Ana Maria Martins and Jairo Nunes
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- September 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199584352
- eISBN:
- 9780191594526
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199584352.003.0007
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Semantics and Pragmatics, Syntax and Morphology
This chapter argues that constructions that apparently involve hyper‐raising with resumption in Brazilian Portuguese actually result from A‐movement of an embedded topic. This chapter accounts for ...
More
This chapter argues that constructions that apparently involve hyper‐raising with resumption in Brazilian Portuguese actually result from A‐movement of an embedded topic. This chapter accounts for the mixed A/A′‐properties of the matrix subject of these constructions and provides independent evidence for Chomksy's (2001) version of the Phase Impenetrability Condition.Less
This chapter argues that constructions that apparently involve hyper‐raising with resumption in Brazilian Portuguese actually result from A‐movement of an embedded topic. This chapter accounts for the mixed A/A′‐properties of the matrix subject of these constructions and provides independent evidence for Chomksy's (2001) version of the Phase Impenetrability Condition.
Noam Chomsky
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- August 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780262062787
- eISBN:
- 9780262273152
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- The MIT Press
- DOI:
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262062787.003.0007
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Theoretical Linguistics
This chapter examines the “strong minimalist thesis” (SMT) that language is an optimal solution to interface conditions that must be satisfied by the faculty of language. SMT emerged within the ...
More
This chapter examines the “strong minimalist thesis” (SMT) that language is an optimal solution to interface conditions that must be satisfied by the faculty of language. SMT emerged within the principles-and-parameters framework of generative grammar and involves efficient computation that requires the restriction of computational resources as well as minimization of computations. The chapter suggests that Merge constitutes the sole computational operation in narrow syntax and proposes a No Tampering Condition (NTC) to prevent Merge from making internal changes to the syntactic objects (SOs) to which it applies. It first reviews some recent and ongoing work in the general framework of the so-called Minimalist Program before turning to the theory of phases, the Inclusiveness Condition, and the Phase Impenetrability Condition. It also discusses two forms of Merge, external merge and internal merge, the latter of which is driven by edge features of lexical items.Less
This chapter examines the “strong minimalist thesis” (SMT) that language is an optimal solution to interface conditions that must be satisfied by the faculty of language. SMT emerged within the principles-and-parameters framework of generative grammar and involves efficient computation that requires the restriction of computational resources as well as minimization of computations. The chapter suggests that Merge constitutes the sole computational operation in narrow syntax and proposes a No Tampering Condition (NTC) to prevent Merge from making internal changes to the syntactic objects (SOs) to which it applies. It first reviews some recent and ongoing work in the general framework of the so-called Minimalist Program before turning to the theory of phases, the Inclusiveness Condition, and the Phase Impenetrability Condition. It also discusses two forms of Merge, external merge and internal merge, the latter of which is driven by edge features of lexical items.
Ian Roberts
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- August 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780262014304
- eISBN:
- 9780262289726
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- The MIT Press
- DOI:
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262014304.003.0006
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Psycholinguistics / Neurolinguistics / Cognitive Linguistics
This chapter explores how head movement relates to the general theory of movement, focusing on “excorporation” and the Head Movement Constraint (HMC). Whereas excorporation is permitted in head ...
More
This chapter explores how head movement relates to the general theory of movement, focusing on “excorporation” and the Head Movement Constraint (HMC). Whereas excorporation is permitted in head movement only under highly constrained conditions, the HMC is nonexistent. As in all other cases of movement, head movement is subject to the locality conditions imposed by the Phase Impenetrability Condition and the general ban on interveners that is essential to the locality condition on Agree. The chapter also considers the possibility of head movement triggered by Edge Features (also known as “A0” head movement), and argues that such cases may exist, as “head topicalization/focalization” and as “wh-head movement.”Less
This chapter explores how head movement relates to the general theory of movement, focusing on “excorporation” and the Head Movement Constraint (HMC). Whereas excorporation is permitted in head movement only under highly constrained conditions, the HMC is nonexistent. As in all other cases of movement, head movement is subject to the locality conditions imposed by the Phase Impenetrability Condition and the general ban on interveners that is essential to the locality condition on Agree. The chapter also considers the possibility of head movement triggered by Edge Features (also known as “A0” head movement), and argues that such cases may exist, as “head topicalization/focalization” and as “wh-head movement.”
Heejeong Ko
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- November 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780199660261
- eISBN:
- 9780191749162
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199660261.003.0006
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Theoretical Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology
Chapter 6 evaluates my proposal against other influential models of cyclic syntax, and wraps up the discussion with an overall summary. In particular, it consider the impact of its arguments for ...
