Contact me in order to access the whole complete document. Email: smtb98@gmail.

com
WhatsApp: https://wa.me/message/2H3BV2L5TTSUF1 Telegram: https://t.me/solutionmanual
ssm
Generative Grammar
mtt
bb99
88@
0. TOPICS COVERED IN THIS CHAPTER
@
This chapter covers some of the basic philosophical issues of syntactic theory.

a) Syntax as a science
b) Syntax as a part of cognitive science
ggm
c) I-language vs. E-language
d) Competence vs. performance
e) Human Language Capacity (HLC)
f) The scientific method
The distribution of person, number agreement in anaphors is used as an example.
maa

g) Modeling syntactic hypotheses using rules

h) Prescriptive vs. descriptive rules
i) Sources of data: judgments, corpora
j) Distinguishing learning from acquisition
k) Innateness and arguments for it
l) Parameters as an explanation for language variation
m) Choosing among theories: levels of adequacy (descriptive, observational and explanatory)
iill..cc

1. CHANGES FROM THE THIRD EDITION

Textbook:
• Adjusted examples to be more inclusive
• Distinguished Syntax the discipline from Syntax the grammatical object
• Reorganization: section on Scientific method brought forward.
• Changed the Language/language distinction to i-language and e-language. Switched to a more
oom

traditional description of i-language.

m

complete document is available on https://unihelp.xyz/ *** contact me if site not loaded

6 Syntax 4E: Instructor's Handbook

• Introduced the idea of the Human Language Capacity (HLC)

• Added box on non-binary gender
• New GPS3: Non-binary gender
• New GPS5: Performance vs. Competence
• New CPS5: Off we go
• New CPS12: Explanatory adequacy

Workbook
• Reworked and updated WBE3 on corpora
• Added WBE5 i-language vs. e-language

2. IF YOU SKIP THIS CHAPTER

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 5 and will probably want to discuss evaluation metrics (levels of
adequacy) before you do chapter 13. Parameter setting should be reviewed before chapter 6. 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.

3. IDIOSYNCRASIES IN THIS CHAPTER

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.

GENERAL PROBLEM SETS

GPS1. PRESCRIPTIVE RULES

Common answers include: maintaining a standard across dialects for effective

communication, marking of social and educational status, and so-called “clarity”
in writing.

GPS2. OBLIGATORY SPLIT INFINITIVES

Clearly, these examples demonstrate that the prescriptive rule against split
infinitives does not accord with native speaker intuitions. As scientists,
our job is to describe linguistic facts, not legislate them; prescriptive
rules are of little interest in this endeavor.
 Chapter 1: Generative Grammar 7

GPS3. NON-BINARY PRONOUNS AND ANAPHORS

Part 1. The data indicate that grammatical gender and number are the key
determinant of English verb agreement forms. The point is that the referent,
for whom personal gender and biological sex are uniquely determined, is the
same in both (a-b) and (c-d). What differs is the expression referring to
that referent. When the personal name Chris is used, the verb shows 3rd
singular agreement, while the pronoun they, with grammatically plural number,
triggers 3rd plural agreement.

Part 2. For determining the choice of the first part of the anaphor (them-),
personal gender seems to be the determining factor. The key point is that the
anaphor form does not depend on the form of the expression for the subject,
but reflects properties of the referent. This differs from the determination
of subject-verb agreement, as seen in Part 1.

Part 3. The dialects differ: dialect 1 (Chris/they… themselves) determines

number on the second part of the anaphor (-selves) on the basis of
grammatical number (of the first part of the anaphor, them-). Dialect 2
instead has the second part of the anaphor reflecting personal number
(namely, singular).

Part 4. A revised hypothesis taking into account the observations above must
be formulated separately for the two dialects seen in Part 3.
Dialect 1: an anaphor must agree in person, personal gender, and grammatical
number with its antecedent.
Dialect 2: an anaphor must agree in person, personal gender, and personal
number with its antecedent.

GPS4. JUDGMENTS

a) Prescriptive (who instead of whom)

b) Prescriptive (me instead of I)
c) Descriptive, syntactic (my red can’t be a subject NP; count nouns like
refrigerator can't appear without either plural morphology or a
determiner)(Some students say semantic; I generally accept this answer
too.)
d) Descriptive, syntactic (that-trace effect)
e) Prescriptive (Hopefully is supposed to mean “in a hopeful manner” not “I
hope that…”)
f) Prescriptive (split infinitive)
g) Descriptive, syntactic (wrong word order)
h) Descriptive, semantic (a sister must be a sibling)

GPS5. PERFORMANCE VS. COMPETENCE

a) Performance
b) Competence
c) Performance
d) Performance (or both?)
e) Competence
8 Syntax 4E: Instructor's Handbook

GPS6. LEARNING VS. ACQUISITION

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.

