English grammar:a generative perspective 0631188398

Citation preview

s

English Grammar a generative perspective

oar i

_ Liliane Haegeman Jacqueline Guéron

English Grammar”

Cee

sities)

Litt

a Pod | Met

petgvet.i

A ban otal, seat

oth

sal Ls wittihagewt

salvarere

A

eaten?

tttipe

|

tas Crteygentt

oy itd

rie) wulser oe]

‘ben coed atttbiagail ot pestaghuriwh ed) noNopsA wyneegt

20 iG bie —snit

oa

Blackwell Textbooks in Linguistics —

Liliane Haegeman

Andrew Spencer Helen Goodluck Ronald Wardhaugh Martin Atkinson Diane Blakemore Michael Kenstowicz Deborah Schiffrin WD SW HNN WOON John Clark and

Colin Yallop Natsuko Tsujimura Robert D. Borsley Nigel Fabb Irene Heim and Angelika Kratzer Liliane Haegeman and Jacqueline Guéron Stephen Crain and Diane Lillo-Martin

Introduction to Government and Binding Theory (Second Edition) Morphological Theory Language Acquisition

Introduction to Sociolinguistics (Third Edition) Children’s Syntax Understanding Utterances Phonology in Generative Grammar Approaches to Discourse An Introduction to Phonetics and Phonology (Second Edition) An Introduction to Japanese Linguistics

Modern Phrase Structure Grammar Linguistics and Literature Semantics in Generative Grammar English Grammar: A Generative Perspective An Introduction to Linguistic Theory and Language Acquisition

English Grammar A Generative Perspective

Liliane Haegeman and

Jacqueline Guéron

,

BLACKWELL

TP bis hes

Copyright © Liliane Haegeman and Jacqueline Guéron, 1999 The right of Liliane Haegeman and Jacqueline Guéron to be identified as the authors of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 First published 1999

DANS ts MOY

YS 3h 1

Blackwell Publishers Ltd 108 Cowley Road Oxford OX4 1JF UK

Blackwell Publishers Inc. 350 Main Street

Malden, Massachusetts 02148 USA

All rights reserved. Except for the quotation of short passages for the purposes of criticism and review, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. Except in the United States of America, this book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, resold, hired out, or

otherwise circulated without the publisher’s prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Haegeman, Liliane M. V. English grammar : a generative perspective / Liliane Haegeman and Jacqueline Guéron. p. cm. — (Blackwell textbooks in linguistics; 14) Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and index. ISBN 0-—631-18838-X

(hardback : alk. paper). — ISBN 0-631-18839-8

(paperback: alk. paper) 1. English language—Grammar, Generative. I Ditle weleeSeness PE1106.H27 425-dc21

I. Guéron, Jacqueline.

1999 98-7150 CIP

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Typeset in 10 on 12 pt Sabon by Graphicraft Limited, Hong Kong Printed in Great Britain by T.J. International, Padstow, Cornwall

This book is printed on acid-free paper

Contents

Acknowledgements Introduction 1

THE STRUCTURE

0

1

2

OF ENGLISH

SENTENCES

Preliminaries: knowledge of language and grammar 0.1 Grammaticality 0.2 The aim of this book 0.3 Aim and scope of this chapter The meaning of sentences: argument structure 1.1 The components of the clause: thematic structure 1.1.1 Verbs and their arguments 1.1.2 The theta-criterion 1.1.3 Adjuncts 1.1.4 Theta-roles and clause structure 1.2 Locality and thematic structure 1.3. Implicit arguments 1.4 Do all verbs assign theta-roles? 1.5 Do only verbs assign theta-roles? 1.6 Do all noun phrases receive theta-roles? 1.6.1 NPs as adjuncts 1.6.2 Expletive subjects 1.6.3 Weather verbs 1.7 Summary: argument structure Phrase structure 2.1 Structure: clauses and constituents 2.1.1 The semantic criterion 2.1.2 Substitution 2.1.3. Movement 2.1.4 Questions: substitution and movement 2.1.5 Deletion 2.1.6 Focalizing a constituent

Contents

V1

2.1.7

Further evidence for separating the verb and the auxiliary

2.1.8

Summary

2.1.9

2.2

Further evidence for structure: rightward movement of constituents Words and categories 2.2.1

Duden 2.2.3 2.2.4

2.3

2.4

2.5

Nouns

eVELS Adjectives Adverbs

2.2.5

Prepositions

2.2.6 2.2.7

Lexical categories Functional categories

2.2.8

Summary

Phrases 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4 2.3.5

Noun Phrases or NPs Prepositional Phrases or PPs Verb Phrases or VPs Adjective Phrases or APs Summary: lexical categories and phrasal categories Layering 2.4.1 VP-layers 2.4.2 NP-layers 2.4.3 AP, AdvP and PP 2.4.4 The X-bar format of phrase structure 2.4.5 The X-bar format and adjunction Functional projections 2.5.1 S, binary branching and AUX 2.5.2 Lexical verbs and auxiliaries 2;5.3 5 9 as a projectionion) 2.5.4 Tas AGR and T (i) 2-5

1Psand CP

2.5.6 Adjunction to the clause 2.5.7 Functional heads and lexical heads 2.5.8 Selection and locality 2.5.9 Small clauses Grammatical functions and case 3.1 The subject NP 3.2 Non-overt subjects 3.3 Non-NP subjects 3.3.1 Clausal subjects 3.3.2 PP subjects 3.3.3 Small clause subjects 3.4 Expletive subjects 2ieod Gad 3.4.2 Existential there 3.4.3 The subject of weather verbs

Contents

3.5

3.6 3.4

The object Seduad NP objects Sead. Speculations on the double object construction in English = eee Non-NP objects The subject requirement Case 3.aet 3. AZ 37.3 3.7.4 ore 3.7.6

Pronouns and morphological case The distribution of nominative and accusative case The Case-Filter Locality and case-assignment Case-assigners Summary

Summary Exercises

Bibliographical notes

2

MOVEMENT AND LOCALITY 0 Aim and scope of this chapter 1

Movement

1.1

‘iy

4.3

Questions teil Preliminary description The status of whether and if Pb Movement and locality 1,3 1.1.4 Extracting the subject EA.5 Adjunct extraction 1.1.6 Islands L.1,2 Summary: wh-movement Relative clauses

Preliminary description Analysis Evidence for the movement analysis Further examples Infinitival relatives Subject relatives with that Double movement Summary: relative clauses and interrogative clauses Passivization and raising £3.34 Argument structure of active and passive 43-2 Raising Passivization and raising: movement to subject 433 position 1.3.4 NP-movement is case-driven 433 NP-movement as a Last Resort and the Principle of Economy 1.3.6 The category of the moved constituent NP-movement: summary 1d

vil

Contents

Vill

1.4

Movement in English 1.4.1 Survey 1.4.2 C-command 1.4.3 Locality 1.4.4 Two types of XP-movement 1.4.5

2

3

A-movement and A’-movement: the identification

of movement types The canonical subject position and the VP-internal subject hypothesis aed| Floating quantifiers pegp Movement of the subject NP ee Locality and the VP-internal subject hypothesis Transitives, intransitives and unaccusatives (ergatives)

One-argument verbs and the base-position of the subject oe The existential construction 3.2.1 English 3.2.2 The existential construction and post-verbal subjects in French Movement and case Unaccusative verbs in English Summary: two kinds of one-argument verbs Head-movement, prepositions and particles 4.1 Head-movement in English: a survey 4.2 The verb-particle construction in English 4.2.1 Introduction 4.2.2 The PP 4.2.3 The particle 4.3 Passivization and particles 4.3.1 Verb-particles and passive 4.3.2 Passive and preposition stranding 4.4 Summary: particles Summary Exercises Bibliographical notes 3.1

4

3

DEVELOPMENTS IN THE ANALYSIS OF THE CLAUSE 0 Aim and scope of this chapter 1 Subjects across categories and be as a raising verb Deak Copular sentences 1.1.1 Copular sentences: a first analysis 1.1.2 Beas a one-argument verb 1.1.3 Subject positions 1.1.4 Functional projections and adjectives 1.1.5 Be as a raising verb Progressive be Passive be Some speculations on perfect have Summary: be as a raising verb

Contents

2

Functional projections and the Split-INFL hypothesis 2.1 Finite clauses 2.2 Non-finite clauses 2.3

2.4

2.5

V-movement across adverbs 2.3.1 V-movement across adverbs in finite clauses 2.3.2 V-movement across adverbs in non-finite clauses The Split-INFL hypothesis: I as AGR and T (ii) 2.4.1 Two landing sites of the verb 2.4.2 Negative sentences in French 2.4.3. Morphological evidence Further considerations on the structure of English clauses

2.5.1 The Split-INFL in English 2.5.2 A note on subject movement 2.5.3 NegP in English: not versus n’t 2.5.4 Speculations on copula be and possessive have 2.6 Speculations on the subjunctive in English Extended projection 3.1 VP as the semantic core of the clause 3.2 Extended projection and subjunctive selection The Split-CP hypothesis 4.1 Head-movement and locality 4.2 The structure of CP 4.2.1 4.2.2 4.2.3 4.2.4

4.3

Topic and focus 4.3.1 4.3.2 4.3.3.

4.4

Negative inversion Topicalization Negative inversion and topicalization More functional projections in CP Operator versus non-operator Hungarian focalization Wh-movement in embedded clauses in English

Conclusion: the split CP

Summary Exercises

Bibliographical notes

4

ASPECTS OF THE SYNTAX OF NOUN PHRASES 0 Aim and scope of this chapter 1

Binding 1.1 The interpretation of reflexives 1.1.1 Antecedents 1.1.2 C-command and binding 1.1.3 A-binding 1.1.4 Locality conditions on binding: the binding domain 1.1.5 Reflexives as subjects 1.1.6 Reflexives contained within subjects

1.2 1.3 1.4

1.1.7. Summary: reflexives and binding Anaphors: reflexives and reciprocals

Pronouns R-expressions

Contents

1.8

Summary: the Binding Theory Binding and movement: A-binding and A’-binding Consequences of the VP-internal subject hypothesis for binding 1.7.1 Binding relations 1.7.2 Movement Summary: binding relations 1.8.1 A-binding 1.8.2 A’-binding

Empty categories: an overview Deh Traces: a recapitulation 2.1.1 Wh-movement 2.1.2 NP-movement 2.1.3 Properties of traces 252 Non-overt arguments in the base 2.2.1 Non-overt subjects in non-finite clauses 2.2.2 Non-overt subjects are not traces 2.2.3. The null subject in Italian 23 Some reasons for postulating non-overt arguments 2.3.1 The subject requirement 2.3.2 Argument structure 2.3.3 Paraphrases 2.3.4 Arguments based on locality: binding 2.4 The typology of non-overt elements 2.4.1 Base generation or movement 2.4.2 Identification of empty categories Des Some further speculations on base-generated

non-overt arguments Qi5elepro

25 nePRO 2.0 Summary: the typology of non-overt elements Speculations on the functional structure of the nominal projection: NP as DP ool Lexical heads versus functional heads: a recapitulation

The nominal projection The specifier of NP NP and clause 3.4.1

325i

3.6

Argument structure

3.4.2 ‘Passivization’ in the NP 3.4.3 Subject of NP 3.4.4 Referential dependencies: binding and control 3.4.5 Summary: NP and clause Functional projections in the NP 32e1 SNP2asyDP 3.5.2 [P-type projections in DP Demonstratives and DP 3.6.1 3.6.2

Demonstratives in [Spec,DP] Demonstratives as maximal projections

Contents

3.7

3.6.3 Some further speculations on demonstratives 3.6.4 Final remarks Pre-nominal adjectival modifiers 3.7.1 Adjectives and APs: three proposals 3.7.2 The adjective is a head selecting an NP complement 3.7.3 Problems for the adjunction analysis of APs 3.7.4 Speculations on adverbial modifiers and clause structure 3.7.5. Summary and further discussion

Summary Exercises

Bibliographical notes 5

FROM STRUCTURE TO INTERPRETATION 0 Aim and scope of this chapter 1 Introduction: syntax and interpretation 1.1 1.2 1.3

Interpretation and semantics Structure and interpretation Compositionality 1.3.1 The interpretation of the sentence is a function of its parts

1.4

Economy and interpretation 1.4.1 Full interpretation 1.4.2 Questions concerning the application of the

1.3.2

2

Idioms

1.4.3.

