Dokumen - Tips - Syntax Instructors Handbook Syntax A Generative Introduction Instructors
Dokumen - Tips - Syntax Instructors Handbook Syntax A Generative Introduction Instructors
Instructor’s Handbook
Syntax
A Generative Introduction
Instructor’s Handbook
Andrew Carnie
© 2002 by Andrew Carnie
Editorial Offices:
108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK
Tel: +44 (0)1865 791100
Osney Mead, Oxford OX2 0EL, UK
Tel: +44 (0)1865 206206
350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148-5018, USA
Tel: +1 781 388 8250
Iowa State University Press, a Blackwell Publishing company, 2121 S. State
Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50014-8300, USA
Tel: +1 515 292 0140
Blackwell Munksgaard, Nørre Søgade 35, PO Box 2148, Copenhagen, DK-1016,
Denmark
Tel: +45 77 33 33 33
Blackwell Publishing Asia, 54 University Street, Carlton, Victoria 3053, Australia
Tel: +61 (0)3 347 0300
Blackwell Verlag, Kurfürstendamm 57, 10707 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 (0)30 32 79 060
Blackwell Publishing, 10, rue Casimir Delavigne, 75006 Paris, France
Tel: +331 5310 3310
The right of Andrew Carnie to be identified as the Author of this Work has been as-
serted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a re-
trieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright,
Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher.
The Blackwell Publishing logo is a trade mark of Blackwell Publishing Ltd, regis-
tered at the United Kingdom Trade Marks Registry.
ISBN 0-631-23237-0
Introduction 1
Chapter 1 Generative Grammar 4
Chapter 2 Fundamentals: Rules, Trees, and Parts of Speech 7
Chapter 3 Structural Relations 17
Chapter 4 Binding Theory 22
Chapter 5 X-bar Theory 24
Chapter 6 Extending X-bar Theory: TP, CP, and DP 29
Chapter 7 Constraining X-bar Theory: Theta Roles and the Lexicon 33
Chapter 8 Head-to-Head Movement 37
Chapter 9 NP/DP Movement 42
Chapter 10 Raising, Control, and Empty Categories 48
Chapter 11 Wh-movement 52
Chapter 12 Towards Minimalism 56
Chapter 13 Alternative Approaches: LFG 58
Chapter 14 Alternative Approaches: HPSG 60
Welcome
TO THE INSTRUCTOR
Thank you for adopting Syntax as the textbook for your class. I hope you and your students
will find it useful.
The book is aimed at an introductory level of formal analysis. It is not an introduc-
tion to Minimalism, but presents a view that is Minimalist-informed. For example, I don’t
approach phrase structure from the perspective of Bare Phrase Structure or Antisymmetry.
Instead, the student starts with old-style Phrase Structure Rules, then is lead through X-bar
theory, finally in chapter 12, there is a very brief discussion of Merge. I didn’t write the book
in Minimalism mainly because I feel that MP, although a great theory, is a little too abstract at
this time for beginning students.
The book is designed to take students through many of the fundamental concepts of
syntax (constituency, phrase structure rules, X-bar theory syntax/lexicon interactions, binding,
structural relations, various kinds of movement and conditions on movement). I certainly don’t
claim to have covered everything. For example, there is almost no discussion of VP ellipsis,
and no mention at all of Dative Movement, Tough-movement or ACD. I chose topics that I
think are accessible to the beginner and form a coherent whole. However, you may well want
to supplement the text with readings on the topics I don’t cover. You may also want to look
carefully at the problem sets and gray textboxes for each chapter. If I wasn’t able to include
discussion of a topic then there is frequently a problem set that takes it up.
The textbook is designed to be used over a typical 14-week semester, although, I
have found that sometimes I want to spend more time on some of the earlier chapters. For
example, I often spend two and a half weeks on chapter 5. I, and my colleagues, have used
this textbook successfully a number of times in our one-semester undergraduate Introduction
to Syntax class. This class (which normally has around 50 students in it) has a prerequisite of a
formal introduction to linguistics, which focuses on the core areas of phonology, syntax, mor-
phology, phonetics, and semantics. Some people may prefer to break this textbook into two
semesters’ worth of material, supplementing some areas I gloss over more quickly with addi-
tional reading. I have also given this textbook to first-year graduate students who came to our
program with limited background in syntax. They have all found it a successful way to gear
them up to the level of our core syntax classes. Other people have told me that they have used
the book in introductory graduate classes, although this is not the primary audience for the
book. I deliberately made the tone of the book “informal,” which may be less appropriate to
graduate students.