More
Chapter 6 evaluates my proposal against other influential models of cyclic syntax, and wraps up the discussion with an overall summary. In particular, it consider the impact of its arguments for Chomsky’s proposition-based phase model. It is shown that the series of arguments developed in this book presents counterevidence to the Phase Impenetrability Condition (PIC). It is argued that the edge must be spelled out together with its complement, contra the PIC. The contrast between domain-internal vs. domain-external movement out of edges as well as general order-preservation effects cannot be properly explained under the PIC model. It is also shown that the evidence in support of order-preservation effects in multiple edges presents non-trivial challenges for the PIC approach. It also discusses some implications of my proposal for principles in the narrow syntax such as locality in movement, scrambling, and argument structure.Less
Chapter 6 evaluates my proposal against other influential models of cyclic syntax, and wraps up the discussion with an overall summary. In particular, it consider the impact of its arguments for Chomsky’s proposition-based phase model. It is shown that the series of arguments developed in this book presents counterevidence to the Phase Impenetrability Condition (PIC). It is argued that the edge must be spelled out together with its complement, contra the PIC. The contrast between domain-internal vs. domain-external movement out of edges as well as general order-preservation effects cannot be properly explained under the PIC model. It is also shown that the evidence in support of order-preservation effects in multiple edges presents non-trivial challenges for the PIC approach. It also discusses some implications of my proposal for principles in the narrow syntax such as locality in movement, scrambling, and argument structure.
Heejeong Ko
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- November 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780199660261
- eISBN:
- 9780191749162
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199660261.003.0002
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Theoretical Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology
Chapter 2 investigates the consequences of Cyclic Linearization for scrambling and quantifier stranding. I start the discussion by introducing a long-standing puzzle concerning a subject–object ...
More
Chapter 2 investigates the consequences of Cyclic Linearization for scrambling and quantifier stranding. I start the discussion by introducing a long-standing puzzle concerning a subject–object asymmetry in licensing floating numeral quantifiers in Korean and Japanese. The chapter shows that previous accounts that rely on a mutual c-command condition or a ban on subject scrambling do not solve the puzzle properly. The chapter argues that the conspiracy of Cyclic Linearization and constraints on domain-internal movement explains the puzzle. This argument is further supported by a variety of other asymmetries between subject scrambling and object scrambling. It then extends the claim to asymmetries in sub-extraction in Russian. Important challenges against the Phase Impenetrability Condition are also discussed. Concluding, it shows that a general order-preservation effect that holds for syntactic edges, called the Edge Generalization, explains seemingly heterogeneous puzzles concerning sub-extraction.Less
Chapter 2 investigates the consequences of Cyclic Linearization for scrambling and quantifier stranding. I start the discussion by introducing a long-standing puzzle concerning a subject–object asymmetry in licensing floating numeral quantifiers in Korean and Japanese. The chapter shows that previous accounts that rely on a mutual c-command condition or a ban on subject scrambling do not solve the puzzle properly. The chapter argues that the conspiracy of Cyclic Linearization and constraints on domain-internal movement explains the puzzle. This argument is further supported by a variety of other asymmetries between subject scrambling and object scrambling. It then extends the claim to asymmetries in sub-extraction in Russian. Important challenges against the Phase Impenetrability Condition are also discussed. Concluding, it shows that a general order-preservation effect that holds for syntactic edges, called the Edge Generalization, explains seemingly heterogeneous puzzles concerning sub-extraction.
Heather Newell (ed.)
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- June 2017
- ISBN:
- 9780198778264
- eISBN:
- 9780191823770
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198778264.003.0002
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology, Theoretical Linguistics
This chapter investigates phonological, morphological, and syntactic phenomena, aiming to demonstrate that the Phase Impenetrability Condition (Chomsky 2001) is epiphenomenal. The chapter therefore ...
More
This chapter investigates phonological, morphological, and syntactic phenomena, aiming to demonstrate that the Phase Impenetrability Condition (Chomsky 2001) is epiphenomenal. The chapter therefore builds on the argumentation in Bošković (2007, 2014). It is demonstrated that the PIC cannot hold in the syntax, as the operations Merge (Late Adjunction), Move (post-spell-out movement), and Agree (long-distance Agree) can all be shown to cross phase boundaries. Morphological operations such as the anti-cyclic merger of morphemes (Late Adjunction) and spell-out of lower copies of a chain demonstrate the same permeability of the previously interpreted domains of phases. In the pure phonology, data displaying the effects of Phonological Merger (Newell and Piggott 2014) and Infixation demonstrate that phonological domains are not opaque for phonological operations, and that this transparency is not limited to phonological edges.Less
This chapter investigates phonological, morphological, and syntactic phenomena, aiming to demonstrate that the Phase Impenetrability Condition (Chomsky 2001) is epiphenomenal. The chapter therefore builds on the argumentation in Bošković (2007, 2014). It is demonstrated that the PIC cannot hold in the syntax, as the operations Merge (Late Adjunction), Move (post-spell-out movement), and Agree (long-distance Agree) can all be shown to cross phase boundaries. Morphological operations such as the anti-cyclic merger of morphemes (Late Adjunction) and spell-out of lower copies of a chain demonstrate the same permeability of the previously interpreted domains of phases. In the pure phonology, data displaying the effects of Phonological Merger (Newell and Piggott 2014) and Infixation demonstrate that phonological domains are not opaque for phonological operations, and that this transparency is not limited to phonological edges.