Principle of Full Interpretation Case and AGR

1.4.4 1.4.5

Expletive constructions Full Interpretation and empty categories

1.5 1.6

Predication Locality and interpretation

1.7

Summary

The functional layers 2.1 CP and discourse connections: a first survey 2.1.1 Illocutionary force and CP: a first illustration 2.1.2

2.2

Discourse connections: focalization, topicalization and scene-setting

Illocutionary force 2.2.1 Embedded questions 2.2.2 Root questions 2.2.3 Do-insertion in negative sentences 2.3. Tense and C 2.3.1 Some examples 2.3.2 Embedded tenses 2.3.3 Locality and tense interpretation 2.4 Summary

Xl

Contents

Xil

3

6

Logical Form 3.1 Quantifiers 3.1.1 The interpretation of quantifiers 3.1.2 The syntactic representation of quantifier interpretation and Logical Form 3.1.3 Bound pronouns 3.2 Wh-phrases and LF movement 3.2.1 Wh-phrases as operators 3.2.2. Wh-raising 3.3 Reconstruction 3.3.1 The Binding Theory and reconstruction 3.3.2 VP fronting and reconstruction 3.4 Expletive replacement and Full Interpretation 3.4.1 Existential sentences and there 3.4.2 Do-insertion 3.5 Consequences for language typology 3.5.1 V-movement revisited 3.5.2 Checking Theory 3.5.3 Movement and language typology 3.6 Conclusion 3.7 Summary Summary Exercises Bibliographical notes

THE NEW

0 1

COMPARATIVE

SYNTAX

Aim and scope of this chapter Introduction 1.1 The comparative approach 1.2

Principles and parameters in syntactic theory

1.2.1 Grammar and knowledge of language 1.2.2 Acquisition of linguistic knowledge Parameters and word-order variation 2.1 Verb movement to AGR 2.2 2.3

N-to-AGR movement SOV languages versus SVO languages 2.3.1 The head parameter 2.3.2 The universal base and object shift

2.3.3 Diachronic developments Summary: principles and parameters 2.4.1 Principles 2.4.2 Parameters 2.4.3 The interaction of parameters and principles Parametric variation between languages: the pro-drop parameter 3.1 Non-overt subjects in finite clauses 3.2 Relating the properties 3.2.1 The identification of pro and rich AGRs 3.2.2 Expletives 3.2.3 Post-verbal subjects and non-overt expletives

2.4

Contents

3.2.4

3.3 3.4

4

Extraction of the subject across an overt declarative complementizer 3.2.5 The clustering of properties Syntax is driven by morphology Speculations on post-verbal non-overt pronouns 3.4.1 The parameter 3.4.2 The non-overt object is syntactically active 3.4.3 Non-overt subjects in small clauses 3.4.4 Two types of post-verbal pro 3.4.5 Object pro and diachronic development

Register variation

4.1

Non-overt subjects in abbreviated English 4.1.1 The data 4.1.2 Arguments for non-overt subjects 4.1.3 4.1.4

4.1.5 4.1.6

4.2

Constraints on non-overt subjects Arguments against the pro-drop analysis The CP level and the identification of non-overt subjects Summary

4.1.7 Some further data The delimitation of movement and complex styles 4.2.1. Recapitulation: movement and locality 4.2.2 Extraction from adjunct clauses 4.2.3 Complex sentences 4.2.4 Movement in English and in Italian 4.2.5 The Latinate style 4.2.6 Stylistic variation and parametric variation Summary: core grammars and peripheral grammars

4.3 Summary Exercises , Bibliographical notes References Index

Xl

Acknowledgements

This book was not written in a vacuum. Its starting point was a need we felt among our own students of English for a book which, while being theory-based, would retain a focus on the empirical data of the English language in all its varieties. We wrote this book for our students, and we thank our students in Paris, in Geneva, and in Sarajevo in the summer of 1996, for their willingness to try out preceding versions. Their contributions helped us to improve the book considerably. Special thanks are due to William Rutherford and to the late Herman Wekker for detailed comments on a previous version of the text. Thanks also to Nadia Golaz, Daniela Russi and Manuela Schoenenberger for useful comments, to Margaret Aherne for the copy-editing, and to Katrien Geers and Johan Haegeman for compiling the index. Jacqueline Guéron Paris

Liliane Haegeman Geneva 15 December 1997

Introduction —————

rr

ae

ae

This book offers an introduction to the study of English grammar from the perspective of generative grammar. We wrote this book primarily with the undergraduate student of English in mind; it will also be useful for the undergraduate student of linguistics who is particularly interested in the structure of English. The title of our book reflects its dual purpose: we analyse important grammatical phenomena of English; we also offer an introduction to a theoretical approach to language study based on the generative point of view. To satisfy the first aim, the book covers a wide range of empirical data. It does not attempt to offer an exhaustive survey of the grammatical phenomena of English, however, as would be the case in the excellent tradition of grammarians such as Otto Jespersen or Randolph Quirk, to name but two. Our aim is to provide the reader with a coherent and systematic approach to the structure of English. This aim informs our discussion of basic grammatical constructions, such as passivization, and interrogative and relative clause formation. The specific analyses of empirical data do not consider these data in isolation but rather as part of an overall analysis of English and of natural language in general. Also, we do not conceive of the grammar of English as a collection of individual constructions, each with its specific properties; rather, in the tradition of generative grammar, founded by Noam Chomsky in the late 1950s, we consider language to be a rule-governed system. The individual constructions of English discussed in this book result from the interaction of various components of the underlying language system. We try to make explicit the underlying system of rules, and attempt to formulate an explicit, coherent grammar of English in which the specific constructions which we discuss are described and analysed in the most economical way. We show how a restricted set of principles, a grammar, can account for a wide range of phenomena of a language, here English. As mentioned, the title of the book reflects its dual aim. Each of the two goals of this book informs and enriches the other. This book does not claim to offer an exhaustive description of English, nor is it an introduction to one specific theory. What we want to do is to show the reader how English can be studied in a systematic theoretical approach. We show that such an approach allows us not

only to analyse a wide range of empirical data of English, but also to discover

2,

Introduction

new phenomena of the language, and to understand why other, readily imaginable, phenomena never occur. To make the goals of the book more concrete, we will outline its major areas of enquiry. The book contains six chapters, five of which concentrate mainly, though not exclusively, on English. The last chapter enlarges the discussion by introducing issues of comparative syntax. This comparative approach is not accidental. One important way that this book differs from more traditional grammars of English is that we do not consider the grammar of English to be an isolated idiosyncratic entity. Rather, we assume throughout the book that the grammatical principles we introduce to account for English data are valid for other languages as well. Ideally, these principles are valid universally. To study English is to investigate both what English has in common with other languages, and how it differs from them. Those readers who may have thought that languages can vary indefinitely, so that there can exist languages which have nothing at all in common, will no doubt be (pleasantly) surprised to discover how many properties languages share. In the discussion we will often use comparative arguments in order to uncover some hitherto unsuspected property of English, or to support a hypothesis about English and about language in general. Following the generative tradition, we concentrate on sentence grammar, that is, on principles that distinguish possible English sentences from impossible ones. We will only rarely refer to grammatical relations involving an element outside the sentence. This is not because we think that relations between sentences within a discourse are not interesting. But we assume that the study of discourse phenomena presupposes the grammar of the sentence, so it is logical to begin with the study of the sentence. The structure of the sentence (or clause, to use a technical term) is thus the object of our enquiry. In chapter 1 we try to identify the principles which determine the way a sentence is built up from words and morphemes. We assume that the sentence and all the units which constitute the sentence, i.e. its constituents, have the same internal organization. We adopt the X-bar theory of phrase structure which stipulates that all syntactic constituents are organized around a head, X. The head, X, is a simple syntactic constituent drawn from the lexicon and consisting of any word or morpheme category. X is expanded by the addition of a complement to form a larger unit, X’ (X-bar), which in turn combines with a specifier to form XP, the maximal projection of X. The complement ZP and the specifier YP in (la) have an internal structure identical to that of XP itself, as shown

n (1b).

Go ie

XP

specifier

x’ xX

YA

complement ZP

Introduction

b.

3

XP ee

specifier

YP sib thse pee “0

Xx’ gibson audi rane X

ry.”

heacinthetrnee LP

complement

¥

KP

syectmmatlas Spec

es nh

Ze

ee yas eee NP

In keeping with a long-standing tradition in the study of grammar, the constituent structure of a sentence is taken to be the product of the interaction of two types of information: (i) lexical information encoded on lexical heads such as nouns or verbs, and (ii) functional information encoded on functional categories such as inflectional morphemes or conjunctions, called complementizers. The distinction between lexical information and functional information is crucial for the grammar of sentences. For instance, verbs are either lexical, like run or know, or functional, like the modal auxiliaries (will, shall, can, may, must), the aspectual auxiliaries have and be, and the auxiliary do. The order of constituents in English negative sentences depends on the type of tensed verb, as illustrated in (2) and (3). If the verb is lexical, like sing in (2), it is found to the right of the negative adverbial moz; if it is functional, like be in (3), it is placed to the left of not. The alternative orderings are ungrammatical, as indicated by the asterisk (*).

(2)

*Thelma sings not. & 7. Thelma does not sing.

(3)

a. b.

*Louise does not be happy. Louise is not happy.

Moreover, only a functional verb may invert with the subject in an interrogative sentence in English; a lexical verb cannot move past the subject. We will see in this book that the data in (4) follow from those in (2) and (3).

(4)

a. b. c. d.

Did you see John last night? Have you seen John already? Are you seeing John tonight? *See you John tonight?

is The existence of functional categories reveals that the structure of a sentence a contain may sentence A tions. considera not determined purely by semantic nouns, unlike that in meaning, lexical no have number of constituents which

event, they do not denote a person or thing, unlike verbs, they do not denote an

4

Introduction

and unlike adjectives, they do not denote a property. Yet these apparently contentless elements are obligatory components of the sentence. They may even require the presence of other apparently contentless constituents in their context. For instance, verbs have agreement features of [person] and [number], which in themselves contribute nothing to the meaning of the verb itself and which, at the level of sentence interpretation, merely duplicate the number and person features of the subject. In (5), for example, the third person singular morpheme -s on the verb sings does not add anything to the interpretation of the sentence. The third person singular nature of the subject is encoded independently in the subject noun phrase: the teacher is singular, the teachers would be plural. The teacher is third person; I or you would be first or second person, respectively. (5)

The teacher sings a song in the shower every day.

Every finite sentence in English must have a subject whose agreement features match those of the verb. The subject is required even if there is no semantic justification for its presence. In (6a) the subject lacks semantic content: it is an expletive or dummy pronoun. Its only function seems to be to occupy the subject position to provide grammatical features ([third person, singular]) which agree with those of the verb. Absence of the meaningless expletive pronoun renders the sentence ungrammatical. (6)

a.

It is raining.

b.

*Is raining.

Whether or not a meaningless element is overtly present in the sentence structure depends on the morphosyntax of the language in question. Elements which are obligatorily present in English may be obligatorily absent, and implicit, in other languages. For instance, in Italian, the analogue of (6b) is grammatical, while that of (6a) is ungrammatical. (7)

av

~ Piovel rain-pres-3sg

b.

*Cio piove. it/that rain-pres-3sg

Conversely, a constituent which is optional in English may be obligatory in some other language. For example, in English, the complementizer that is optional in certain embedded clauses (8) and in certain relative clauses (9), but the analogous complementizer que is always obligatory in French (10)—(11).

(8)

a. b.

I know that Louise is determined to change her lifestyle. I know Louise is determined to change her lifestyle.

(9)

a. b.

The man that I like best is Harry. The man I like best is Harry.

Introduction (10)

a. b.

Je sais que Louise veut changer de vie. *Je sais Louise veut changer de vie.

(11)

a b.

Lhomme que je préfére est Harold. *ULhomme je préfére est Harold.

5

Chapter 1 introduces the principles which determine what kind of components the sentence minimally contains. We will see that the predicate of a sentence (verb or adjective) is its semantic core: it determines the number and types of arguments that a sentence must contain, its argument structure. A verb like give refers to an activity which crucially involves three participants: the agent, the one who gives; the theme, the object of the transaction of giving; and the goal, the one who receives the theme argument. A sentence containing the verb give requires that these three lexical arguments be realized by three different constituents of the sentence. As we propose that every sentence contains a subject, one of the arguments of the predicate can always be realized by the subject. In our example, the agent argument of give is realized as the subject. The remaining arguments are realized by constituents contained in the projection of the verb, the VP: the goal argument is realized by the indirect object and the theme argument is realized by the direct object (12a). When one of the arguments of the predicate is missing, the sentence becomes ungrammatical (12b).

(12)

a.

b.

Thelma [yp gave Louise a book]. AGENT GOAL THEME *Thelma [yp gave Louise]. AGENT GOAL

The verb see has only two arguments, the perceiver and the thing perceived. We continue to assume that one argument of the verb is always realized by the subject; the perceiver argument of see is realized by the subject. The second argument of see is realized inside the VP (13a). Since see has only two lexical arguments, a sentence based on see containing three arguments is ungrammatical (13b).