The textbook is designed to be used in the order of presentation, where each chapter
builds on the next. I understand that you may, of course, want to do the chapters in a different
order, or skip chapters entirely (e.g. some people may prefer to skip the discussion of phrase
structure rules and go directly to X-bar theory). In this manual, I’ve mentioned all the major
ideas covered in each chapter, so that if you skip a chapter or do them out of order you’ll know
what to cover extramurally.
The problem sets form an important part of the book. They often ask the student to
challenge the presentation of the material in the textbook and think critically about the mate-
rial. The problem sets come of a number of types. Some are simply technology practice to
cement the knowledge they have learned (e.g., the tree drawing exercises), others ask the stu-
dent to apply their new skills to foreign language problem sets, and still others ask the student
to challenge the black and white presentation of the text.
Electronic copies of all the problem sets in Microsoft Word 98/2000 and PDF for-
mats are available on the textbook homepage on Blackwell’s website:
http://www.blackwellpublishers.co.uk/carnie You may need a password to
access them. Instructions on how to obtain one are found on the web page. You may also need
to download fonts to use the Word98/2000 versions. You are welcome to download these
problem sets and modify them for your own use. However, please do not distribute problem
sets without a citation to the book on every page, even if you significantly modify them. I, and
my contributing problem set authors, have spent a long time composing these problem sets,
and would like credit for them. On that same website you can download the power point pres-
entation slides I use in my own classes. You are welcome to use these if you like, again with
credit.
On a related note: in order to retain the usefulness of the problem sets in this text
book for use in classes by other instructors, and for your future classes, please do not distrib-
ute this instructor’s handbook or these answer keys in any form (electronic, print, or
otherwise) to your students. Please do not photocopy this handbook. If you need extra copies
for teaching assistants, please contact Blackwell, and they will be happy to send you a desk
copy. I thank you in advance for your assistance in this matter, it will ensure that future in-
structors will be able to use the problem sets in my textbook with confidence in the originality
of their students’ answers.
Unsurprisingly, this text is going to reflect my own biases. While I tried to follow
the “canon” of thought on particular matters where possible, on occasion, I quite deliberately
strayed from the generally accepted path. When I did this, I did it for one of two reasons: (1)
Pedagogical reasons (2) I really don’t believe the “standard view.” An example of the former
(pedagogical reasons), is the fact that until an exercise in chapter 8, I generate all auxiliary
verbs under T (not as V). I felt it was just easier for the students to put them in the right place
when you don’t give them the option. An example of the latter (I don’t believe the canon), is I
don’t distinguish adverbs from adjectives (calling them both A). This may well annoy you, the
instructor, and for that I apologize in advance. I have thought very carefully about all the cases
This chapter covers some of the basic philosophical issues of syntactic theory. Items marked
with an asterisk (*) have a mention below in Idiosyncrasies in this Chapter section below.
a) Syntax as a science
b) Syntax as a part of cognitive science
c) I-Language (Language) vs. E-Language*
d) The scientific method*
The distribution of person, number agreement in anaphors is used as an example.
e) Modeling syntactic hypotheses using rules
f) Prescriptive vs. Descriptive rules
g) Sources of data: Intuitions, corpora
h) Distinguishing learning from acquisition
i) Innateness and arguments for it
j) Parameters as an explanation for language variation
k) choosing among theories: Levels of adequacy (descriptive, observational and explana-
tory)
Some instructors have expressed to me the desire to do this chapter last instead of first. This is
a matter of personal taste. If you leave it until last, then you will want to review number and
agreement and the notion of anaphor before you do chapter 4, and will probably want to dis-
cuss evaluation metrics (levels of adequacy) before you do chapters 12–14. Parameter setting
should be reviewed before chapter 5. The things that I would review in class before going on
to chapter 2 include prescriptive vs. descriptive rules, and basic syntactic methodology and
perhaps innateness.
1 My description of the scientific method will undoubtedly cause some people to raise their
eyebrows. Of course scientific investigation does not necessarily begin with data. (In fact,
some people claim that it never does). Often a hypothesis precedes any data gathering.
However, from the perspective of the student, I think it is important to perceive the data
as being the primary driving force behind linguistic science. So I made this simplification
for pedagogic reasons.
2 I distinguish I-language from E-language, but use the terms Language (capital L) and
language (lower case l). The definitions are not precisely identical to I-language and E-
language. Language (upper case) is the capacity and ability to use a particular language
(lower case).