GPS7. UNIVERSALS

Common answers include: shared world-view and perception of the way the world
works; a common ancestor language; convergent evolution under similar conditions
of use and acquisition; the idea that syntactic structures reflect some natural
or logical order in the exterior world.

GPS8. INNATENESS

It is really hard to come up with a good answer to this question, which is the
point of the question. It is hard to come up with an argument against innateness,
which suggests the hypothesis is likely correct! The best common answer I’ve
seen suggests performing an unethical experiment where one exposes a child to
a language that violates UG.

GPS9. LEVELS OF ADEQUACY

a) descriptive
b) observational
c) explanatory

CHALLENGE PROBLEM SETS

CPS1. PRESCRIPTIVISM

This demonstrates that not only is the prescriptive rule inadequate as a

description of what English speakers actually do (it’s incorrect as a statement
of fact), it misses out on an important subtlety, that the position splitting
the infinitive is required for certain meanings. This reinforces the idea that
the facts of language are to be discovered by careful scientific work, rather
than dictated by language “mavens”.

CPS2. ANAPHORA

Part 1: The antecedent must precede the anaphor and agree in person, gender and
number.
Part 2: The antecedents here are (or contain) quantifiers. Based on the data shown
here, they allow any gender or number to appear on the anaphor. Note,
however, that they are both grammatically singular, in that they both
 Chapter 1: Generative Grammar 9

obligatorily trigger singular verb agreement: Everyone/Nobody is/*are...

The possibility of plural anaphors may be related to the semantic fact
that we are quantifying over a set of individuals, and aligns with what
we saw in GPS3, that determination of anaphor form is sensitive to a wider
array of factors than subject-verb agreement, which is very narrowly tied
to grammatical person and number.

CPS3. YOURSELF

Part 1: Only yourself (and yourselves) are fully grammatical.

Part 2: On the face of it, this seems to contradict the rule. Students may note
that this structure permits an overt subject pronoun (in some registers
and dialects), which must be 2nd person (Don't you hit yourself!). Our
account, of course, will be that this understood silent subject is
syntactically present. This is a good opportunity for you to introduce
the notion of null arguments.

CPS4. CONSTRUCT AN EXPERIMENT

There are several directions students could take with this question. At a
minimum, they should consider the full set of possibilities for singular and
plural nouns in both the real subject and intervener positions. Other wrinkles
could include extending the intervener with a further prepositional phrase
(e.g., The readiness of our conventional forces in peacetime is/are at an all-
time low), and varying number in that position as well. Another way to test
the hypothesis would be to investigate questions in which the agreeing verbal
element appears before the subject (e.g., Are the readiness of our conventional
forces at an all-time low?).
Students may hold various opinions on how best to run such an experiment:
some will insist on careful experimental procedure and design, with large
numbers of subjects to gather reliable data. Others will be satisfied with an
informal consultation of their own judgments.

CPS5. OFF WE GO

Using the (overly) simple distinction between stative verbs and motion verbs,
it appears that the construction in question is restricted to motion verbs.
Students may notice interesting subtleties here: for example, there is a phrasal
verb go off, which can mean “explode”: The bomb went off. But off it went
apparently cannot be used to express this meaning, and must instead indicate
directional motion.

CPS6. JUDGMENTS

Below I provide my own judgments on these sentences (Ö=fully grammatical); be

sure to allow for variation in your students’ judgments, and in those of their
consultants.

a) i. ÖThe students met to discuss the project.

ii. ?/*The student met to discuss the project.
iii. ÖThe class met to discuss the project.
10 Syntax 4E: Instructor's Handbook

(a.ii) is considerably improved if there is some understood person with whom

the student is meeting (an advisor, say).

b) i. ÖZeke cooked and ate the chili.

