v v V see VP vPvP v v T T [past] TP DP I CP CØCØ

29. *I saw melt the ice Somehow the ice needs to move over melt. But to where? Somehow the ice needs to move over melt. But to where? We could say SpecvP, but why would the ice move there just when we have a small clause unaccusative? We could say SpecvP, but why would the ice move there just when we have a small clause unaccusative? *I the ice melted. *I the ice melted. Also, this won’t help us with a similar problem we’d have with I consider Bill my friend. Also, this won’t help us with a similar problem we’d have with I consider Bill my friend. V melt VP DP the ice vPvP v v V see VP vPvP v v T T [past] TP DP I CP CØCØ

30. *I saw melt the ice A suggestion that has been made in the literature is that small clauses, while they may lack a T, are still a category of their own: a PredP (predication phrase). A suggestion that has been made in the literature is that small clauses, while they may lack a T, are still a category of their own: a PredP (predication phrase). If we suppose that we have a PredP above vP, one that acts like T insofar as it has a [uD*] feature, our problem will be solved. If we suppose that we have a PredP above vP, one that acts like T insofar as it has a [uD*] feature, our problem will be solved. Note: You will not be asked to draw PredP. Note: You will not be asked to draw PredP. V melt VP DP the ice vPvP v v V see VP vPvP v v T T [past] TP DP I CP CØCØ

31. I saw the ice melt V melt VP vPvP v v V see VP vPvP v v T T [past] TP DP I CP CØCØ Pred Pred [uD*] PredP DP the ice

32. Etc. From here, I’ll just leave this as a topic for further exploration, e.g., in Syntax II. From here, I’ll just leave this as a topic for further exploration, e.g., in Syntax II. Things get pretty complicated pretty quickly when trying to deal with all of the properties of small clauses. (Try thinking about I consider Bill my friend.) Things get pretty complicated pretty quickly when trying to deal with all of the properties of small clauses. (Try thinking about I consider Bill my friend.) You’ve been exposed to the concept. You’ve been exposed to the concept. If you see small clauses again in this course, it will only be of the PP type: If you see small clauses again in this course, it will only be of the PP type: I saw Bill in the garden. I saw Bill in the garden. I want Bill off this ship. I want Bill off this ship. To repeat: You do not need to incorporate PredP into the system for the purposes of LX522. To repeat: You do not need to incorporate PredP into the system for the purposes of LX522.

33.                       

34. I consider Bill my friend Small clauses need not have verbs. I saw Bill in the garden, for example. Here, the main predicate is in. Small clauses need not have verbs. I saw Bill in the garden, for example. Here, the main predicate is in. We’ve seen nouns assign  -roles before, for example in Bill’s destruction of the vase. We’ve seen nouns assign  -roles before, for example in Bill’s destruction of the vase. Here, it seems like Bill is getting a role from friend. The property friend is being attributed to Bill. Here, it seems like Bill is getting a role from friend. The property friend is being attributed to Bill. I possess this friend, so we’ll want a PossP as well. I possess this friend, so we’ll want a PossP as well.

35. I consider Bill my friend This is almost right, but… This is almost right, but… When do nouns assign  -roles? When do nouns assign  -roles? How does everything get case? How does everything get case? How is Bill selected as the DP to raise to SpecPredP? (What feature is matched?) How is Bill selected as the DP to raise to SpecPredP? (What feature is matched?) N friend NP DP Bill nPnP n n Poss PossP D D DP DP my Pred PredP