PROBLEM SETS
1. INTUITIONS
2. INNATENESS
3. PRESCRIPTIVE RULES
4. UNIVERSALS
Typical answers:
Learned: Reading, writing, mathematics, modern dance, the rules
of basketball, driving.
Acquired: walking, facial recognition, sexuality, taste in
food.
Other answers are, of course, possible.
6. LEVELS OF ADEQUACY
a) descriptive
b) observational
c) explanatory
7. ANAPHORA
This chapter focuses on the basic notions of constituency (and constituency tests) and phrase
structure rules. There is also an extensive discussion of parts of speech and how they are de-
termined (on the basis of distribution, rather than semantically). The rules are roughly aspect-
style phrase structure rules.
It is possible to skip directly to chapter 5 at this point and do X-bar theory. However, if you do
this, you will need to discuss parts of speech, as well as the mechanics of how rules are writ-
ten, and trees are generated by rules. Average students often comment to me that they are glad
they did this chapter before doing X-bar, although they express frustration at having to learn
two notations.
You should be warned that the trees in chapters 3 and 4 use the phrase structure
rules in this chapter, not the X-bar ones. So if you skip this chapter, you’ll need to explain
that.
1 I don’t distinguish adjectives from adverbs, abbreviating both as A. I’ve had a number of
good in-class debates on this issue.
2 I don’t use AUX, instead auxiliaries are generated in T. I use the categories S and S' (TP
and CP are introduced in chapter 6).
NP T VP
will
N V NP
I use
N
tense
3 Be careful to note the final form of rules, some rules are revised throughout the chapter. I
also draw my student’s attention to this fact.
means you can have (hypothetically) as many APs and NPs as you need.
5 I discuss the possibility that particles (blow up, etc.) are actually prepositions without an
object.
6 Some people dislike my use of the term “modifies” in my golden rule for tree associa-
tion, feel free to replace with “is closely semantically associated with.”
PROBLEM SETS
1. PART OF SPEECH 1
unattractive description.
A N
2. PART OF SPEECH 2
3. NOOTKA
1) N
2) V
3) V
4) N
5) First position in sentence is a verb, verbs take –ma ending
second position in a sentence is a noun, nouns take -÷i
suffix.
6) The same word appears in different parts of speech in the
same language.
4. ENGLISH
a) S
NP VP
D AP N V PP PP
the child walked
AP A P NP P NP
young from to
A N D N
very school the store
a) [S[NP[DThe][AP[AP[Avery]][Ayoung]][Nchild]][VP[Vwalked]
[PP[Pfrom][NP[Nschool]]][PP[Pto][NP[Dthe][Nstore]]]]].
b) S
NP VP
N V NP PP
John paid
D N P NP
a dollar for
D N PP
a head
P NP
of
N
lettuce
b) [S[NP[NJohn]][VP[Vpaid][NP[Da][Ndollar]][PP[Pfor]
[NP[Da][Nhead][PP[Pof][NP[Nlettuce]]]]]]].
c) S
NP VP
N V AP
teenagers drive
AP A
quickly
A
rather
c) [S[NP[NTeenagers]][VP[Vdrive][AP[AP[Arather]][Aquickly]]].
d) S
NP T VP
can
D AP N PP V NP AP
A magician fool
A P NP D N A
clever with the audience easily
D AP N
the equipment
A
right
d) [S[NP[DA][AP[Aclever]][Nmagician][PP[Pwith][NP[Dthe]
[AP[Aright]][Nequipment]]]][Tcan][VP[Vfool][NP[Dthe]
[Naudience]][AP[Aeasily]]]].
e) S
NP T VP
might
D N V NP PP
the police plant
D N P NP
the drugs in
D N
the apartment
e) [S[NP[DThe][Npolice]][Tmight][VP[Vplant][NP[Dthe][Ndrugs]]
[PP[Pin][NP[Dthe][Napartment]]]]].
f) S
NP T VP
should
D AP N V AP AP*
those hopefuls practice
A A AP A
Olympic diligently day
A
every
f) [S[NP[DThose][AP[AOlympic]][Nhopefuls]][Tshould]
[VP[Vpractice][AP[Adiligently][N?P[Devery][Nday]]]].
g) S
NP VP
D AP N PP AP V NP PP
the research warns
A P NP A N P NP
latest on always people about
N D N
dieting the dangers
PP
P NP
of
AP N
chol.