ii. Ö/?Zeke ate and cooked the chili.
Both are completely grammatical if it is understood that the first verb is
used intransitively (e.g., Zeke ate (a lunch of pasta) and cooked chili; Zeke
cooked (pasta) and ate chili). If both verbs are understood to take chili as
their object, (b.i) is noticeably better than (b.ii). To my ear, these two
possibilities (intransitive, transitive, or two transitives with same object)
will sound distinct when read aloud (slightly higher stress on the second
verb in the two-transitives reading).

c) i. *He put the clothes.

ii. */Ö1 He put in the washing machine.
iii. ÖHe put the clothes in the washing machine.
iv. %/*/?He put in the washing machine the clothes.
1. (c.ii) is fully grammatical with the sense of “he installed the washing
machine” (phrasal verb “put in”); note though that read aloud it will sound
different, with greater stress on “in” than on “put”. With the intended
regular verb “put”, this gets a *.

d) i. ÖI gave my brother a birthday present.

ii. ÖI gave a birthday present to my brother.
iii. ÖThat horror movie almost gave my brother a heart attack.
iv. ?/*/#That horror movie almost gave a heart attack to my brother.

e) %Where do you guys live at?

f) i. ÖIt is obvious to everybody that Tasha likes Misha.

ii. ÖThe fact that Tasha likes Misha is obvious to everybody.
iii. Ö/?Who is it obvious that Tasha likes?
iv. *Who is the fact that Tasha likes obvious?

CPS7. COMPETENCE VS. PERFORMANCE

This is an open-ended question. Expect creative answers. Possible answers might

include musical competence versus musical performance, athletic activities, or
even motor functions like walking. None of these distinctions are exactly
language-like. Students should be evaluated more on the arguments they present
rather than the particular answer they provide.

CPS8. IS LANGUAGE REALLY INFINITE?

Q 1: Premise 2 is contradicted by this assumption; if the set is finite, there

is a longest sentence (or set of sentences).
Q 2: Assuming that E is infinite begs the question: we start out assuming the
truth of the conclusion we wish to establish.
Q 3: This is a difficult question. Personally, I do not agree with Pullum and
Scholz that there is anything formally wrong with this proof. It follows
 Chapter 1: Generative Grammar 11

standard practice in establishing the cardinality of infinite sets (the

proof is entirely parallel to, say, Euclid's proof that the set of prime
numbers is infinite).

Q 4: Rough proof using subsets

Assume that the set of sentences S is a subset of possible sentences of
English (as determined by a native speaker), S contains the sentence
Calvin likes tuna. S also contains the embedding construction John said
that S which can be applied recursively to any other sentence in S. S is
an infinite set, S is a subset of possible English sentences, therefore
the set of possible sentences of English is infinite.

Rough proof using contradiction.

Assume there is a sentence S that is the longest sentence in the English
language. Native speakers know you can embed any sentence under "John
said that", therefore "John said that S" is a grammatical sentence and is
longer than S. Therefore there can be no S which is the longest sentence
in the English language.

CPS9. ARE INFINITE SYSTEMS REALLY UNLEARNABLE?

This question requires a fair amount of creativity on the part of the student,
so I can't give you a definitive answer here. (I doubt most linguists would say
there is a definitive answer anyway.) In short none of the equivalents are
necessarily incompatible with UG (in fact they all require something innate
even if it is just a good statistical learning mechanism); they mostly vary in
the degree to which innateness is involved in grammar.

CPS10. INNATENESS AND PRESCRIPTIVISM

The important thing about prescriptive rules is that they must be learned
explicitly; they exist because some language “expert” perceived a need to
correct a common “error.” But, of course, if Language really is an instinct,
we already know how to do it, so to speak; we do not need additional pointers
from the experts. From this perspective, prescriptive rules are as useful as
advice from experts on how to grow your organs, say, something the body already
knows how to do on its own.

CPS11. LEARNING

Q 1: Positive evidence for pro-drop can only come in the form of hearing
sentences without subjects.
Q 2: The default setting must be non-pro-drop.
Q 3: This is a difficult question; on the face of it, this is exactly the sort
of trigger that should lead children to analyze English as pro-drop. One
way around this problem is to note that imperatives are special in several
ways, including prosody and (lack of) agreement. Or perhaps innate
instructions tell children to ignore imperatives when determining the
pro-drop parameter.
12 Syntax 4E: Instructor's Handbook

CPS12. EXPLANATORY ADEQUACY 3

A reasonable answer is that it is sufficient for syntactic hypotheses to make

predictions about language acquisition, without actually having to
conduct new experiments. This is an open-ended question; expect creative
responses here.
 Parts of Speech

0. INTRODUCTION

This chapter focuses on parts of speech and how they are determined (on the basis of distribution, rather
than semantically). Among the lexical categories, subcategories are distinguished on the basis of features.