(13)

a. b.

Thelma [yp saw the book]. *Thelma [yp saw Louise the book].

Chapter 1 also offers a discussion of the distribution of the case-marked

feminine proforms of the noun phrase. In (14), for instance, the third person form her. noun takes two forms: the nominative form she and the accusative the accusatThe nominative form functions as the subject of the sentence, while ive form is the direct object.

(14)

a.

She met her in the park.

however. This is We cannot identify nominative case with the subject function, functions as the shown in (14b) and (14c), in which the accusative form her subject of the non-finite verb.

6

(14)

Introduction

b. c.

Iexpect her to meet Louise in the park. For her to meet Louise in the park was surprising.

We will see in this book that noun phrases may also contain subjects. In (14d) and (14), the subject function is realized inside the noun phrase by the possess-

ive pronoun and by genitive case-marking on the noun phrase, respectively. (14)

d. e.

Her analysis of the situation was controversial. Louise’s analysis of the situation was controversial.

Following the discussion of the principles which determine the major constituents of the sentence in chapter 1, chapter 2 introduces the syntactic mechanism of movement. This mechanism links one constituent of a sentence to two or more syntactic positions within it. Consider the sentences in (15): (15)

a. b. c.

I will see ten friends at the party. How many friends will you see at the party? How many friends I will see at the party!

The verb see has two arguments. One is realized by the subject, I in (15a) and (15c), and you in (15b). The second argument of see is realized by the direct object. In (15a), the direct object ten friends occupies the canonical post-verbal object position. In (15b) and (15c), however, the direct object how many friends occupies a sentence-initial position. We know that the noun phrase in initial position is related in some way to the post-verbal direct object position, for no other phrase may appear in that position.

(15)

d. e.

*How many friends will you see them/the boys/Jack at the party? “How many friends I will see them/the boys/Jack at the party!

In order to relate the sentence-initial constituent in (15b) and (15c) to the canonical direct object position, we propose that the word-order in (15b) and in (15c) is derived by movement. Both (15b) and (15c) are formed — or, to use a technical term, generated — by the leftward movement of the direct object from its canonical post-verbal position (15a) to the initial position of the sentence. The auxiliary will may also move. From its original position to the right of the subject, the auxiliary moves past the subject to a position between the fronted object and the subject in (15b). (15b’) and (15c’) illustrate the derivation of (15b) and (15c) respectively.

(15)

b’.

How many friends will you ——

c’.

How many friends I will see ——

see ——

at the party?

at the party!

Introduction

7

Postulating the existence of operations which move constituents allows us to account for the parallelism of structure and meaning among the sentences in (15). Movement is a powerful grammatical tool. If syntactic movement were completely unconstrained, we could generate many sentences which are in fact ungrammatical, such as (16a) and (16b).

(16)

a. b.

*Ten friends will I meet at the party. *I will meet how many friends at the party.

In (16a), both the direct object and the auxiliary have undergone leftward move-

ment; this results in an ungrammatical sentence. In (16b), the object and the auxiliary have not moved leftward, and the sentence is also ungrammatical. In order for the grammar to successfully distinguish grammatical from ungrammatical sentences, it must restrict the constituents which can undergo movement,

the positions to which they can move, called the landing site, and the distance which a single element can cover. In chapter 2, we propose a number of principles which constrain movement operations. These principles can be defined positively and negatively. Certain principles make it obligatory to move some constituent in a structure, as is the case of the direct object in (15b) and (15c). Other principles disallow movement in a particular structure; for*instance, the auxiliary may not move in (16a).

In chapter 2 we identify the constituents of the sentence which undergo movement. The examples in (15) suggest, for instance, that in English, a constituent such as how many friends in (15b) and (15c) must undergo leftward movement, while a constituent such as ten friends in (15a) must not. The constituents which undergo movement in (15b) and (15c) are said to be operators; they determine the illocutionary force of the sentence, i.e. the fact, for example, that (15b) is interrogative and (15c) is exclamative, while (15a) is a declarative sentence. A constituent like how many friends must occupy a position which allows it to have scope over the entire sentence it relates to. This position can be the initial position in the sentence. The distance an element can move must also be constrained. One might conclude, on the basis of examples such as (17a), that leftward movement of the operator is unbounded. In (17a), the direct object has moved out of the most deeply embedded sentence into the first position of the highest clause:

(17)

a.

[How many friends did you say [that Mary thought [that I would see

at the party]]]?

In fact, movement is highly restricted. (17b), for instance, in which the operator has moved out of the most deeply embedded clause and has crossed over an intervening operator, is ungrammatical (signalled by the asterisk) or highly degraded (signalled by the asterisk plus the question mark):

(17)

b.

*2?{How many friends did you say [that Mary wondered [where I would see

Hl?

the ultimate The ungrammatical or degraded status of (17b) is not due to far from its landing site, the initial position of the highest sentence, being too

8

Introduction

original position. The landing site of how many friends in (17b) is no further away from its original position than in (17a). The contrast is due to an overriding principle which constrains syntactic movement: locality. In order for the object of the most deeply embedded sentence to raise to the initial position of the highest sentence, it must first pass through the initial positions of the intervening sentences on its way, as (17a’) illustrates for (17a):

(17)

a’.

[How many friends did you say [ that Mary thought [ that I would see

at the party]]]?

The iterative local movement displayed in (17a) is impossible in (17b), however. As shown in (17b’), the position to the left of the subject of the most deeply embedded sentence is occupied by the operator where. This means that one of the positions through which the operator how many friends would have to move in order to reach the higher landing site to the left of the subject of the highest clause is blocked.

(17)

b’.

[How many friends did you say [ that Mary wondered +

[where I would see

eae

It thus turns out that an operator may move out of an embedded declarative sentence, as in (17a), but not out of an indirect question, as in (17b).

(17) shows how locality plays a role in determining the movement of an entire phrase, or an XP constituent, from its original position to a higher position in the sentence. Locality also constrains movement of a single head, X, to a higher position. (18a) shows that the auxiliary verb have can move from its original position which follows the subject in a declarative sentence to a position preceding the subject in an interrogative sentence. (18)

a. b.

You have done it. Have you done it?

Similarly, in (19b) the modal auxiliary could inverts with the subject and the result is grammatical. (19)

a. b.

You could have done it. Could you have done it?

(19c) is ungrammatical, however.

(19)

c.

*Have you could ——

done it?

Introduction

9

In (19), the auxiliary have has raised to a position to the left of the subject, bypassing the auxiliary could. This is an illegitimate move. (19c) violates the

locality conditions on movement. The move of the auxiliary could to the initial

position in (19b) is shorter than the move of have to the same position in (19c). The grammar requires that every syntactic movement be the shortest one poss-

ible. This makes (19b) the only grammatical outcome of a verb movement operation applying to (19a). So just as locality conditions prevent an operator from crossing over another operator, an auxiliary cannot cross over another auxiliary. In general, no constituent can move over another constituent of the same type which is itself closer to the landing site. In the grammar, the shortest move pre-empts all others. In this book, we show that in addition to restricting movement, considerations of locality play an important role in other areas of the grammar. We will repeatedly make use of the pervasive grammatical constraint of locality. In chapter 3, we return to the discussion of clause structure. We show that functional projections, that is, projections headed by a functional head such as Inflection, must be decomposed into discrete, hierarchically organized, elementary projections. The projection headed by the verbal inflection is decomposed into two separate projections, one headed by the agreement morpheme of the verb, and one headed by its tense morpheme. The domain occupied by the subordinating conjunction (or the complementizer) links the embedded clause to the immediately higher clause and the main clause to the discourse context. This domain, called the C(omplementizer) domain, will, like Inflection, be decomposed into a number of elementary projections. CP, the highest projection of the clause, can be divided into specialized projections which encode illocutionary force (declarative, interrogative), focus and topic. Chapter 4 is concerned with the form and the interpretation of projections of a noun. In the first part of the chapter, we examine interpretive dependencies between noun phrases. In (20a), for instance, the reflexive object, herself, refers to the same individual as the subject, Louise.

(20)

a.

Louise criticized herself severely.

We say that the NP Louise is the antecedent of the reflexive, or that it binds the reflexive. The dependency between a reflexive element and its antecedent is subject to locality constraints. In (20b) and (20c), the reflexive herself must be bound by the noun phrase Louise, the subject of the lower clause. It cannot be bound outside of the embedded clause. Thelma, the subject of the higher clause, is not

a suitable antecedent. The closest antecedent pre-empts all other antecedents. (20)

b. c.

Thelma says that Louise criticized herself. Thelma does not expect Louise to criticize herself.

Binding relations can also be established inside a noun phrase. (20)

d.

Thelma disapproved of Louise’s severe criticism of herself.

l Data such as (20d) suggest that there are similarities between the structura the examine we When relations in the clause and those inside the noun phrase.

not just structure of the noun phrase more closely, we see that a noun phrase is

Introduction

10

a noun preceded by a specifier and followed by a complement. Rather, the noun

projects an articulated structure, with a lexical nucleus headed by the noun itself, and higher functional projections. The structure of the noun phrase thus resembles that of the clause, which consists of a lexical nucleus headed by the verb and augmented with functional projections. Chapter 5 discusses the interpretation of the sentence. Sentence interpretation is compositional: the meaning of the sentence corresponds to the sum of its parts. More precisely, the interpretation of a sentence is calculated on the basis of the combination of the lexical meaning that each constituent contributes, and the meaning contributed by the structure itself. For instance, the leftward movement of the modal will in (21a) does not alter the number of constituents contained in the sentence, nor the meaning which these constituents contribute to the sentence. But the very fact that will is moved into the functional C domain to the left of the subject assigns interrogative force to the sentence. (21b), in which the auxiliary has not been raised to a position to the left of the subject, is assigned declarative force. (21)

a. b.

Will Louise meet her friends at the party? Louise will meet her friends at the party.

A similar contrast holds between (15b) and (15c) above: (15b) is an interrogat-

ive sentence, by virtue of the combined movement of the operator and the auxiliary verb, while (15c), in which the operator how many friends has moved leftward and the auxiliary remains in the position to the right of the subject, is not interrogative but exclamative. Movement operations do not alter the relation between a verb and its arguments: in (15b) and (15c), for instance, how many friends, though preposed,

remains an argument of the verb see. The leftward movement of the operator encodes the illocutionary force of the sentence. Movement operations may have an effect on the meaning of the sentence beyond encoding illocutionary force, however. This is shown by the following example: (22)

a. b.

Louise says that Jane intends to sell this picture of herself. This picture of herself, Louise says that Jane intends to sell.

In (22a) the direct object this picture of herself follows the verb sell which

selects it. The reflexive herself in (22a) is bound by Jane, the subject of the embedded clause. It cannot be interpreted as being bound by Louise, the subject of the higher clause. In (22b), the direct object this picture of herself has been fronted to the left of the subject of the higher clause. Despite this leftward movement, the noun phrase this picture of herself is still construed as an argument of the verb sell in the lower clause. However, in (22b) the reflexive pro-

noun herself can enter into two interpretative relations: it may be bound either

by Jane, as in (22a), or else by Louise, an interpretation which is impossible in

(22a). Fronting of the object of sell to the initial position of the higher clause has thus added one possible interpretation to the sentence. In discussing the importance of sentence structure for sentence meaning, we will make crucial use of examples like (23):

(23)

When did you go where?

Introduction Sentences like (23) are interesting because they contain an operator

11 (where)

which, surprisingly in the light of the data in (15), has not moved to the C domain to the left of the subject. Nevertheless, the interpretation of the sentence

links where to the operator when which precedes the subject. Paradoxically,

although the operator where has not been moved, it is interpreted as if it had undergone movement. To solve this paradox, we introduce into the grammar

an abstract level of representation, called Logical Form. We will propose that at the level of Logical Form, the interpretation of where in (23) is linked to that of when. As mentioned, chapters 1 to 5 focus on English. Throughout the discussion, however, we show that in order to describe some particular point of English grammar, it is useful to turn to a comparison with other languages. In the final chapter of the book, we explicitly adopt the comparative approach. If we assume, with linguists working in the generative tradition, that all human languages share the same basic principles, such as X-bar theory, movement mechanisms, locality conditions on movement, etc., then the similarities between languages are not surprising at all. On the contrary, the challenge becomes how to account for cross-linguistic differences. How can languages differ while still being based on the same set of universal principles? How does a child acquire his or her language? How does he or she know what is particular to his or her language? How does the English child learn that the contentless expletive subject must be present in (6a) and the Italian child learn that he or she must omit the same contentless subject in (7b)? In chapter 6, we try to account for both linguistic universals and linguistic variation. In addition to invariant general principles, such as X-bar theory, movement, locality, etc., we postulate that there are dimensions, or parameters, along which languages can differ. These parameters are responsible for linguistic variation. One parameter is that which regulates the need for a subject in a finite sentence. In English, as shown by (6a-b), the contentless expletive subject may not be omitted. In Italian, as shown by (7a—b), omission of the expletive subject is obligatory. The data in (6) and (7) illustrate the presence versus absence of ‘contentless’ expletive subjects. (24)-(25) show that the same variation applies to subjects with lexical content. (24)

a. b.