AP A
much
A
too
g)[S[NP[DThe][AP[Alatest]][Nresearch][PP[Pon][NP[Ndieting]]]]
[VP[AP[Aalways]][Vwarns][NP[Npeople]][PP[Pabout][NP[Dthe]
[Ndangers][PP[Pof][NP[AP[AP[Atoo]][Amuch]][Ncholesterol]]]].
h) S
NP T VP
was
D AP N V AP AP PP
that faucet dripping
A A AP A P NP
annoying constantly day for
A N
every months
h) [S[NP[DThat][AP[Aannoying]][Nfaucet]][Twas][VP[Vdripping]
[AP[Aconstantly]][AP[AP[Aevery]][Aday]][PP[Pfor]
[NP[Nmonths]]]].
5. AMBIGUITY
(Students often give the trees for their paraphrases, not the
original sentence, although the question is worded so they
don’t. You might draw their attention to this.)
NP VP
N V S' AP
John said
S A
quickly
NP VP
N V PP
Mary went
P NP
to
D N
the store
NP VP
N V S'
John said
S
NP VP
N V PP AP
Mary went
P NP A
to quickly
D N
the store
NP VP
N V NP
I discovered
D AP N
an poem
AP A
English
A
Old
NP VP
N V NP
I discovered
D AP AP N
an poem
A A
old English
6. STRUCTURE
8. ENGLISH PREPOSITIONS
But
9. BAMBARA
1) No
2) Yes
3) No evidence
4) NP Æ N (or none)
5) PP Æ NP P
6) VP Æ (NP) V (PP)
7) S Æ NP (T) VP
8) a) S
NP VP
N V
A kasi-ra
c) S
NP T VP
ye
N NP V
Den min
N
ji
d) S
NP VP
N V PP
N son-na
NP P
ma
N
a
9) b) [S[NP[NA][VP[Vkaa-ra]]].
c) [S[NP[NDen][Tye][VP[NP[Nji]][Vmin]]].
10. HIXKARYANA
1) Yes
2) No
3) NP Æ N (A) (D)
4) VP Æ (NP) V
5) S Æ VP NP
6) Verb, it precedes the subject NP
7) a) S
VP NP
NP V N
yonyohoryeno biyekomo
N
kurah
b) S
VP NP
NP V N
yonoye kamara
N A D
toto heno komo
8) a)[S[VP[NP[NKuraha]][Vyonyhoryeno]][NP[Nbiyekomo]]].
c)[S[VP[NP[NToto][Aheno][Dkomo]][Vyonoye]][NP[Nkamara]]].
11. IRISH
1) No
2) NP Æ (D) N (A) (must be consistent with the answer to (1)
3) No
4) S Æ V NP (NP)
5) c) S
V NP NP
Phóg
D N D N
an fear an mhuc
d) S
V NP NP
Chonaic
N D N A
mé an mhuc mhór
e) S
V NP
Rince
D N
an bheán
0. INTRODUCTION
PROBLEM SETS
1. STRUCTURAL RELATIONS1
1) N3, NP3, PP, VP, S
2) NP3
3) No
4) D1 AP, A,
1
The idea for this problem set is borrowed from Radford (1988).
2. TREES
a) S
NP1 VP
3. STRUCTURAL RELATIONS
1) VP, V, NP2, N2, PP2, P2, NP3, AP2, A 2, N 3
2) V, NP2, N2, PP2, P2, NP3, AP2, A2, N3
3) D, AP1, N1, PP1, P1, NP4, N4
4) D, AP1, N1, PP1
5) VP, V, NP2, N2, PP2, P2, NP3, AP2, A 2, N 3
6) NP1, D, AP1, N1, PP1, P1, NP4, N4
7) D, AP1, N1, PP1, P1, NP4, N4
8) V, NP2, N2, PP2, P2, NP3, AP2, A2, N3
9) V, NP2
10) None
11) NP1, D, AP1, N1, PP1, P1, NP4, N4
5. GRAMMATICAL RELATIONS
a) Subject: It; object of preposition: southern California
b) Subject: we ; indirect object: the family dog; object: an-
other bath
c) Subject: The quiz show contestant; object: a wild guess
about the answer; object of a preposition: the answer
6. TZOTZIL
1) NP Æ (D) N
2) PP Æ P NP
3) VP Æ V (AP) (NP) (PP)
(There is not enough evidence to determine the order of NP
and PP.)
4) S Æ VP NP
(Some students may treat the subject as optional if they
note that the church in (c) is semantically an object.)
5) li Maruche
6) A trick question, could be either depending upon how you
treat passives also depending upon their trees in (10) below.