1. IF YOU SKIP THIS CHAPTER

If you skip this chapter you will want to review the basic ideas of subcategorization before doing chapters
3, 6, 8 and 9.

2. INTRODUCTION

Unlike the first edition I do distinguish adjectives from adverbs. Enough of you were annoyed with me
about the A category in the first edition that I've caved to pressure. This makes the rules in chapter 3
considerably more complex than the ones in the first edition. Honestly though, I still don't believe in the
distinction, because distributionally they have so much in common.

3. CHANGES FROM THE THIRD EDITION

Textbook
• No major changes in content, just fiddled with the examples so they are more inclusive.
• Added CPS3: Mohawk Incorporation

Workbook
New problem sets:
• WBE2: Irish Morphology
• WBE3: Abaza
• WBE4: Edo
• WBE13: English Pronouns
14 Syntax 4E: Instructor's Handbook

GENERAL PROBLEM SETS

GPS1. NOUNS

The lamps had been lit, but the blinds had not been drawn, so that (I) could
see Holmes as (he) lay upon the couch. (I) do not know whether (he) was seized
with compunction at that moment for the part (he) was playing, but (I) know
that (I) never felt more heartily ashamed of (myself) in my life than when (I)
saw the beautiful creature against (whom)(I) was conspiring, or the grace and
kindliness with (which) (she) waited upon the injured man. And yet (it) would
be the blackest treachery to Holmes to draw back now from the part (which) (he)
had entrusted to (me). (I) hardened my heart, and took the smoke-rocket from
under my ulster. After (all), (I) thought, (we) are not injuring (her). (We)
are but preventing (her) from injuring (another).

lamps, blinds, (I), Holmes, (he), couch, (I), (he), compunction, moment, part,
(he), (I), (I), (myself), life, (I), creature, (whom), (I), grace, kindliness,
(which), (she), man, (it), treachery, Holmes, part, (which), (he), (me), (I),
heart, smoke-rocket, ulster, (all), (I), (we), (her), (We), (her), (another).

GPS2. VERBS

The lamps had been lit, but the blinds had not been drawn, so that I could see
Holmes as he lay upon the couch. I do not know whether he was seized with
compunction at that moment for the part he was playing, but I know that I never
felt more heartily (ashamed) of myself in my life than when I saw the beautiful
creature against whom I was conspiring, or the grace and kindliness with which
she waited upon the (injured) man. And yet it would (be) the blackest treachery
to Holmes to draw back now from the part which he had entrusted to me. I hardened
my heart, and took the smoke-rocket from under my ulster. After all, I thought,
we are not injuring her. We are but preventing her from injuring another.

lit, drawn, see, lay, know, seized, playing, know, felt, (ashamed), saw,
conspiring, waited, (injured), (be), draw, entrusted, hardened, took, thought,
injuring, preventing, injuring

GPS3. ADJECTIVES AND ADVERBS

The lamps had been lit, but the blinds had (not) been drawn, so that I could
see Holmes as he lay upon the couch. I do not know whether he was seized with
compunction at that moment for the part he was playing, but I know that I never
felt more heartily ashamed of myself in my life than when I saw the beautiful
creature against whom I was conspiring, or the grace and kindliness with which
she waited upon the injured man. And yet it would be the blackest treachery to
Holmes to draw (back) now from the part which he had entrusted to me. I hardened
my heart, and took the smoke-rocket from under my ulster. After all, I thought,
we are (not) injuring her. We are (but) preventing her from injuring another.
 Chapter 2: Parts of Speech 15

(not), never, more, heartily, ashamed, beautiful, injured, yet, blackest,

(back), now,(not)

GPS4. PREPOSITIONS

The lamps had been lit, but the blinds had not been drawn, so that I could see
Holmes as he lay upon the couch. I do not know whether he was seized with
compunction at that moment for the part he was playing, but I know that I never
felt more heartily ashamed of myself in my life than when I saw the beautiful
creature against whom I was conspiring, or the grace and kindliness with which
she waited upon the injured man. And yet it would be the blackest treachery to
Holmes to draw (back) now from the part which he had entrusted to me. I hardened
my heart, and took the smoke-rocket from under my ulster. After all, I thought,
we are not injuring her. We are but preventing her from injuring another.

upon, with, at, for, of, in, against, with, upon, to, (back), from, to, from,
under, after, from

GPS5. PART OF SPEECH 1

Students are asked to give only the Adjs, Advs, Ns, Ps, and Vs. They are not
asked for Determiners or Ts.

a) The old rusty pot-belly stove has been replaced.