She is happy *Is happy

(25 )ecdun

.Lei-é-felice she is happy é felice

b.

In our discussion we show that cross-linguistic variation of the type illustrated here can fundamentally be related to differences in the morphology of languages. This leads to the general hypothesis that syntax is driven by morphology. This hypothesis allows us to understand how a child learns his or her language. Morphological elements which are phonetically encoded in the lin-

guistic data to which the child is exposed in his environment suffice to enable him to identify the value of a given parameter in his language.

12

Introduction

We judged (24b) as ungrammatical in English, and so it is. Yet, who has not

read diaries or other English texts which contain subjectless sentences like those in (26a):

(26)

a.

%Got up early. Took a shower. Went to the office.

The sentences in (26a) belong to a special register, as signalled by the diacritic %. For instance, sentences such as (26a) can be found in diaries. What distinguishes diary sentences such as those in (26a) from the ungrammatical (24b)? Is the language used in diaries characterized by a breakdown of the grammatical system? Is diary language a language in which ‘anything goes’? Further observation of the data reveals that it is not the case that anything goes in diaries. While we may come across sentences such as (26a), we are much less likely to find sentences like (26b). (26)

b.

*I think that will get up early.

On the whole, diary sentences without subjects tend not to be embedded sentences. We assume that (26b) is also ungrammatical in the diary register. In chapter 6 we explore register variation such as that illustrated in (26). We show that the variation encountered is in fact constrained by general principles which characterize the sub-grammar of diaries. Throughout the book we adopt the following strategy. First, we formulate a hypothesis about the structure of English sentences based on a restricted set of data. Subsequently, we review the initial hypothesis in the light of additional data of increasing complexity. This confrontation with new data may lead us to modify the hypothesis we have developed, or to formulate additional hypotheses. Throughout the book, references to relevant earlier or later discussion are signalled by footnotes; footnotes will be used exclusively for the purpose of cross-referencing. An important consideration in evaluating the hypotheses we formulate is that of the internal consistency of the resulting system. When we propose a hypothesis to account for a set of data, this hypothesis must fit in with those previously formulated. We must work out the consequences of new hypotheses for the analyses elaborated in previous sections. As already mentioned, we try to devise a restrictive system, with a limited number of rules and principles. One general principle which accounts for a wide range of empirical data is preferable to several specialized principles which have only limited scope. Both the specialized principles and the general principle may provide a description of the data, but general principles go beyond mere description; they bring us closer to an explanation of the data. s Two kinds of arguments will be advanced in support of an analysis: (i) empirical arguments, drawn directly from the data, and (ii) theoretical or conceptual arguments, which focus on the internal consistency of the system and its restrictiveness. The reader will see that there is a constant interplay between the empirical arguments and the conceptual arguments.

The development in this book bears witness to the progress made in linguistic

research over the past years. Proposals which at first seem adequate turn out to

require further modification. It is important to emphasize that this constant need for revision does not detract from the value of even the very first hypo-

thesis. Early hypotheses reflect our understanding of the grammar at some stage;

Introduction

13

they constitute a stepping stone, often a necessary one, towards a later, better

understanding. We may say that the main goal of this book, even beyond the light it sheds on the structure of English sentences, is to demonstrate how arguments are constructed in linguistics, how linguistic research is carried out, and how theories of grammar are elaborated. As said before, our purpose is not to provide a final exhaustive grammar of English. Indeed, for most of the issues we will deal with here, this book does not offer a definitive analysis, even if we do think it offers the best analysis available at an introductory level. Each hypothesis which we formulate may give rise to new questions. We hope that the approach presented here will give the reader the desire to pursue his or her study of English beyond the bounds of our book. As readers who are already familiar with the generative literature will discover, the system we develop integrates concepts borrowed from the so-called Government and Binding framework with concepts from the more recent Minimalist approaches. Given the empirical starting point of the book, our main concern has been to elaborate an explicit proposal which allows us to account for a broad range of phenomena within a coherent and economical system. The chapters of this book are all relatively long. Each chapter explores in depth and breadth a number of different aspects of one central theme, and contains three or four major sections which to some extent constitute selfcontained units. At the end of each chapter the reader will find a summary, organized according to the major sections of the chapter. We also offer numerous exercises at the end of each chapter, partly organized again in terms of its major sections. Readers working with this book may decide to work through a full chapter and then turn to the exercises, or they may prefer to organize their work in terms of the major sections of the chapter, turning to the relevant

exercises after each section. The exercises are of different types. Some are relatively straightforward and simply require the reader to apply what he or she has learnt in the chapter. Other exercises are more adventurous; they serve to broaden the reader’s perspective on both the empirical and the theoretical level of language study. One type of exercise invites the reader to evaluate some aspect of the theory elaborated in the light of new data. This type of exercise may well lead the reader to the conclusion that the system of principles set out in the related chapter is not yet able to account for all the data and that further modifications are required. Often, the necessary modifications will turn out to be the subject matter of a later section. Sometimes the problems raised in the exercises are too complex and far-reaching to be treated in an introductory book; in those cases we refer to the literature. A further type of exercise serves to broaden the data base with which we are working. These exercises invite the reader to apply the concepts he or she has mastered in the chapter to new material drawn from diachronic developments, from regional variation, or register-based variation. The aim of such exercises is to make the reader more attentive to variations in language. The latter type of exercise should enhance the reader’s general linguistic awareness and may also contribute to developing his or her analytic skills in other domains of inquiry such as, for instance, stylistic analysis. At the end of each chapter we provide a short list of references. These references are grouped in full at the end of the book.

1

0 0.1

The Structure of English Sentences

Preliminaries: knowledge of language and grammar Grammaticality

In this book we will be considering the question of what it is that constitutes knowledge of language. Specifically, we ask the question: if you know English, what is it that you know? The starting point of the discussion is the native speaker’s knowledge of English. Consider, for instance, the paired sentences in (1)-(4). Every native speaker of English is able to evaluate these sentences. He or she knows that the (a)-sentences are well-formed sentences of English and that the (b)-sentences are not. The (a)-sentences are acceptable sentences of English; the (b)-sentences are not: they are unacceptable. If a sentence is not well-formed,

we signal this by an asterisk (*). To the native speaker of English, judgements on the sentences in (1)-(4) come quite naturally; native speakers have intuitions about their language. Non-native speakers of English may not be able to make the judgements as easily. While some may have the same intuitions as the native speaker, others may find some of the sentences below hard to judge. French speakers, for instance, might think that the (b)-sentences are acceptable and they might themselves produce such sentences. (1)

a. b.

Thelma often meets her university friends. *Thelma meets often her university friends.

(2)

a. b.

Thelma will do some exercises every day. *Thelma will do every day some exercises.

(3)

a. b.

The agreement allowed one to work independently. *The agreement allowed to work independently.

(4)

a. b.

Thelma found it strange that Louise should call. *Thelma found strange that Louise should call.

The unacceptability of (1b) is due to the position of the time adverb often. In the English sentences in (1), the verb meets cannot be separated from its direct object her university friends; the verb is next to or, to introduce a technical

The Structure of English Sentences

15

term, adjacent to its direct object. Likewise, in (2b) there is a problem of wordorder: the verb do is separated from its object some. exercises by the time specification every day. The non-adjacency of the verb and the object gives rise to unacceptability.’* (3b) is unacceptable because an element is missing. In order to render (3b) acceptable, we can, for instance, add the pronoun one, as in (3a) Similarly, in (4b) we have to insert the pronoun it to save the sentence. The (b)-sentences above are not well-formed in English, but their analogues might well be well-formed in other languages. French presents us with a different array of judgements: (5)

a.

b.

*Thelma souvent Thelma often

rencontre ses amis de l’université. meets her friends of the university

Thelma rencontre souvent

ses amis de |’université.

‘Thelma often meets her university friends.’

(6)

a.

Thelma fera un peu d’exercice chaque jour. Thelma will do a little of exercise each day ‘Thelma will do some exercises every day.’

b.

Thelma fera

(yiuvawd

oVaccord

chaque jour un peu d’exercice. nous permettait de travailler de maniére indépendente.

the agreement us allowed to work of fashion independent ‘The agreement allowed us to work independently.’ beeLaccord permettait de travailler de maniére indépendente. ‘The agreement allowed one to work independently.’ (8)

a.

Thelma trouvait cela bizarre que Louise ait téléphoné. Thelma found that strange that Louise had called ‘Thelma found it strange that Louise should have called.’

b.

Thelma trouvait bizarre que Louise ait téléphoné.

We conclude that the well-formedness of a sentence depends to some extent at least on the properties of the specific language we are considering. The sentences in (1)/(5) and in (2)/(6) illustrate cross-linguistic word-order differences. In the English sentences, the direct object cannot be separated from the verb (1b, 2b); in French there seems to be no such adjacency requirement (Sb, 6b). Sentences (3)/(7) and (4)/(8) show that while an element may be obligatory in a certain position in one language, it may be optional in the same context in another language. In English, for instance, the direct object cannot be dropped in (3b) while in French this is perfectly natural (7b). ' Regularly, discussions in later chapters will reconsider hypotheses developed in earlier in chapters. Footnotes will be reserved for cross-references to related earlier or later sections the book. 2 But see also section 2.1.9 and chapter 2, section 1.4.5.1.

16

The Structure of English Sentences

Native speakers of the language in question — English or French in our examples — intuitively know which of the sentences illustrated above are well-formed or acceptable and which are not well-formed or unacceptable. The question arises on what basis native speakers can evaluate sentences of their language. Clearly, it is not the case that native speakers have access to a sort of exhaustive list of all possible sentences of the language, and that they then match the example sentence with the list. Sentences are not pre-existing static objects. Human language is creative: new sentences are formed and interpreted every day, at all kinds of opportunities, and there is no predetermined total number of sentences. Rather, there seems to be potentially an infinite number of sentences for any given language. The native speaker is able to form acceptable sentences at every moment and to evaluate and interpret any new sentence of the language when confronted with it. In order to reconcile the hypothesis that there is an infinite number of sentences, actual used sentences and potential sentences which are still to be formed, and the fact that the native speaker’s cognitive capacities are limited (we have finite memories, for instance), we postulate that native speakers do not have all the possible sentences of a language stocked in their memory. Rather, we postulate that native speakers have at their disposal an internal system of rules and principles which enables them to produce well-formed sentences, and also to evaluate the sentences they are confronted with, and to replace an unacceptable sentence by an acceptable variant. Such a system of rules and principles which is at the basis of all sentences of a language is called a grammar of the language. Knowing a language means knowing its grammar.

Non-native speakers are also able to form sentences in their second or third language, and evaluate and interpret them. So they too must have at their disposal the type of knowledge which we refer to as a grammar. However, the non-native grammar may be partly influenced by the grammar of the first language. French speakers, for instance, who might consider English (1b) acceptable, base their judgements ultimately on the grammar governing their first language. They transfer their knowledge of their first language onto the second one. Native speakers are also able to interpret a sentence of their language, i.e. to relate the form of a sentence to its meaning. Consider (9). Both sentences in (9) are undoubtedly well-formed: (9)

a.

Louise has invited Thelma.

b.

Thelma has invited Louise.

Both sentences contain exactly the same words: Louise, Thelma, has, invited. Knowledge of English implies knowing that the interpretation of (9a) differs from that of (9b): in (9a) the AGENT of the activity of inviting is Louise, and Thelma is the receiver of the invitation. In (9b) the relations are reversed: Thelma extends the invitation and Louise receives it. The difference between (9a) and (9b) is due to the realization of the grammatical functions.’ In (9a) Louise is the subject of the sentence, in (9b) it is the object. Apparently, the grammatical functions of the elements of a sentence determine its interpretation: in (9), for * See section 3 of this chapter.

The Structure of English Sentences

17

instance, subjecthood seems to be associated with agency. Consider the sentence in (10), which again is a well-formed sentence:

(10)

a.

Louise saw the girl with the binoculars.

(10a) is ambiguous: it has two interpretations, depending on the internal relations between the words in the sentence or on its structure. Either what Louise saw was ‘the girl with the binoculars’; or, alternatively, Louise saw the girl and Louise used binoculars to that purpose. In the former case, the binoculars are associated with the girl; in the latter case they are associated with Louise’s perception. (10a) illustrates a structural ambiguity: the two interpretations of the sentence can be related to two different structures for the sentence. In the first interpretation of the sentence, the string the girl with the binoculars is one syntactic unit, a constituent. We will represent constituents by means of square brackets as in (10b): (10)

b.