7) Precede
8) Precede
9) Yes
10) b) S
VP NP
V PP D N
‘ibat li Maruche
P NP
xchi’uk
N
smalal
c) S
VP NP
V D N
Pas ti ‘eklixa’une
7. HIAKI
1) NP Æ (D) N (A)
2) No, prepositions are morphologically marked.
3) VP Æ {PP, A, NP} V
(Don’t put any order on these complements because there
isn’t any evidence for the order in the data.)
4) S Æ NP VP
5) b) S
NP VP
D N NP2 V
Hunáa'a yá'uraa nokriak
D2 N2
hunáka'a hámutta
c) S
NP1 VP
N1 NP2 V
Taáwe hiba-tu'ure
N2 A
tótoi'asó'olam káamomólim
d) S
NP VP
N A V
Tá’abwikasu ’áma yépsak.
6) [NPHunáa'a yá'uraa]
7) Technically no, since the students are told to assume 'áma
is an adverb and object is defined as an NP daughter of VP.
8) [N yá'uraa]
9) VP, NP2, N2, D2, V
10) [V yépsak]
11) NP
12) NP2, VP, S
13) N2,
14) NP1, N1, N2
15) No
16) Yes
0. INTRODUCTION
PROBLEM SETS
1. BINDING PRINCIPLES
a) Condition B
b) Condition C
c) Condition A
d) Condition B
e) Condition A
f) Condition B
2. JAPANESE
Question 1: It appears to be an anaphor in this data, it must
be locally bound.
3. WH-QUESTIONS
The anaphor in the wh-phrase isn’t c-commanded by its antece-
dent in it’s surface position. We return to this question in
the chapter on wh-movement.
4. COUNTEREXAMPLES?
a) Me is c-commanded and coindexed with I, should be a princi-
ple B violation.
b) Should be a condition A violation, because himself is bound
by an NP outside its binding domain (clause).
c) The obligatorily bound anaphor is bound by an NP two
clauses up.
d) In (i) the pronoun ye can’t be locally bound.
In (ii) the pronoun ye can’t be free.
So in (i) it’s behaving like a pronoun, and in (ii) like an
anaphor.
5. PERSIAN
Xodesh can either be locally or longdistance bound.
Xod must be locally bound.
6. C-COMMAND OR PRECEDENCE?
If precedence defines binding, then these sentences would constitute condition C
violations. However, the sentences are grammatical. By contrast, under c-command,
the pronoun does not c-command the R-expression, so these do not constitute condi-
tion C violations (correctly).
0. INTRODUCTION
This chapter introduces the basic notions of X-bar theory as applied to NPs, APs,
PPs, and VPs.2 CP, TP (which I use instead of IP), and DP are saved until the next
chapter. There is significant discussion on motivating more general principles in-
stead of language specific phrase structure rules. I also discuss at length the
distinction between complements and adjuncts, and the tests to distinguish them. The
notion of phrase structure parameters is also introduced.
As in Radford (1988) and the original work in X-bar theory (but not con-
sistent with common current practice), adjuncts in this chapter are not Chomsky-
adjoined. Instead they are daughters of and sisters to the single bar level.
I’m using a version of X-bar theory where only the single bar level iterates,
XP is what I use for Xmax or X''.
There is relatively little discussion of specifiers (I’m going to reserve speci-
fiers for subjects in later chapters). I put determiners in the specifier of NP in this
2
The particular presentation in this chapter of X-bar theory draws fairly heavily on Radford
(1988) rather than on the original versions of X-bar theory found in Chomsky (1973) or Jack-
endoff (1977).
chapter but this is the only specifier they see. In chapter 6, I adopt a DP hypothesis
getting rid of this exception. Unlike Jackendoff’s original form, I don’t put very in
the spec of VP, because I find this confuses the students later when they do the VP-
internal subject hypothesis. So students may need some additional discussion reas-
suring that specifiers are well motivated.
One area that may require further discussion is the treatment of pre-head
complements (as in the linguistics professor). Some people prefer to treat these as
N-N compounds rather than AP N complement head structures. I adopt the latter,
without much discussion. There is no discussion in the text of why pre-head modifi-
ers must not be phrasal. This will probably need some classroom work.
PROBLEM SETS
1. TREES
a) S
NP VP
N' V'
N V NP
Abelard wrote
D N'
a
N' PP
N P'
poem
P NP
about
N'
N
Héloïse
You are on your own with the rest. Notice that “from Italy” in
(d) is ambiguous and could either modify volume or verse, in
either case as an adjunct.
e) The biggest man in the room said that John danced an Irish
jig from County Kerry to County Tipperary all night long.