D Adj Adj Adj(or N) N T T(or V) V

b) The red-haired assistant put the vital documents

D Adj N V D Adj N

through the new efficient shredder.

P D Adj Adj N

c) The large evil leathery alligator complained to

D Adj Adj Adj N V P

his aging keeper about his extremely

D Adj N P D Adv

unattractive description.
Adj N

d) I just ate the last piece of chocolate cake.

N Adv V D Adj N P Adj(or N) N

GPS6. NOOTKA

1) N
2) V
3) V
4) N
5) First position in the sentence is a verb, and verbs take –ma ending. Second
position in a sentence is a noun, and nouns take -ʔi suffix.
16 Syntax 4E: Instructor's Handbook

6) The same word functions as different parts of speech in the same language.
Students may note that this is not so exotic; work and man may be both verbs
and nouns in English as well: to work, the work; a man, to man (e.g., to man
the defenses, though with a different meaning here).

GPS7. GENDER NEUTRAL PRONOUNS

Pronouns are a closed class. Evidently, co-opting a featurally mismatched, but

already existing form is preferred to innovation. And note that in this case,
speakers have not even innovated the use of this as a grammatically singular
form; in contexts where it is used as a stand-in for an unspecified-gender
single individual, it still occurs with plural verb agreement (They say…/*they
says…). There is also considerable historical precedence for singular use of
“their” including the King James Bible and works of Shakespeare (students
obviously need not mention this, but it is useful ammo versus any belligerent
prescriptivists).

GPS8. FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES

The categories appear below the words. The categories D, T, Neg, Conj, C, and
P are all closed class functional categories, so not marked as such below to
save space. Likewise, only the closed lexical categories (here, pronouns) are
marked for open/closed class below as N-c

The propriety of introducing the university slang will be

D N P V/N D N/Adj N T T

readily admitted; it is not less curious than that of the Old

Adv V N-c T Neg Adv Adj Conj N-c P D Adj

Bailey, and is less generally understood. When the number and

N Conj T Adv Adv Adj/V Adv/C D N Conj

accuracy of our additions are compared with the price of the

N P D N T V P D N P D

volume, we have no doubt that its editors will meet with the
N N-c T D N C D N T V P D

encouragement that is due to learning, modesty, and virtue.

N C T Adj P N N Conj N
 Chapter 2: Parts of Speech 17

GPS9. FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES

All closed classes allow some small measure of innovation, but interjections
seem to allow more than usual. For example, we find the recent introduction of
LOL to indicate that the speaker finds humor (perhaps replacing hee hee or ha!)

GPS10. PART OF SPEECH 2

You will be surprised at the variety of responses students will give. A number
of alternatives are reasonable in some cases; these are indicated where they
are known to me.

wabe N; after the

were T; closed class
mome Adj or N after the. If Adj, before a plural N; if N, before an agreeing
verb (depending on whether the -s ending on raths is a [plural] or [3rd Sg
Pres].
outgrabe V; out- prefix
[also possible are Adj or even P; cf. "...and the mole rats ugly", "...and
the mole reads outside."]
Jubjub Adj; after the, before bird
frumious Adj; after the, -ious ending
bandersnatch N; after frumious
vorpal Adj; after his, before sword, possibly -al ending
manxone Adj; after the, before foe
tumtum Adj; after the, before tree
And Conj; closed class
in P; closed class
thought N; after in
uffish Adj; after in, before thought, –ish ending
he This is tricky, I accept D, Pronoun, or Noun
Jabberwock N; after the, before PP
whiffling could be either a V (gerund) (after came, precedes PP) or an
Adverb (after verb came)
the D; closed class
tulgey Adj; between the and wood, -y ending
burbled V; -ed ending
The "modifies" criteria should be avoided here since it isn't clear what
modifies what, given that many of these words are meaningless.
18 Syntax 4E: Instructor's Handbook

GPS11. SUBCATEGORIES OF NOUNS

Noun Plural Count Proper Pronoun Anaphor

Cats + +
Milk
New York ? +
They + + +
People + +
Language +
Printer +
Himself + + +
Wind
Lightbulb +

New York is tricky, it can't appear with a determiner, but it is of course a

count noun, it can’t appear with a determiner in English, because it’s a proper
name.