Louise saw [the girl with the binoculars].

In the second interpretation of the sentence, the strings the girl and with the binoculars constitute two constituents:

(10)

c.

Louise saw [the girl] [with the binoculars].

Native speakers are aware of structural relations between the components of the sentence and of the repercussions that structure may have on interpretation. The awareness of structural relations between components of a sentence and the awareness of the link between the form and the interpretation of the sentence are also established via the internal system of principles and rules that we refer ‘to as the grammar. The main body of our book in fact concentrates on formal properties of sentences; the first section of this chapter and chapter 5 focus on the relation between the form of the sentence and its interpretation. At this point, one proviso is important. For most native speakers, the knowledge of the grammar of his or her language is largely unconscious. Native speakers may not be able to describe why a sentence is unacceptable, or what determines its interpretation. They may not be able to use technical terms such as subject, object, and so on. Only those native speakers who have studied the linguistic system in some detail can make that knowledge explicit and formulate the principles that compose the grammar. It is the task of the linguist to make the native speaker’s knowledge explicit, to provide a representation of the tacit knowledge of language. In this book we will attempt to formulate part of the grammar of English. In order to do so we will have to deploy concepts such as subject, object and structure, and we will formulate a number of principles and constraints governing the organization of the sentence. In chapter 6,‘ we will also briefly consider the question of how the native speaker has acquired the knowledge of his or her language. Anticipating the discussion there, we will show that although exposure to the language in question - plays an essential role in triggering the acquisition process, it would be incorrect to assume that language can be acquired simply on the basis of exposure. 4 Section 1.2.

The Structure of English Sentences

18

Whenever a sentence is formed according to the rules of the internal grammar of the speaker of the language, it is grammatical; a sentence which is not formed

according to the rules of the grammar is ungrammatical. Grammaticality and acceptability are closely related notions. But grammaticality and acceptability are not identical. Acceptability refers to the native speaker’s intuition: a native speaker knows intuitively whether a sentence is acceptable or not. The native speaker has unconscious knowledge of his language, which is reflected in his intuitions, but, as mentioned before, the native speaker may not be able to formulate this knowledge explicitly. Grammaticality refers to the linguistic explanation of a phenomenon: it relates the native speaker’s intuitive judgements to an explicit representation of the native speaker’s unconscious knowledge of his language. In the syntax literature, the term ‘grammar’ is used in a number of different ways. On the one hand, the term is used to refer to the native speaker’s unconscious knowledge of the rules and principles that determine his language, his ‘internal grammar’. Alternatively, the term is used to refer to the explicit representation of this knowledge as it is formulated by the linguist. Native speakers’ intuitions about acceptability and (un)grammaticality do not always coincide. It is possible for a sentence to be formed according to the rules of the grammar of English, i.e. to be grammatical, and yet for it to be felt not acceptable by the native speaker. The unacceptability of a grammatical sentence may be due to the fact that the sentence is hard to process. Consider, for instance, (11):

(11)

a. b. c.

This is the house which Bill is going to buy. Bill is the man who married Jane last week. Jane is the woman you met at the party yesterday.

All the sentences in (11) are grammatical and will be judged acceptable by native speakers. We can make more complex sentences by combining the sentences in (11). For instance, we can combine (11a) and (11b) into (12a).

(12)

a.

This is the house which the man who married Jane last week is going to buy.

Starting from (11a), we replace Bill by the string the man who married Jane last week. We conclude that we can replace a unit, or, to use the technical term, a constituent, like Bill by a more complex unit without loss of grammaticality. By an exactly analogous process of substitution (11b) and (11c) can combine into (12b). Jane is replaced by the woman you met at the party yesterday:

(12)

b.

Bill is the man who married the woman you met at the party yesterday last week.

But though (12b) is formed exactly like (12a), (12b) will be felt by most native speakers to be rather poor. The trouble is that it ends with two adjuncts of time, yesterday and last week. Yesterday modifies the verb met; last week modifies married. The sequence in (12b) is hard to process. Observe, though, that to form

(12b) we have simply applied the substitution process which we had already

used to form, or, to use the technical term, to generate, the acceptable sentence (12a). (12b) is therefore ‘grammatical’; it is formed according to the principles

of English grammar. The same principles also govern the formation of (12a). For

The Structure of English Sentences

19

many speakers, (12b) is only marginally acceptable or unacceptable because of the processing problem associated with the two adjacent sentence-final time

specifications, yesterday and last week. We can change the position of one of

these to eliminate this problem:

(12)

c.

Bill is the man who last week married the woman party yesterday.

you met at the

The native speaker who evaluates sentences can only make evaluations of acceptability. The native speaker (unless she/he is a linguist) does not have an explicitly formulated system of principles at his or her disposal to determine why a sentence is unacceptable. It may be that an unacceptable sentence violates some principle of the grammar of English: in this case we say that the sentence is ungrammatical. It may also be that a sentence is unacceptable because of processing complexity: in this case it is grammatical, though unacceptable. It is the task of the linguist to determine what is the cause of the degradation in judgement of a sentence, whether this is due to a grammatical principle or to other factors. Our aim in this book is to formulate some of the principles and rules of the grammar of English. We are essentially concerned with grammaticality judgements, and rather less so with acceptability. The reader should bear in mind that we are only interested in the linguistic principles which are at the basis of language use. There are obviously other considerations which also govern the use of language. For instance, the contrast between (13a) and (13b) is not one of grammar, but of plausibility:

(13)

a. b.

The woman was attacked by a rat. The woman was attacked by a dinosaur.

Given that dinosaurs about the real world. (13b) will be entirely observation applies to

(13)

c. d. e.

are extinct, (13b) is unlikely to express a proposition This does not make the sentence ungrammatical. In fact appropriate in fairy tale or film contexts. And the same the following sentences:

The woman was attacked by a toothbrush. The woman was attacked by a green rabbit. The woman was attacked by a transparent tree.

The sentences (13b-e) are just as grammatical as (13a). They are incompatible with the state of the actual world as we perceive it in 1998, but they are all compatible with different worlds such as the world of dreams, of fairy tales or of films. In this book we are interested in grammaticality; we are not interested in the degree of plausibility of the state of affairs which our sentences express. However, to avoid obscuring the issue, our example sentences will usually represent situations which we think are compatible with the world as we perceive it.

0.2

The aim of this book

that is, to The aim of this book is to formulate a partial grammar of English: nts that constrai and es spell out or make explicit some of the major principl

20

The Structure of English Sentences

govern the formation and interpretation of sentences in English and to show how these apply to particular language phenomena. In the first chapter we provide the reader with some of the concepts and analytical tools needed for analysing language, more specifically English. Using these concepts and tools we will outline the basic principles of sentence structure in English. This chapter thus will formulate a first set of hypotheses about the grammar of English. These first hypotheses about the structure of English sentences will be based on a small set of data. In the following sections of the book, we test our initial hypotheses in the light of new data of increasing complexity and we will revise our hypotheses accordingly. Very often, then, a first proposal for some structure will later have to be reconsidered and replaced by more complex proposals. . The hypotheses which we formulate are intended to be part of the grammar of English. A grammar is a coherent system. This means that we have to bear in mind the need for internal consistency in the system we are elaborating. It will be important that any hypothesis which we formulate should fit in with the system formed by the hypotheses already elaborated. We also try to devise a restrictive system, with a limited number of rules and principles. One general principle which accounts for a wide range of empirical data is preferable to two or more specialized principles which have only limited scope. Considerations of restrictiveness and internal consistency imply that our analysis is not merely based on empirical arguments, that is, arguments drawn directly from the data. While empirical:arguments play an important role, we must also take into account theoretical or conceptual arguments, arguments based on the internal consistency of the system and its restrictiveness. In our discussion there will be a constant interplay between empirical and conceptual arguments. The present chapter discusses the structure of the clause and attempts to reveal the basic principles that underlie this structure. Chapter 2 shows that within the well-defined bounds of the sentence, operations may apply which move the constituents of the sentence. We will examine the various types of movement in detail. Chapter 3 reconsiders the results of chapters 1 and 2 and modifies some of the earlier findings. Using the tools and principles elaborated in the first three chapters, chapter 4 discusses the structure and the interpretation of nominal groups such as the man, John, a student of English. In chapter 5 we will examine the relation between the structure of the sentence as elaborated in chapters 1, 2 and 3, and its interpretation. In the final chapter of the book we will consider how to account for linguistic variation.

0.3

Aim and scope of this chapter

In this chapter we provide a first analysis of the sentence. In section 1, we will see how the basic building blocks of the sentence are determined by its predicate, which takes one or more arguments. In section 2, we consider the structural

properties of the sentence and its constituents. We conclude that the sentence

and its constituents are endocentric; they are organized around a central unit,

the head. We will also make a distinction between lexical elements and functional elements. The former are items such as nouns (John, woman), verbs (sleep, eat), adjectives (big, happy), adverbs (quickly) and prepositions (in, under). Lexical elements contribute to the descriptive content of the sentence.

The Structure of English Sentences

21

Functional elements are elements such as modal auxiliaries (will, shall), articles

(the, a) and conjunctions (that, if, for). They do not contribute to the descriptive content of the sentence. In section 3, we re-examine the traditional notions of subject and object in the light of the system we are elaborating.

1

The meaning of sentences: argument structure

1.1

1.1.1.

The components of the clause: thematic structure

Verbs and their arguments

In this section we will see how the composition of a sentence depends on the type of verb it contains. Consider the following sets of sentences: (14)

Louise abandoned the project.

*Louise *Louise Louise ono op *Louise

abandoned. abandoned after the project. abandoned the book. abandoned the project the book.

From the examples in (14) we can draw the provisional conclusion that the verb abandon must be accompanied by a constituent of a certain type, here, the project. As we will see below’ a constituent like the project is called a noun phrase (abbreviated as NP): its main component is a noun, project. If the verb abandon is not associated with a noun phrase, then the sentence in which it ~ occurs is not well-formed. In (14b), the absence of the noun phrase renders the sentence ill-formed. Similarly, in (14c) abandon is followed by the constituent after the project. After the project is not a noun phrase; it is a constituent introduced by the preposition after, and is referred to as a prepositional phrase (PP).° Clearly, the presence of the prepositional phrase to the right of abandon fails to make the sentence well-formed. We will say that to complete a sentence which contains the verb abandon, we need a complement of the category noun phrase. Observe that only one such complement is possible, as shown by (14d)/ (14e). The verb abandon may take as a complement the noun phrase the book (14d); it cannot be followed by both the noun phrase the project and the noun phrase the book (14e). The traditional treatment of the data in (14) is to say that the verb abandon is a transitive verb; the complement noun phrase is its direct object.’ (14a) and (14d) are grammatical: the transitive verb is accompanied by a direct object. is (14b) is ungrammatical because the transitive verb lacks a complement; (14c) approprithe of nt compleme a ungrammatical because the transitive verb lacks many. ate type; (14e) is ungrammatical because there is one complement too Pa SECHON 2.3.1; . ® See also section 2.3.2. extensively in discussed be will object direct and subject as such functions 7 Grammatical section 3 below.

The Structure of English Sentences

22

Not all verbs are transitive like abandon. Sentence (15a) contains the verb smile. Unlike abandon, smile does not require the presence of a noun phrase; indeed, as shown by (15b), smile is incompatible with such a noun phrase: (15)

a. b.

Louise smiled. *Louise smiled her friend.

Traditionally, the verb smile is said to be intransitive. This means that it cannot be followed by an NP like her friend. (15b) is ungrammatical because the intransitive verb is associated with an object NP. Other types of verbs must be followed by a complement, but the complement is a constituent other than a noun phrase. We will say that a verb selects a complement of a specific kind. Abandon selects a noun phrase. The verb live selects a prepositional phrase in (16a): (16)

a.

Thelma lives in an apartment. *Thelma lives.

c.

*Thelma lives an apartment.

Still other verbs select a sentence as their complement: (17)

a b. c.

Mary wondered [whether Bill would leave]. *Mary wondered [Bill’s departure]. *Mary wondered.