2) I believe mit Sahne modifies the verb, not the NP cake, but
this is up for debate. Simin Karimi tells me that on the
basis of certain pronominalization facts, she thinks the PP
modifies Kuchen. The exact analysis of the mit Sahne PP is
irrelevant to the content of the question. Which is actu-
ally about the Subject NP.
a) S
NP VP
D N' V'
Die
N' PP V' PP
OR
NP VP
D N' V'
Die
AP N' V' PP
f) S
NP VP
D N' V'
Die
AP N' V NP
liebte
A' N PP D N'
Koenigin die
A P' N
junge Prinzessin
P NP
von
N'
N
England
3. JAPANESE
NP VP
N' V'
N NP V
Toru-ga mita
D N'
sono
AP N'
A' N
hon-o
A
akai
4. PARAMETERS
0. INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents a short survey of clause types (main, embedded, complement,
adjunct, specifier, tensed, untensed). There is no discussion of small clauses, I find
students have too much difficulty with the concept to identify them at this stage in
their intellectual development. I identify a clause as a subject and predicate phrase (I
use the term predicate phrase here, instead of predicate due to the fact in the next
chapter we use predicate to refer only to the head of the predicate phrase).
DPs, TPs (note not IP!) and CPs are all introduced. I make the claim that all
clauses have a CP even if there is no overt C (and similarly with TP and T). There is
a brief introduction to subject/aux inversion, which we return to in more detail in
chapter 8.
PROBLEM SETS
1. ENGLISH THAT
a) Complementizer
b) Determiner, as shown by number agreement
3. CLAUSE TYPES
a) Main clause: Stalin may think that Roosevelt is a fool.
complementizer: Ø
T: may
subject: Stalin
finite
Embedded clause: that Roosevelt is a fool
complementizer: that
T: is
subject: Stalin
finite
4. TREES
CP
C'
C TP
Ø
NP T'
D N' T VP
the -ed
AP N' V'
AP A' N V' PP
child
A' A V' PP P'
young
A V P' P NP
very walk to
P NP D N'
from the
N' N
store
N
school
5. TREES II
Again you are on your own.
6. HUNGARIAN
No, the possessor has to appear in spec, NP. In the second con-
struction it appears in spec, DP.
0. INTRODUCTION
The system of X-bar theory developed in the previous chapter seriously overgener-
ates. This chapter introduces theta roles and thematic relations as a way to constrain
this.
Two important points of note: (1) I distinguish thematic relations from theta
roles. Thematic relations are the semantic notions. Theta roles are the syntactic slots
associated with a group of theta roles. The theta criterion holds of theta roles, not
thematic relations. (2) I use Haegeman’s box notation for theta grids.
The EPP and expletives are also introduced in this chapters.
PROBLEM SETS
1. SINHALA
1) See below
2) See below
3) Experiencer
4) maˇ´ is used with experiencers
5) A attaches to Agents, B attaches to experiencers
e) Mam´i naˇ´n´wa.
agent
i
f) Maˇ´j næˇ´en´wa.
experiencer
i
3. WARLPIRI
ngka: location
kurra: goal
ngirli: source
ngku: agent
wana: location/path
4. OBJECT EXPLETIVES
Maybe. It is the double of the relative clause that modifies
it. Otherwise this sentence would be an example of a counterex-
ample to the theta criterion.
5. PASSIVES
Part 1:
i j
i j
i j
i j k
i j k
6. HIAKI -WA
Part 1: Deletes agents, similar to English –en.
Part 2: Only agents are effected by –wa. Also note that intran-
sitives can be affected by the suffix.
0. INTRODUCTION
PROBLEM SETS
1. ENGLISH
a) CP
C'
C TP
NP T'
N' T VP
have
N V'
I
AP V'
A' V N/DP
loved
A N/D'
always
N
peanut butter
(some students may treat peanut butter as a phrase)
b) CP
C'
C TP
NP T'
N' T NegP
do
N Neg'
I
Neg VP
not
V'
V N/DP
love
N/D'
N
peanut butter
NP T'
N' T VP
-s
N V'
Martha
AP V'
A' V CP
thinks
A
often John hates syntax
d) CP
C'
C TP
+Q
NP T'
N' T VP
do
N V'
you
V N/DP
like
N/D'
N/D
peanut butter
3. VERB RAISING
German: Yes, main verbs appear higher than negation and undergo
T Æ C.