GPS12. SUBCATEGORIES OF VERBS

There will be some variability in the answers here. The canonical usages of the
verb are represented in bold. I’d assume that the bold-faced ones were the
minimum a student would give. Implicit arguments can play a little havoc with
students’ answers. I’d take this exercise as a means for opening up discussion
about whether the verb eat in I ate and I ate an apple is the same or not.

spray V[NP__NP PP] (ditransitive type 2) I sprayed the wall with paint.
V[NP__NP] (transitive type 1) I sprayed the bullets.

sleep V[NP__] (intransitive) I slept.

V[NP__NP] (transitive type 1) I slept a deep sleep (only possible with
cognate objects).

escape V[NP__](intransitive), He escaped.

V[NP__NP](transitive type 1), I escaped prison.
Also possible is I escaped from prison, which is probably a modified
version of the intransitive usage (i.e. with a modifier instead of
an argument)

throw V[NP__NP](transitive type 1) I threw the ball.

V[NP__NP {NP/PP}](ditransitive type 3) I threw him the ball/I threw the
ball to him.

wipe V[NP__NP](transitive type 1) I wiped the table.

say V[NP__NP/CP](transitive type 2) I said a lie/I said that he smells.

think V[NP__NP/CP](transitive type 2) I thought something/I thought that he

likes peanuts.
The classic proverb I think, therefore I am. may encourage some
students to give you V[NP__](intransitive).
 Chapter 2: Parts of Speech 19

(be)grudge V[NP__ NP NP] (ditransitive 2) I begrudged him his trophy.

thank V[NP__NP](transitive type 1), I thanked him.

The idiom I thank my lucky stars that it's not true. may cause
people some problems.

pour V[NP__] (intransitive) ?the water poured onto the ground.

V[NP__NP](transitive type 1) I poured the wine.
V[NP__NP {NP/PP}] I poured her a glass of lemonade, I poured a glass of
lemonade for her.

send V[NP__NP {NP/PP}](ditransitive type 3), I sent him the message/the message
to him.
Some people may come up with I sent a message. This probably has an
implicit goal. Implicit arguments are what make this problem set a
little tricky. I’d accept this simple transitive too.

promise V[NP__] (intransitive), I promise.

V[NP__NP/CP](transitive type 2), I promised him; I promised that we'd
go.
V[NP__NP {NP/PP}]I promised him an apple, ?I promised an apple to John.
Promise is also an object control verb, which they might analyze as
V[NP__NP {NP/CP}].

kiss V[NP__] They kissed,

V[NP__NP] He kissed her.

arrive V[NP__](intransitive), I arrived.

CHALLENGE PROBLEM SETS

CPS1. -IAN AND -ISH

This question relies on creativity on the part of students. One answer is that
the words can simply be of either category (Adj or N). Another possible answer
is that the examples without an overt noun head have a silent noun, something
like a null version of "one", or that there is a null nominalizer. Very good
students will notice that Canadian and prudish don’t work exactly alike. You
can say “the very prudish” but “?the very Canadian” sounds odd (but may have an
interpretation like “the very Canadian among us” meaning those people with
Canadian characteristics). Canadian can be pluralized (the Canadians), which
really suggests it’s a noun, whereas prudish can’t: *the prudishes.
Interestingly, this behavior carries over to the –ish in words like British:
one can say “?the very British”, as noted for Canadian above, but not *the
Britishes (though note the possible clipped form: the Brits).

CPS2. NOMINAL PRENOMINAL MODIFIERS

Part 1. Based on the distributional criteria set out in the text, these should
be Adjs.
20 Syntax 4E: Instructor's Handbook

Part 2. These items do not behave at all like other Adjs, not allowing
comparatives or adverbial modification. Note further that there are adjectival
forms of these words (leathery, watery).

How do we resolve this? This is a challenge question, so you can expect a variety
of answers. There are several possible solutions: (a) these are really compounds,
combining with the head noun to form a single N, or (b), these are really nouns,
but that our PSR system is wrong. This kind of issue makes for a really nice
way to transition into X-bar theory, where categories are less important and
the complement/adjunct distinction takes precedence. Note that examples like
these will crop up repeatedly in the tree-drawing exercises in later chapters;
if you want your students to use a consistent analysis of such forms, this is a
good opportunity to present your favored solution.

