Scribd
Upload
1K views8 pages

X-Bar Theory (Syntax)

The document summarizes the X-bar schema, which provides a basic blueprint for phrase structure trees. The schema represents phrases as binary branching trees with a head, specifier, and complement. Some key points: 1) Phrases like NP, VP, PP, and AP follow the template of a head projecting upwards to a maximal projection, with a specifier and complement. 2) Sentences are represented as a series of merged X-bar structures under a TP node. 3) The operation of "Merge" from Minimalism replaces phrase structure rules, building trees by combining lexical items based on their features.

Uploaded by

elbrujo135
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
1K views8 pages

X-Bar Theory (Syntax)

The document summarizes the X-bar schema, which provides a basic blueprint for phrase structure trees. The schema represents phrases as binary branching trees with a head, specifier, and complement. Some key points: 1) Phrases like NP, VP, PP, and AP follow the template of a head projecting upwards to a maximal projection, with a specifier and complement. 2) Sentences are represented as a series of merged X-bar structures under a TP node. 3) The operation of "Merge" from Minimalism replaces phrase structure rules, building trees by combining lexical items based on their features.

Uploaded by

elbrujo135
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 8

A SIMPLE VERSION OF GENERATIVE GRAMMAR: THE X-bar SCHEMA

The basic blueprint:

head (which projects upwards) specifier complement


XP SPEC X HEAD
(maximal projection of X) projections of X

(intermediate projection of X)

COMP (the comp is always sister


to the head)

NOTE: FYI there are also adjuncts (which well be ignoring for now) Example (where the XP is an NP): NP SPEC
Bobby Kennedy was known as I am looking for the the

N N N COMP ADJ
from Massachusetts with the red cover

senator book

from New York of poems

NOTE 2: SPEC, COMP and ADJ are actually phrases too

So, back to the basic simplified schema, heres what N, V, P and A phrases look like under X -bar. A couple of rules: (1) one COMP per HEAD; (2) all nodes (except for terminal ones) are binary.
NP
SPEC

AP N
SPEC

DP N the

AdvP A quite certain


HEAD

A PP about Nim
COMP

PP

book about Chomsky


HEAD COMP

PP
SPEC

VP P P NP the house
COMP SPEC

AdvP

AdvP V

V PP at the restaurant
COMP

almost

in
HEAD

never

overeat
HEAD

We could write a series of PS rules like so: NP (DP) N PP (AdvP) P N N (PP) P P (NP) AP (AdvP) A VP (AdvP) V A A (PP) V V (PP)

Or we could just write two lines: XP (YP) X (SPEC rule) X X (WP) (COMP rule)

A CAUTIONARY NOTE
We used to do trees like (a) although the rule was really TP NP T VP, and the trees should have looked like (b):

(a) NP

TP (T?) V VP NP music

(b) NP

TP T V People pres VP NP

People

love

love music

The same sort of thing is happening with trees like (c) below, which should really look like (d):

(c)
(SPEC?)

VP V NP a hamburger
COMP

(d)
empty SPEC

VP V V eat
HEAD

V eat
HEAD

NP a hamburger
COMP

(NOTE: empty nodes will come in handy later)

The sentence itself also needs to fit the X-bar schema; TP (Tense Phrase) follows the same pattern TP SPEC NP HEAD T T VP COMP

TP

NP
DP SPEC of TP N N

T
T VP
V

COMP of TP

The

clown

past

juggle

HEAD of TP

In effect, a sentence consists of a series of X-bar structures merged together: XP1 spec1 X1 spec2 X2 spec3 X3 Heres a simple example: TP T
he

X1 XP2 X2 XP3 X3 comp

EMFTREE_SIGGG0101|23|XP (spec)(X' (X)(co

XP

spec X

X' comp

T
pres

VP V V
eat

NP

N
N
apples (Reminder: were ignoring adjuncts)

AN UNEXPECTED ASIDE: THE MERGE OPERATION This comes out of the Minimalist Program and it replaces PS rules; heres a quick tour:
MERGE places pairs of lexical items together which either can or cannot be combined based on their lexical features (these are what decide which items can be combined, and under which label). NOTE: what follows is done in the bare phrase structure format (which replaces the X-bar format) First, a process called numeration selects a series of lexical items, e.g.,: the, river, people, watch

Then, merge takes the and river and puts them together as follows (again, based on their lexical features): the the river
(the is the label and the head; river is the complement)

Merge now puts together the above structure with watch: watch watch the the river
(watch is selected as the label based on lexical features)

Merge now puts together the watch the river structure with the last item from numeration, people:

watch people watch the watch the river


(watch is selected as the label based on lexical features again)

Notice how this is the equivalent of a more familiar (well, except for that DP node) X-bar type structure:

VP
SPEC

watch V
SPEC

DP V people watch
HEAD

people
HEAD

watch watch the the


COMP

DP the river
COMP

river

(Did you notice how the subject DP is in the VP spec position? This is the VP Internal Subject Hypothesis. But we wont me ntion that.)

OGrady didnt use bare phrase structure but ran X-bar generated structures through merge:
X-bar generates an NP (e.g., the house): D N the house That NP is then merged as comp to a head (e.g., the preposition in): PP P P D N in the house NP N NP N

And so on, all the way up to the TP (well, eventually to the CP, but we wont mention that)

You might also like