4. ITALIAN
V raising
Part 2: V raising.
7. ENGLISH
Adjectives normally precede nouns in English, the adjectives
here follow. Suggesting that at least part of the noun has
moved around them. This is supported by the alternation between
some spicy thing and something spicy. (However, of course, con-
trast a spicy something!)
9. ITALIAN N → D
When there is no determiner, the adjective follows the noun,
when there is, it precedes the noun. Assuming that adjectives
are fixed in position, the alternation suggests that the N has
raised around the AP. The answer to this is very similar to the
answer to question 7.
0. INTRODUCTION
PROBLEM SETS
1. ENGLISH
a) CP
C'
C TP
Ø
NP T'
N' T AP
is
N A'
Marie
A CP
likely
C'
C TP
Ø
t T'
T VP
to
V'
V N/DP
leave
the store
I leave the rest for you to do, however, I’ve listed the trans-
formations that apply in each:
4. ARIZONA TEWA
1) Spec: XP Æ (YP) X'
Adjunct: X' Æ (ZP) X'
Complement: X' Æ (WP) X
2)a) CP
C'
C TP
Ø
DP T'
D' T VP
Ø
D NP V'
he¶’i
N' DP V
mánkhwE¶@di
N D'
sen
D NP
nE@’i
N'
N
‘enú
c) CP
C'
C TP
Ø
DP T'
D' T VP
Ø
D NP V'
na:bí
N' DP V
mánsunt’ó
N D'
kwiyó
D NP
he¶’i
N'
N
p’o
4)b) CP
C'
C TP
Ø
T'
T VP
Ø
V'
DP V'
D' DP V
mánkhwE¶@di
D NP D'
he¶’i
N' D NP
nE@’i
N N'
sen-di
N
‘enú
d) CP
C'
C TP
Ø
T'
T VP
Ø
V'
DP V
nasunt’íi
D'
D NP
he¶’i
N'
N
p’o
c,d,e) These three pieces of data show that the subject of the
embedded clause is behaving like it is part of the higher
clause with respect to binding theory, it allows disjoint ref-
erence in (c). For many people it may be bound by the subject
7. HAITIAN CREOLE
NP movement in Haitian Creole leaves a resumptive pronoun. This
pronoun is an “overt trace,” creating an NP–Pronoun chain
(thus not violating the theta criterion).
9. TURKISH
The NP already has case in the embedded clause, therefore there
is no motivation for raising.
0. INTRODUCTION
This chapter introduces the distinctions between raising and control constructions,
between subject to subject raising and subject to object raising, between obligatory
and optional control, and between subject control and object control. There is also a
short discussion of little pro and the null subject parameter
Control theory is notoriously problematic. Here I give a less than satisfying
answer, but that I think reflects the less that satisfying status of control theory at this
time. I discuss the various syntactic, thematic/semantic, and pragmatic accounts that
have been suggest for controlling PRO. I do not consider movement analyses of
PRO.
PROBLEM SETS
1. ENGLISH PREDICATES
Warning: this is a very long (and tedious) problem set to do!
3. IS EASY
6. CONTROLLERS
a) To improve myself is a goal for next year.
PRO = me obligatorily (as shown by the anaphor bound by
PRO) but there is no me to control it.
b) To improve yourself would be a good idea.
same answer as (a)
c) To improve himself, Bruce should consider therapy.
PRO = Bruce obligatorily, but Bruce does not c-command
it.
d) To improve herself, Jane went to a health spa.
same answer as (c)
7. IRISH pro
Irish doesn’t allow you to have both agreement and the pronoun.
Basic wh-movement is addressed in this chapter, as well as some of the easier con-
straints. Wh-movement is cast as movement for feature checking reasons.
The main focus of the chapter is on locality conditions, in particular
bounding theory. The version of bounding theory I use here involves the subjacency
condition, and counting bounding nodes (TP and NP). There is no discussion of bar-
riers or the ECP (because I haven’t used government). In the next chapter we revise
subjacency into the more general minimal link condition (MLC), but that is left aside
in this chapter. I also discuss, briefly and stipulatively, that-trace and double-filled
CP filters. There is no discussion of the specified subject condition or argu-
ment/adjunct asymmetries in extraction. There is also no discussion of relative
clause or other operator constructions. The reason for all these omissions is brevity –
I assume these topics can all be covered in more advanced classes.