In (17a) the verb wonder selects the complement whether Bill would leave, which is itself a sentence. A sentence which contains another sentence as one of

its components is a complex sentence. In traditional grammar, the clause is defined in terms of a predication relation between a subject and the property related to — or predicated of — the subject, the predicate.’ The clause Mary wondered whether Bill would leave says something about the subject Mary, namely: ‘that she wondered whether Bill would leave’. Or, to put it differently, the property of wondering whether Bill would leave is predicated of Mary. Mary is the subject of the predication. (17a) contains two clauses: (i) the clause whether Bill would leave, and (ii) the clause Mary wondered whether Bill would leave. To differentiate between the clauses in a complex structure, we refer to a clause which is a constituent of another sentence, such as whether Bill would leave in (17a), as an embedded clause, a subordinate clause or a lower clause. Fhe clause of which the subordinate clause is a constituent, such as Mary wondered whether Bill would leave in (17a), is referred to as the higher clause or the matrix clause. The topmost clause in a complex structure is the main clause, or the root clause. The verb of the matrix clause can be referred to as the matrix verb; the subject of the matrix clause can be referred to as the matrix subject. In (17a) wondered is the matrix verb and Mary is the matrix subject. The verb of the embedded clause can be referred to as the embedded verb; the subject of the embedded clause can be referred to as * For discussion of grammatical functions see also section 3 below. For the notions ‘predication’ and ‘subject of predication’ we also refer to chapter 5, section 1.5.

The Structure of English Sentences

23

the embedded subject. In (17a) leave is the embedded verb and Bill is the embedded subject. In traditional grammar, the term sentence is reserved for a

root clause, an independent, free-standing clause which is NOT embedded in another clause. In (17a) Mary wondered whether Bill would leave would be a

sentence, but whether Bill would leave would not be a sentence. Following this rigid distinction, the term ‘embedded sentence’ would be contradictory. In the generative literature, the rigid terminological distinction between clause and sentence is not always maintained so sharply. The terms ‘sentence’ and ‘clause’ are sometimes used more or less interchangeably. Thus, whether Bill would leave in (17a) might be referred to as an ‘embedded sentence’. The matrix verb wonder selects a clausal or sentential complement in (17a).

The noun phrase Bill’s departure, which is interpretatively similar to the clause whether Bill would leave, is inadequate as a complement of wondered in (17b). Alternatively, wonder may select a prepositional phrase (17d): (17)

d.

Mary wondered [about Bill’s departure].

Announce is like wonder in that it may select a clausal complement, but unlike wonder in that it may also select a noun phrase complement: (17)

e. f.

Mary announced [Louise’s departure]. Mary announced [that Louise was leaving].

(14e) above noun phrases. certain English are referred to _ complements. (18)

a.

was ill-formed because the verb abandon was followed by two This does not mean that verbs never have two complements; verbs must be followed by two complements. Traditionally, they as ditransitive. In (18a) the verb hand takes two noun phrase

Thelma handed Louise the text.

The complements of hand may also be realized by a noun phrase and a prepositional phrase: (18)

b.

Thelma handed the text to Louise.

(18c) and (18d), in which hand has only one complement, are ungrammatical. Similarly, (18e), in which the verb has three complements, is ungrammatical.

(18)

c. d. e.

*Thelma handed Louise. *Thelma handed the text. *Thelma handed Louise the text the lecture.

phrase. Put The verb put requires the presence of an NP and a prepositional be followed by is not of the same type as hand, though. Unlike hand, put cannot two noun phrases: (19)

a.

Thelma put the text on the desk. *Thelma put the text. *Thelma put on the desk.

is a *Thelma put the text the desk.

24

The Structure of English Sentences

The verbs discussed above do not exhaustively exemplify all the types of English verbs. However, they suffice to make the point that the presence of a certain verb in a sentence determines the form of the remainder of the sentence in that it may require or disallow the presence of other constituents. For instance, with abandon, we expect there to be a direct object noun phrase; with smile, we cannot have a complement; with put we expect to find both a noun phrase and a prepositional phrase, and so on. We say that a verb selects one or more complements, or that it subcategorizes for one or more complements of a certain type. Abandon, for instance, selects/subcategorizes for an NP, while put selects/subcategorizes for an NP and a PP. Sentences must contain all the units required by the selectional or subcategorizational properties of the verb. As a first approximation, we can say that the composition of a sentence is determined by the selectional requirements of its verb. Native speakers of English are able to give acceptability judgements for sentences (14)-(19). This means that their internal grammar contains information

concerning the impact of selectional restrictions on sentence formation. Information about selectional requirements is part of the linguist’s representation of the speaker’s knowledge. But knowledge of selectional restrictions is not just part of the grammar of English. The principle that the presence of a certain verb imposes certain requirements on the sentence is not English-specific. The same observation applies to French. Just like its English counterpart announce (17e, f), French annoncer selects either a noun phrase or a clause. (20)

a.

Jean annonce [le départ de Marie]. Jean announces the departure of Marie ‘Jean announces Marie’s departure.’

b.

Jean annonce [que Marie va partir]. Jean announces that Marie goes leave ‘Jean announces that Marie is going to leave.’

The specific realization of the complements selected by a verb may differ from one language to another, though. While English ditransitive verbs may be followed by two noun phrases (18a), or by a noun phrase and a prepositional phrase (18b), only the latter option obtains in French: ditransitive verbs are followed by a noun phrase and a prepositional phrase. The alternation between (21a) and (21b) is not replicated in French. Only the equivalent of (21b) is grammatical. (21)

(22)

a.

Thelma gave Louise the manuscript.

b.

Thelma gave the manuscript to Louise.

a.

*Thelma a donné Louise le manuscrit. Thelma has given Louise the manuscript

b.

Thelma a donné le manuscrit 4 Louise. Thelma has given the manuscript to Louise ‘Thelma gave the manuscript to Louise.’

The Structure of English Sentences

25

To some extent, the structure of a sentence in a particular language is determined by principles which are universal. It is a universal property of human language that the selectional properties of the verb determine the composition of the sentence. The structure of a sentence in a given language is subject, in addition, to language-specific properties. For instance, the double noun phrase construction is available in English and Dutch, but not in French or Italian. (23)

(24)

a.

Thelma gaf Louise het manuscript. Thelma gave Louise the manuscript

b.

Thelma gaf het manuscript aan Louise. Thelma gave the manuscript to Louise

a.

b.

1.1.2

*Thelma Thelma Thelma Thelma

ha dato Luisa il testo. has given Luisa the text ha dato il testo a Luisa. has given the text to Luisa

The theta-criterion

The reader will no doubt have observed that the selectional requirements of the verb are closely related to its meaning. The verb abandon, for instance, refers to an activity involving two participants: the one who abandons and the person or thing that is abandoned. It is hard to think of the activity of abandon without also thinking of these two participants. On the other hand, the verb smile does not express a situation which necessarily relates two participants. Depending on the meaning of the verb, then, one or more elements will be required in the ~ sentence. It is as if each verb sets the scene for some type of action or state: the verb requires a number of participants to engage in a certain state of affairs. We will say that a verb has an argument structure. When a verb is introduced in a sentence its argument structure is activated. Abandon, for instance, has two arguments: (25)

a.

abandon:

1: 2:

b.

Thelma abandoned the project. 1 2

Argument 1 is the acenT of the activity. It is realized by the NP which precedes the verb in (25a) and which will be labelled the subject of the sentence. Argument 2 refers to the element which undergoes the activity; this argument is often referred to as the PATIENT. The distinct participant roles attributed to the argu1 ments of the clause are referred to as thematic roles or theta-roles. Argument of role thematic the receives the thematic role of AGENT. Argument 2 receives PATIENT; this argument is realized by the NP which follows the verb and which refer will be referred to as the direct object. The terms ‘subject’ and ‘object’

realized as to grammatical functions. Smile has only one argument, the AGENT,

the subject.

The Structure of English Sentences

26 (26)%

aisle: b.

Louise smiled. 1

Finally, a verb such as give has three arguments: the AGENT, the BENEFICIARY, and the element which is transferred, the THEME. (Qed wrAisin tgOIC

ewek* 3

b.

Thelma gave Louise the text. 1 p) 3

c.

Thelma gave the text to Louise. 1 . z

We will not be concerned very often with specific semantic labels associated with the arguments of the verb, such as AGENT or PATIENT. For the reader’s information we give a list of the labels which have been used in the literature to refer to thematic roles or theta-roles (see Haegeman 1994). (28)

AGENT/ACTOR: the one who intentionally initiates the action. PATIENT: the person or thing undergoing the action. THEME (1): the person or thing moved by the action. EXPERIENCER: the entity that experiences some (psychological) state. BENEFACTIVE/BENEFICIARY: the entity that benefits from the action. GOAL: the entity towards which the activity is directed. SOURCE: the entity from which something is moved as a result of the activity.

Te AO TrMMO LOCATION:

the place in which the action or state is situated.

Sometimes the roles of PATIENT and THEME (1) are grouped into a single role THEME: (28)

i.

THEME (2): the entity affected by the action.

In the following sentences we exemplify the distribution of thematic roles: (29)

a.

‘Thelma abandoned

the project.

AGENT

PATIENT/THEME (2)

b.

Thelma handed AGENT

Louise the text. BENEFICIARY THEME (1)/THEME (2)

c.

Thelma liked EXPERIENCER

the text. THEME

The identification of thematic roles is not always easy. For instance, the subject Thelma in (30a) seems to express both the AGENT of the action aia the THEME (1); in (30b) the prepositional phrase to Louise could be argued to express —_ the BENEFICIARY of the action or its GOAL.

The Structure of English Sentences (30)

a.

Thelma went AGENT?/THEME

b.

Lu

to Rome. (1)?

‘Thelma handed AGENT

GOAL the manuscript THEME

to Louise. BENEFICIARY ?/GOAL?

In this book we will often simply refer to argument 1, argument 2, and leave aside the discussion of theta-role labels. The number of arguments is more relevant for our purposes than the type of argument. However, the identification of the specific thematic roles has been argued to play a role in determining sentence structure. For instance, it seems to be a cross-linguistic generalization that in active sentences, the AGENT theta-role is structurally more prominent than the other thematic roles. Observe, by way of illustration, that in all the sentences above, the AGENT is realized as the subject.

All the theta-roles which are associated with a verb must be realized in the sentence, i.e. the verb must have a sufficient number of arguments to be able to assign its theta-roles. There is a one-to-one relation between theta-roles and arguments. For instance, a verb cannot assign one theta-role to two different arguments (cf. (14e)): (31)

a.

*Thelma abandoned the project the book. 1 2 2

We can make (31a) grammatical by creating one argument out of the two noun phrases the project and the book. This is achieved by means of the process of co-ordination. Co-ordination conjoins, or co-ordinates, two constituents of the same type by the conjunction and or or and creates a single constituent from ‘ them. In (31b) the single co-ordinated constituent the project and the book coordinates the two noun phrases the project and the book. This constituent is itself also a noun phrase and is able to receive the second theta-role of the verb

abandon: (31)

b.

Thelma abandoned [the project and the book]. y) 1

Similarly, one argument cannot be assigned two theta-roles. The verb invite takes two arguments in (32a); we infer that it assigns two thematic roles (32b): (32)

a.

‘Thelma invites Louise. 1 2

b.

invite

1: 2:

invite (32c) is ungrammatical. In this example, both theta-roles associated with

are assigned to the same argument, Thelma: (32)

c.

*Thelma invites. 1+2

The Structure of English Sentences

28

If the aGENT of the invitation and the THEME both happen to be Thelma, the sentence can take the following form: (32)

d.

Thelma invites herself.’ 1

pi

The one-to-one relation between thematic roles and arguments is referred to as the theta-criterion. (33)

Theta-criterion

a. b.

Each argument must be associated with one and only one theta-role. Each theta-role must be associated with one and only one argument.

There is a difference between the concept of subcategorization and that of thematic structure or argument structure. Subcategorization frames associated with verbs only refer to the complement(s) of the verbs, i.e. the constituents which follow the verb in the unmarked case. Surprisingly perhaps, subcategorization frames do not include any reference to the subject; this is because all verbs can (and indeed must) have a subject. Verbs are not divided into sub-classes with respect to the need for a subject. A two-argument verb such as abandon is said to subcategorize for ONE NP; on the other hand, the argument structure of abandon specifies that the verb takes Two arguments, i.e. it assigns Two thematic roles. There is no contradiction between the two formalisms. When a verb assigns two thematic roles, say AGENT and PATIENT, this will mean that there must be two arguments in the clause. One argument can always be realized as the subject of the sentence. In the case of abandon, the AGENT of abandon is realized as the subject and the PaTIENT is the NP to the right of the verb, the direct object; abandon is hence subcategorized for one NP complement.’

1.1.3

Adjuncts

The argument structures associated with a verb determine to some extent the number of components of a grammatical sentence: abandon, for instance, requires two arguments and no more; smile requires only one argument. However,

the argument structure does not exhaustively determine the content of the sentence; a sentence may contain other material in addition to the arguments of the verb: (34)

Louise abandoned the project on a Sunday. Thelma quickly handed Louise the text. Because it was too heavy, Louise put the parcel on the desk. Thelma gave Louise the money in the living room. Thelma probably put the parcel on the desk. mono oe Because it was too heavy, Thelma probably put the parcel on the desk

last night.