CPS3. MOHAWK INCORPORATION

(Note: there is an unfortunate misalignment of the glosses with the words for
this example in the text: thíkʌ means “that”, and o-’neróhkw-a’ means “NEUT-
box-NOMINALIZER”.)

Part 1. Based on the morphology they take, it appears that rak is a verb, and
‘neróhkw is a noun.

Part 2. The challenge here is that it is not clear if part of speech is relevant
for parts of a word, rather than whole words. This is a complicated topic having
to do with the proper boundaries between syntax and morphology; you may expect
creative answers here. The simple answer is that it is part of a complex verb.

CPS4. INTENSIFIERS

Part 1. Generally speaking, intensifiers form a closed class. But students might
notice some recent innovations in this class like hella (and lowkey?), which
might lead them to conclude it’s open class.

Part 2. Intensifiers cannot be preceded by anything other than another

intensifier within any AdjP or AdvP. Some students might claim that adverbs like
“completely” in He completely destroyed the competition are really intensifiers.
I think this mixes up the subclass of manner adverbs and intensifiers. Again
this is a challenge question so you can expect some variation in the answers.

CPS5. COMPLEMENTARY DISTRIBUTION

This of course suggests that complementary distribution doesn't work for part
of speech categories, which is one of the reasons I think that many researchers
don't use part of speech categories anymore. But, of course, they are in
practical use all the time. This question is meant to make your students
critically evaluate the material in the main body of the text.
 Chapter 2: Parts of Speech 21

CPS6. SUBCATEGORIES OF ADVERBS

This problem is tricky, because of course the position of adverbs is fairly free
in English. If a student puts stress or focus on an adverb, then it can also
shift in position or if they place a “comma pause” before or after the adverb
then positioning becomes quite free. This makes the data fairly murky. The
judgments definitely fall into the category of “subtle”.
As with other Challenge exercises, this problem set should be viewed
primarily as a means to get the students to think critically about the data and
about the methodologies described in the chapter rather than having a “right”
or “wrong” answer. Here’s what I think, but answers may vary wildly from this:

Parts 1 & 2

TP scope adverbs like yesterday (every day, etc.) can appear before the subject
or at the end of the sentence, but not in any of the intermediate positions
Yesterday, I gave a waffle to Bill
I gave a waffle to Bill yesterday
*I had yesterday eaten the apple
*I gave a waffle yesterday to bill

The temporal adverbs frequently, always and again (as well as often) can appear
in pretty much any position (with slightly different interpretations):
Frequently I give books to charity
I frequently give books to charity
I give books frequently to charity
I give books to charity frequently
Always, I give books to charity
I always give books to charity
?I give books always to charity
I give books to charity always
Again, I gave books to charity
I again gave books to charity
I gave books again to charity

The aspectual adverb almost is generally only ok right before the verb, although
a comma pause will license it at the end of a sentence.
*Almost I gave it to him
I almost gave it to him
*I gave it almost to him
?*I gave it to him, almost

Adverbs that express speaker attitude and/or mood, such as frankly, evidently,
hopefully, luckily, necessarily, probably, and certainly can appear initially,
after T and at the end of the sentence. They typically don’t appear between an
object and PP in ditransitives. The sentence final orders get decidedly better
with a comma pause.
Frankly, I hate baseball.
Evidently, Bill hates baseball.
Hopefully, Bill eats meat.
Necessarily, we bought the cheapest car.
Probably, he didn’t notice.
Certainly, we love doing linguistics.
22 Syntax 4E: Instructor's Handbook

Luckily, we love baseball.

I frankly hate baseball/ I don’t frankly like peanuts.
Bill will evidently leave tomorrow.
Bill has luckily bought his ticket.
Bill will hopefully eat the stew.
We will necessarily buy the cheapest car.
He will probably not notice.
We will certainly leave before the fireworks.
*I gave the book frankly to Bill.
*I gave the book evidently to Bill.
*I gave the book hopefully to Bill. (This is ok if hopefully means “in a
hopeful manner”).
?*I gave the book necessarily to Bill. (Perhaps ok if Bill is contrastive
with another potential goal)
*I gave the book certainly to Bill. (this is ok if certainly means “in a
certain manner”)
*I gave the book luckily to Bill.
I hate baseball, frankly.
Bill hates baseball, evidently.
Bill eats meat, hopefully.
Mary’s going to come tonight, probably.
We love doing linguistics, certainly.
We love doing linguistics, luckily.