PROBLEM SETS
1. ENGLISH TRANSFORMATIONS
Again I haven’t bothered with the trees here, I just give the
relevant traces and PROs. Students are asked to provide the
trees.
2. BOUNDING THEORY
Students are supposed to draw the tree. I’ve just circled the
bounding nodes here:
*Whoj did [TP George try to find out [CP whati [TP tj wanted ti]?
3. PICTURE NPS
Should be a violation of the subjacency condition. Who crosses
the NP node [a picture of] and the TP node of the sentence.
There is no intermediate CP to stop off in.
4. IRISH
You get the aN–resumptive strategy obligatorily when you have
an island (= subjacency violation). A note on the data: this is
a simplification of the facts. You can actually get the a N -
resumptive strategy in any position, except for the highest
subject position, but it is only obligatory in an island. See
McCloskey (1991) for more details.
5. BINDING THEORY
Binding conditions hold at D-structure, before the transforma-
tions have move the wh-phrase.
6. ENGLISH
Students are expected to do trees, I’ll just list the transfor-
mations:
7. SERBO-CROATIAN
9. IRISH
Complementizer agreement shows that the wh-word stops off in
the intermediate specifier. There would be no a L comp in the
embedded CP if the wh-word didn’t stop there.
0. INTRODUCTION
PROBLEM SETS
1. ENGLISH
The MLC holds that movement is to the closest potential landing
site. With wh-islands there is an intermediate, but filled
spec, CP that serves to block further movement. With NP is-
lands, however, there is no such “closer potential landing
site” to block extraction.
2. PF MOVEMENT
I was looking for sentences that might be synonymous or nearly
synonymous, for example, particle movement. Of course there are
always those that will claim that that all movement types have
some effect on meaning (broadly interpreted to include so
called “pragmatic” issues like topic and focus). The answers
you’ll get on this question will depend upon the semantic so-
phistication of your students.
0. ALTERNATIVE THEORIES
even though it has different assumptions and motivations.” This is likely to annoy
those people who actually work in these frameworks, as it gives a certain P&P feel
to them. Again this is for pedagogical reasons. I reiterate, if you want proper intro-
ductions to the influential ideas of LFG or HPSG, you’d be better off going to the
source material. But if you want a brief explanation of what a metavariable or a SYN-
SEM structure is, then these chapters will do the trick.
One other caveat has to do with my discussion of evaluating competing
theories. A number of people have given me quite a bit of flack about the “all theo-
ries are roughly equal” or “aesthetics play a big role” language I use in these
chapters. Let me state for the record, that of course I believe it is possible to evaluate
theoretical approaches on empirical grounds. However, I do want to point out that
doing so is extremely difficult. Some theoretical machinery is better suited to certain
empirical tasks, but other machinery might be better at different tasks. This makes
empirical comparison, while not impossible, certainly more difficult than many
scholars would have us believe. This practical consideration has the effect that for
the most part people work in the theoretical framework that appeals to them on aes-
thetic grounds or works best in their own particular sub-area of interest. This isn’t an
ideal situation, but I think it is wrong to try to conceal this fact from students.
This chapter, on LFG, introduces – but does not discuss in depth – some of
the original motivations for abandoning transformations. It introduces the basic no-
tions of c-structure, f-structure, a-structure, variables, metavariables, grammatical
functions, AVMs, functional equations, f-descriptions, unification, lexical rules, and
functional control. It treats none of these topics in depth.
PROBLEM SETS
1. ENGLISH
I leave these for you to do.
2. ICELANDIC (AGAIN)
No.
3. TRANSFORMATIONS OR NOT?
The answer to this question involves creativity on the part of
the student.
4. WANNA-CONTRACTION
The answer to this question involves creativity on the part of
the student.
Please read the caveat about the alternatives chapters at the beginning of chapter 13
of this instructor’s handbook.
This chapter covers all the basics of HPSG: Features, SYN-SEM structures,
tags, realization principles, gap (slash) features, lexical rules, compositionality, uni-
fication, phrase structure rules, and binding theory. It does not get into some of the
more difficult issues, such as inheritance hierarchies. As in the last chapter, the
metaphors used are sometimes those of P&P not HPSG, for pedagogic reasons, and I
make no claims that this chapter represents HPSG as it’s practitioners would present
it.
PROBLEM SETS
1. ENGLISH
I leave these for you to do.
2. SUBJECT/AUX INVERSION
The answer to this question involves creativity on the part of
the student.
3. ISLAND CONSTRAINTS
The answer to this question involves creativity on the part of
the student.