” Herself is called a reflexive. In chapter 4, section 1, we will consider the distribution of reflexives. " For further discussion of the special position of the subject in the structure of = clause see section 3.1 below.

The Structure of English Sentences

29

The sentences in (34) contain more material than the minimum required by the

argument structure of the verb. In (34a) we have added the prepositional phrase"

on a Sunday, which specifies the time at which the action took place. The addition of this particular time specification does not alter the nature of the activity expressed by the verb abandon: in (34a) abandon expresses an activity involving two participants, the AGENT and the PATIENT. All the prepositional phrase on a Sunday does is to add information concerning the time of this activity. We refer to components which provide information about time, manner, reason, place, modality, and so on, of the event or state of affairs expressed in the sentence as adjuncts. In (34b) the verb hand takes three arguments, Thelma,

Louise and the text; hand subcategorizes for two complements, Louise and the text. The adjunct of manner, the adverb quickly, is added to the sentence. In addition to the obligatory arguments, Louise, the parcel and on the desk, (34c) contains an adjunct of reason, the clause because it was too heavy. (34d) contains an adjunct of place, in the living room. (34e) contains a modal adjunct, probably.

Finally, as shown by (34f), more than one adjunct may be inserted in a clause. Adjuncts are not arguments of a verb. They are not subcategorized for or selected; their relation to the verb is less direct than that of the arguments which have a thematic link with the verb. The meaning of the verb determines the number and types of theta-roles it will assign and hence the number of arguments required in the sentence; the verb is thus the semantic nucleus of the sentence.

1.1.4

Theta-roles and clause structure

Let us consider the implications of the theta-criterion for our analysis of sentences by considering some slightly more complex sentences. We will see that the theta-criterion functions as a tool for syntactic analysis in that it guides us in ~ determining the structural relations in a sentence. Consider the simple examples im (35): (35)

a.

Thelma believes this story. 1 2

b.

Thelma believes Louise. il y4

In both the above examples, the verb believe selects two arguments, the argument realized by the subject NP Thelma, and a second argument. In (35a), the second argument is this story; in (35b), it is Louise. There is a slight difference in the interpretation of believe depending on the type of object it takes. In (35a), believe this story means something like ‘give credence to the content of the story, think that the story is true’, while in (35b), believe Louise means, roughly, ‘give credence to the content of Louise’s words, think that Louise is speaking the we truth’. In the following sentence believe takes a clausal complement, which ed: underlin _ have bracketed and (35)

c.

Thelma believes[that Louise has abandoned her husband].

1 Cf. section 2.3.2.

30

The Structure of English Sentences

The interpretation of the verb believe in (35c) is similar to its interpretation in (35a), i.e. the sentence means something like ‘Thelma thinks that it is true that Louise has abandoned her husband’. In (35c) just as in (35a) believe assigns two thematic roles: one to Thelma, another to the complement, the clause that

Louise has abandoned her husband. Within the complement clause, abandoned assigns two thematic roles: one to Louise and one to her husband: (35)

c’.

Thelma believes

[that Louise has abandoned her husband].

1

2

[

1

2

]

Observe that in this particular example, the NP Louise is an argument of abandon and not of believe. Now consider (35d). (35)

d.

Thelma believes Louise to have abandoned her husband.

Here believes is followed directly by the NP Louise. At first glance, one might be tempted to propose that in this sentence believe takes the NP Lowise as an argument and that the verb has the interpretation it has in (35b), but this conclusion would be too rash. Semantically, (35d) is very close in interpretation to (35c), in which believe takes a clausal complement and in which Louise is an

argument of abandoned. Abandon has two arguments: in (35d) these arguments are Louise and her husband. If Louise is an argument of abandoned, then it cannot at the same time be an argument of believe. Recall that there is a biunique relation between arguments and theta-roles: each argument is assigned one and only one theta-role (cf. (33)). In (35d) the verb believe also has two thematic roles, as before, and these are assigned to its subject Thelma, and to its complement, the bracketed string Louise to have abandoned her husband.'* (35)

d’.

Thelma believes

[Louise to have abandoned her husband].

1

2

[oer c’.

Thelma believes 1

2

]

[that Louise has abandoned her husband]. 2

[

1

2

]

The discussion of the examples in (35) illustrates how the theta-criterion can guide us in assigning structure to a sentence.

As a first step in the construction of sentences we may imagine that we pick a verb from the lexicon of the language we are working with. This verb is-associated with one or more thematic roles. The associated roles have to be realized, so we will have to create the argument(s) that will go with the verb. This

provides us with the first building blocks of the sentence: the verb and its argument(s). In what follows we will see how this semantic core of the sentence is then extended and associated with additional elements. '* We return to the nature of the bracketed string in section 2.5.5.

The Structure of English Sentences

1.2

|

Locality and thematic structure

When we consider the composition of complex sentences, we see that the argu-

ments required by a verb tend to be realized in the vicinity of that particular verb. To use the technical term, there is a locality requirement on the realization

of the argument structure: (36)

a.

[Mary] showed [her sister] [why [Louise] had destroyed [the painting]. 1 ps 3 1 2

b.

*[Mary] showed [her sister] [the painting] [why Louise had destroyed]. 1 2 3) ? 1 2?

(36a) is a complex sentence: it contains an embedded clause why Louise had destroyed the painting. The verb show is associated with three thematic roles, realized in (36a) by (1) the NP Mary, (2) the NP her sister, and (3) the clause why Louise had destroyed the painting. Within the embedded clause, the NP Louise and the NP the painting are the arguments of destroyed. (36b) is ungrammatical: if the NP the painting is interpreted as the object of showed, the verb destroyed no longer has two arguments. There is a locality constraint on the realization of arguments: as a first approximation we can say that the arguments of a verb must appear in the same clause as the verb. The locality condition on argument structure may be defined in terms of minimality. Take example (36). The verb show will assign its thematic roles to the closest available arguments: in (36a) these are the NP her sister _ and the clause why Louise had destroyed the painting. Destroy can assign its thematic roles to Louise and to the painting. In (36b) the NP the painting is closer to showed than the clause is, and it will be interpreted as the argument of showed. The clause why Louise had destroyed is no longer an argument of showed: showed only assigns three thematic roles and these are satisfied. Within the embedded clause itself, the verb destroy, which assigns two thematic roles, now lacks one argument. The NP the painting is no longer available: it is outside the clause containing the verb destroyed. Hence the sentence is ungrammatical. Schematically we can represent the locality relations as in (37). We define the locality relation (R) in terms of minimality. The verb (X) always assigns a thematic role to the closest available argument (here Y); the verb cannot ignore a closer argument (Y) and assign a thematic role to a more remote argument in the structure (here Z).

(37)

Locality and minimality

X showed OK 4

m6 the painting R———

Z why Louise had destroyed

Rmi i———_

a thematic Putting things differently, because the verb showed (X) can assign argument and it will role to the NP the painting (Y), it will select that NP as its

o2.

The Structure of English Sentences

not assign a thematic role to the clause why Louise had destroyed not as close to it. The locality condition on the realization of arguments may appear to be violated quite generally. In (38) it seems as if one destroyed is not in the same sentence as the verb itself and yet the acceptable:

(38)

a. b.

(Z), which is

at first sight argument of examples are

Which painting did Mary say that Louise had destroyed? Who did Mary say had destroyed the painting?

On the basis of the data in (38) we will not conclude that the locality requirement summarized in (37) is invalid, but rather that arguments of a verb have a certain mobility. Apparently, arguments can move away from the verb which assigns them a theta-role, the theta-assigner, to positions outside the sentence in which the theta-assigner appears. In (38a) which painting occurs to the extreme left of the sentence; it is closer to the verb say than to the verb destroyed. Yet which painting is the THEME argument of destroyed. It would not be possible to insert another element to the right of the verb destroyed:

(38)

c.

*Which painting did Mary say that Louise had destroyed her book?

The same observation applies to (38b): we cannot insert another element to the left of the verb: (38)

d.

*Who did Mary say Louise had destroyed the painting?

As a first approximation, we can formulate the following hypothesis. A verb has an argument structure associated with it. The arguments are either realized in the same sentence as the verb with which they are associated or else they are moved away from the verb, leaving an open slot. In (38a) the direct object of destroyed, which painting, is extracted from the embedded clause; in (38b) the

subject of the embedded clause is extracted. The position from which a constituent moves is called its extraction site; the position to which a constituent moves is called its landing site. In (39) we provisionally mark the extraction site of the (boldface) moved constituents by [ ]. : (39)

a. .

c.

Mary said [that Louise had destroyed the painting]. Which painting did Mary say [that Louise had destroyed [——]]? Who did Mary say [[ ] had destroyed the painting]?

Arguments cannot be moved randomly, however. (36b), repeated here for the reader’s convenience as (39d), is unacceptable because one argument of destroyed occurs in the wrong position. The painting has been extracted from the

embedded clause and moved to an inappropriate landing site.! (39)

d.

“Mary showed [her sister] [the painting] [why [Louise] had destroyed

lel: © In chapter 2, section 1, we examine some of the mechanisms which determine the landing sites of moved elements. In chapter 2, section 1.4.3, we reconsider the role of locality and

minimality in constraining syntactic movement.

:

The Structure of English Sentences

33

Adjuncts can also be realized in a position outside the sentence to which they bear a direct semantic relation. (40)

a.

Why did Mary say that Susan had resigned?

In (40a) the adjunct why occupies a sentence-initial position. The sentence is ambiguous: it has two interpretations. The adjunct why relates either to say or to resigned. In the first case the adjunct asks for the reason for Mary’s saying something; in the second case, it asks for the reason for Susan’s resignation. In the first case, why has been extracted from the main clause; in the latter case, why has been extracted from the embedded clause. In (40b) and (40c) the symbol [——] marks the extraction site. (40)

b. c.

Why did Mary say [——] [that Susan had resigned]? Why did Mary say [that Susan had resigned [ ]]?

In this book, we shall discover that locality restrictions are pervasive in the grammar of English. Again and again, we will see how grammatical relations

are constrained to local domains.'*

1.3

Implicit arguments

Our tacit assumption so far has been that the arguments of the verb are always realized explicitly or overtly. This hypothesis is also supported by the data in

(41): (41)

She trusted Bill.

ao se

*Trusted Bill. Thelma was wondering whether she should trust Bill. *Thelma was wondering whether should trust Bill.

(41a) is a grammatical sentence. (41b) shows that we cannot omit the first argument of trust. We deduce that trust is a verb that requires two arguments, realized as indicated in (41e):

(41)

e.

trust

1: she 2: Bill

(41c) is a complex sentence. The verb wonder takes two arguments, one realized as Thelma, the subject, the other as an embedded clause whether she should and Bill. trust Bill, the complement. In (41c) the arguments of trust are she bears argument each (41d) shows that she cannot be omitted. As seen before,

one theta-role; in (41d), therefore, the NP, ize an argument of trust and an argument argument of wonder, it cannot at the same let us turn to (41f). We concentrate on the

Thelma, cannot simultaneously realof wonder. If Thelma in (41d) is an time be an argument of trust. Now argument structure of the embedded

clause.

(41)

f.

Thelma was wondering [whether to trust Bill].

that the movement possibilities of 14 We will also discover in chapter 2, section 1.1.5, adjuncts are more restricted than those of arguments.

34

The Structure of English Sentences

In (41f) trust appears inside the embedded clause. (41f) differs from (41c) in one

crucial way: trust in (41f) is an infinitive. The clause in which trust appears does not contain a verb inflected for tense or agreement. Verbs inflected for tense or agreement are finite; non-inflected verb forms, such as infinitives, are non-finite. In (41f) wonder takes an infinitival clause or a non-finite clause as its complement. In (41f), as in (41c), the verb trust selects the NP Bill as one of its

arguments. The sentence is grammatical even though one argument of trust seems to be missing. On the basis of the interpretation of (41f), we would like to say that the second argument of trust is implicit: it is Thelma. We are now faced with an apparent contradiction. In our discussion of (41d) above we concluded that one NP can only serve as the argument of one verb; Thelma could not act as an argument of both wonder and trust. In (41f) we would like to say that somehow Thelma is an argument of trust. In order to get around this problem we postulate that in some sense the verb trust in (41f) DoES have two arguments: one is overtly realized as Bill; the other is understood or non-overt. The argument is present in the abstract representation of the sentence which determines its interpretation, but it is not present in the phonetic string. The understood argument of trust is not associated with phonetic content. Such abstract or non-overt arguments can be presented by the symbol ec (empty category). (41)

g.