Adverbs that express manner, such as patiently, earnestly, intently, completely,

and demandingly, cannot appear initially without a strong comma pause. Their
preferred place is between the T and the V. They are also ok between a direct
object and a PP in intransitives:
*Patiently, I gave medicine to Bill (but ?Patiently … I gave medicine to
Bill)
*Earnestly, I gave a letter to Bill.
*Intently, I studied the book.
*Completely, I read the paper.
*Demandingly, I asked for a new copy of the book.
I had patiently given him his medicine.
I had earnestly given him a letter.
I had intently studied the book.
I had demandingly asked for a new copy.
?I gave the book patiently to him.
I gave the book earnestly to him.
I gave the book intently to him. (This is odd for pragmatic reasons)
I put the questionnaire demandingly on the table.
I gave him his medicine patiently.
I asked the question earnestly.
I read the paper completely.
I asked the question demandingly.

Part 3
Initial Position: Generally speaking having more than one adverb in this
position is difficult. In particular adverbs like yesterday and those like
always are incompatible on semantic grounds. To the extent that having more
than one adverb is possible, and this is generally only the case with large
 Chapter 2: Parts of Speech 23

comma pauses, temporal adverbs like yesterday and modal adverbs like frankly
are freely ordered:
Yesterday, frankly, I was sick of his drunken behavior.
Frankly, yesterday I was sick of his drunken behavior.

Final Position: with neutral stress and focus, multiple adverbs are difficult.
I think the order is typically manner > aspectual > temporal. The position of
modal adverbs seems to be highly dependent upon stress and focus.
I give him his medicine earnestly often every day

Between T and V: modal > aspectual > manner > almost. (Keeping in mind that
such sentences are pragmatically odd, and you can force reorderings with
prosodic cues.)
I hopefully often intently almost reach the finish line.

CPS7. SUBCATEGORIES OF ADJECTIVES

two > big > thick > desperate > young > scaly > blue

CPS8. ANIMACY

Part 1: This can be described by insisting that buy requires that, when it
appears in the frame [NP1 __ NP2 NP3], NP2 must be animate.
Its feature structure could be described as: V [NP __ NP[+anim] NP], V[NP __ NP
PP], alternately V {[NP __ NP[+anim] NP]/[NP __ NP PP]}, or V [NP __ {NP[+anim] NP
/ NP PP}].
Part 2: The dative marker a appears when the direct object of the verb is
animate. We could capture this fact with a feature structure like the following:
vimos V[NP __ {NP-anim/NP+anim+dat}].

CPS9. IMPLICIT ARGUMENTS

In (1-4), we arguably have idioms, relatively fixed expressions with

idiosyncratic syntax. So the atypical argument structure of give in these
examples might be chalked up to the properties of the idiom, rather than being
counter-examples to the idea that verbs have fixed argument structure.
(5-6) present a different kind of issue for a theory of argument
structure. In these examples, it is not so clear that there is any idiom present;
rather, it just seems like some arguments are implicit, understood but not
pronounced. In (5), for example, we understand that Dan gave money to charity.
(6) is an even more extreme case, where both what was given (say, money) and to
whom it was given (charity?) are reconstructed from context. Notice that the
implicit arguments must be typical arguments for the verb; to my ear, no amount
of context can allow “I gave last week” to mean “I gave John a noogie last
week.” In this light, it seems that whatever we want to say about these examples
should be extended to examples like the following:

(i) I ate lunch already.

(ii) I ate already.

In (ii), the verb eat appears without any direct object. In the text, it
was suggested that there are simply two verbs eat, one transitive and one
24 Syntax 4E: Instructor's Handbook

intransitive. But notice that in (ii), it is understood not just that I ate
something, but indeed that I ate something typical (say, a meal). Crucially,
(ii) cannot readily refer to atypical kinds of eating – say, a circus performer
eating glass. This suggests that a more refined analysis may be appropriate,
wherein a verb’s argument structure is more fixed than suggested previously,
but arguments may be implicit under certain circumstances. Much more would
have to be said to spell this out (especially with respect to subjects, which
cannot be dropped like other arguments).