Thelma; was wondering 1

[whether

ec; to trust Bill]. sey)

[1

2]

Representation (41g) is meant to show that trust has one overt argument (Bill) and one non-overt one (ec). For its interpretation, the non-overt element ‘ec’ is

referentially dependent on Thelma, the overt argument. This dependency is represented by a subscript; Thelma and ec are co-indexed. We say that the NP Thelma controls the interpretation of the non-overt subject of trust. In the examples below we illustrate further instances of non-overt elements being controlled by overt ones. Consider first (42): (42)

a.

b.

Ipromised John

1

2

Ipromised 1

John 2

| a new bicycle.

3 [that I would buy a new bicycle]. 3

[1

2]

In (42a) the verb promise has three arguments: (1) the aGENT I, (2) the BENEFICIARY or GOAL John, and (3) the THEME, a new bicycle. In (42b) the verb promise also has three arguments: I, John and the clause that I would buy a new bicycle. Within the embedded clause, buy has two arguments, I and-a new bicycle. Now consider (43a), which is accepted by most speakers of English. We concentrate on the embedded clause: (43)

a.

I promised John [to buy a new bicycle].

This sentence is very close in meaning to (42b). Ideally we would like to keep the argument structure associated with the verbs promise and buy constant. Specifically, the argument John in (43a) is the BENEFICIARY/GOAL of promise,

The Structure of English Sentences

on

just as was the case in (42a) and in (42b). Thus J and John are arguments of promise. Since we know that promise has three arguments, the non-finite clause to buy a new bicycle must be the third argument. Now let us turn to the verb buy: we expect buy to have two arguments. In (42b) the two arguments are I and a new bicycle. In (43a), though, the first argument seems to be missing. But as before, we cannot say that the argument I in the main clause has two thematic roles. Rather, we will say that as was the case in (41f) the infinitival clause in (43a) contains a non-overt subject, which is controlled by I: (43)

b.

J; promised John 1 2

[ec, to buy a new bicycle]. y 3

[1

2]

An interesting development in speakers’ intuitions is to be observed concerning the use of a non-finite complement with the verb promise. Younger speakers of British English often reject (43a). For them, the verb promise can only take an infinitival complement if the BENEFICIARY/GOAL argument is not expressed: (43)

c.

I; promised [ec; to buy a new bicycle].

To express the BENEFICIARY/GOAL argument of promise in the presence of a clausal complement, these speakers will use a sentence with a finite complement (42b). Let us speculate for a moment on the basis for these differences in the judgements of (43a). For speakers who reject (43a), the control relation between the matrix subject J; and the implicit subject ec, in the embedded clause can apparently not be established across the BENEFICIARY/GOAL argument. They do allow -acontrol relation to be established with the subject of promise, as long as there is nO BENEFICIARY/GOAL argument (43c). Why should this be? For speakers who reject (43a) the presence of the BENEFICIARY/GOAL argument seems to block the control relation. We have already seen that theta-role assignment is subject to a locality constraint (37). Let us tentatively propose that the locality constraint applies to control relations. In terms of (37), X is the controller, the matrix subject I. A control relation has to be established between X and Z, the nonovert embedded subject ec;. But this relation crosses Y, the BENEFICIARY/GOAL argument John. For speakers who reject the example, the control relation in (43a) violates the locality constraint on control relations. We propose that for speakers who accept (43a) an intervening non-subject (John in (43a)) does not suffice to block a control relation between a matrix subject and an embedded subject. The sentences in (44) also illustrate the need for postulating non-overt subjects. (44)

a.

LIasked 1

John 4

a_question. 3

b.

Iasked

John

[if he would buy a new bicycle].

2

3

1

[1 c.

LIasked

John

to buy a new bicycle.

2]

36

The Structure of English Sentences

In (44a) ask has three arguments, I, John, a question. In (44b) the third argu-

ment is clausal, if he would buy a new bicycle. Within the embedded clause, the verb buy, as before, has two arguments, he and a new bicycle. In (44c) the third argument of ask is a non-finite clause, to buy a new bicycle. Again, if we wish to maintain that buy has two theta-roles to assign in (44c), we can postulate that one of them is realized as an implicit argument (‘ec’). In (44c) the empty category which functions as an argument of buy is controlled by the object NP John. (44)

c’.

Iasked 1

John, [ec, to buy a new bicycle]. 2 ; 3 1 2

In the infinitival clause in (44c), the subject is a non-overt argument.’’ The nonovert subject of buy is controlled by I, the subject of promise, in (43b); it is controlled by John, the object of ask, in (44c). Non-overt subjects of infinitives are not always controlled by another argument in the sentence, however:

(45)

a.

[ec to buy a bicycle now] is very important.

In (45a) the non-finite clause has a non-overt subject, represented as ec, but

there is no controlling element. The interpretation of the non-finite clause in (45a) is similar to that of the non-finite clause in (45b):

(45)

b.

[For us/you/people to buy a bicycle now] is very important.

The non-overt subject of buy in (45a) is understood either as having arbitrary reference (‘people in general’) or as referring to a contextually salient referent (‘us’, ‘you’).

An important property of the non-overt elements introduced in our discussion so far is that they are subjects of non-finite clauses. To buy is a non-finite form

of the verb buy: it is not inflected for tense. The ec cannot serve as the argument of a finite verb. This was shown by the ungrammaticality of (41d), repeated here for the reader’s convenience as (46a):

(46)

a.

*Thelma was wondering [whether should trust Bill].

If the non-overt subject ec could be introduced as a subject of a finite clause, (46a) would be grammatical with the representation (46b), where ec stands for a non-overt subject of finite should. (46)

b.

*Thelma, was wondering [whether ec; should trust Bill].

As a first approximation,’ we propose that finite sentences in English must have an overt subject. 'S We turn to a definition of the notion ‘subject’ in section 3. '© To be modified in chapter 2, section 1.1.4, in chapter 4, section 2, and in chapter 6,

section 4.1.

:

The Structure of English Sentences

a7

Not all languages are like English in this respect. Consider the following Italian sentences: (47)

a.

Luisa compra un libro. Luisa buys a “book

b.

Leicompra She buys

c.

Compra un libro.

un libro. a book

In Italian (47), the overt argument (Luisa or lei (‘she’)) alternates with a nonovert one. (47c) is often more natural than (47b) with the overt pronoun. In Italian, the subject pronoun, /ei in (47b), is regularly dropped. In English, this is not possible:'’ a subject pronoun must be overtly realized. A language which allows pronominal subjects to be dropped in finite clauses is called a pro-drop language. In (47a) and (47b) compra (‘buy’) has two arguments; we conclude that the verb assigns two thematic roles. Following the reasoning developed above, we will propose that in Italian (47c) one of the arguments is non-overt:'*

(47)

d.

ec compra un libro.

1.4

Do all verbs assign theta-roles?

So far we have established that the content of a sentence, i.e. the constituents

which it contains, is determined by the argument structure of the verb. Verbs " like buy, or destroy, for instance, assign two theta-roles and when they are used in a sentence we expect two arguments to be associated with these verbs. Consider now the examples in (48). (48)

Thelma bought a new bicycle.

Thelma has bought a new bicycle. Thelma is buying a new bicycle. oe Thelma will buy a new bicycle. es In (48a) the verb buy is associated with two arguments: Thelma and a new bicycle. We assume, then, that buy has two theta-roles to assign: (49)

a.

buy

1: 2:

Thelma anew bicycle

b.

Thelma bought a new bicycle. 2, 1

17 Cf. chapter 6, section 4.1, though.

et

chapter 4, section 2. We return 18 We discuss the properties of non-overt subjects in detail in Spanish, Catalan, Hungarian, (also to the contrast between pro-drop languages like Italian 6, section 3. chapter in French) (and English like etc.) and non-pro-drop languages

38

The Structure of English Sentences

In (48b) the same verb buy is used, but it is realized as a past participle, bought, preceded by the verb has.'? The addition of have apparently does not change the argument structure of the clause: as before, there are two arguments in the clause — Thelma and a new bicycle, the arguments of buy. We conclude that the insertion of the verb have in (48b) does not have any impact on the argument structure of the clause. As a first approximation, we could say that a verb like have does not assign any thematic roles. The function of have in (48b) is not that of introducing a participant in the event of buying; rather, have is used to form what is traditionally called the present perfect. The present perfect is formed of the element have (itself in the present tense) associated with the past participle. It is a form which indicates that the action of buying precedes the present moment and bears some connection to it.”° In a way, the role of the element have is like that of a tense inflection, and

indeed, in some languages, the present perfect is expressed by means inflectional morpheme. Latin is a case in point: (50)

a.

of an

amo

love-1singular ‘T love’ b.

ama-vi love-perfect-1singular ‘T have loved’

A verb like have in (48b) which appears not to contribute to the argument structure of the clause is referred to as an auxiliary verb. Verbs which carry their own thematic roles and describe events or states of affairs are called lexical verbs. The observations made concerning (48b) extend to the remaining examples in (48): in each case there is an additional (boldfaced) verbal element in the clause, but this element does not entail the insertion of additional arguments. In each sentence, the verbal element introduces some temporal or modal dimension to the activity: the auxiliary be is associated with the present participle and expresses a progressive activity; the auxiliary will is associated with the infinitive of the verb and expresses futurity. Finally, consider the set of examples in (51): (51)

a. b. c. d. e. f.

John bought a new bicycle. John did not buy a new bicycle. *John bought not a new bicycle. *John not bought a new bicycle. Did John buy a new bicycle? *Bought John a new bicycle?

If we wish to negate (51a), we need to resort to a structure with the verbal element do. Without do, we cannot negate the sentence (51c, 51d). Again, the ’° For arguments that have is a verb we refer to section 2.2 below. * For some discussion of Tense interpretation in English we refer the reader to chapter 5,

section 2.3.

'

The Structure of English Sentences

39

insertion of do does not modify the thematic structure of the clause. For question formation in English we also need do (51e, 51f). As before, we say that do

is an auxiliary.”!

1.5

Do only verbs assign theta-roles?

So far we have discussed the impact of the verb on the structure of the clause. We have seen that lexical verbs assign a number of theta-roles and that these theta-roles require the presence of corresponding arguments. It might appear as if only verbs are theta-role assigners, but this is not correct. Consider, for instance, (52):

(52)

a.

They announced

[that Louise has arrived].

1

)

[ b.

They announced 1

1

]

[Louise’s arrival]. 2

Le od

]

In (52a) the verb announce has two arguments, they and that Louise has arrived. Within the embedded clause Louise is an argument of the verb arrive. In (52b), the complement of announce is the noun phrase Louise’s arrival. Within this NP, Louise has a semantic relation to arrival which is parallel to the relation of Louise to arrived in (52a). We will assume that nouns may also have an argument structure.” In the examples below the noun which assigns the thematic roles within the bracketed NP is written in boldface; the arguments are - indicated by means of numerals: (53)

a.

Isaw [Rembrandt’s picture of Saskia].

[ b.

ye |

1

[Caesar’s invasion of Belgium] was memorable.

le. fel c.

[John’s fear of his sister] was incomprehensible.

bart d.

2s] Jae

1

[The students of English] have arrived.

[

Deel

Consider the following set of sentences.

(54)

a. b.

I consider [that his reply is inadequate]. Iconsider [his reply inadequate].

questions and in negative 21 For an extensive discussion of the mechanism of do-insertion in ation of do in such interpret the For 2.2.3. and 2.2.2 sections 5, chapter to sentences we refer examples we refer to chapter 5, section 3.4.2. in chapter 4, section 3.4. 22 We return to the assignment of thematic roles by nouns

40

The Structure of English Sentences

In (54a), consider takes two arguments, realized by the subject NP I and by the clausal complement that his reply is inadequate. The embedded clause contains the NP his reply. The question arises if this NP is an argument, and if so, what it is the argument of. Two candidates emerge: (i) the verb be, or (ii) the adjective inadequate. The same question arises for (54b), which is a paraphrase of (54a). In (54b) the verb be is absent from the complement, but semantically the interpretation of (54b) is similar to that of (54a). In (54b), consider again has two arguments: I and the constituent his reply inadequate, which is a reduced version of that his reply is inadequate in (54a). Within the string his reply inadequate the only element capable of assigning a theta-role to his reply is the adjective inadequate. We are thus led to conclude that adjectives can also assign thematic roles. If inadequate assigns a theta-role to his reply in (54b) then the verb be in (54a) does not assign a theta-role. Be in these examples is said to function as a

copular verb or a copula: it establishes a predicative relation between the predicate, inadequate, and the subject his reply. Like progressive be (48c), copular be does not assign any thematic roles. Below”’ we will show that the distributional properties of progressive be extend to the copula be. We conclude that like progressive be, copula be is an auxiliary. Finally, consider the following examples: (55)

a. b.

Louise entered the room. Louise is in the room.

In (55a) Louise and the room are arguments of enter. (55b) contains the verb be, here in its copular use, and the sentence contains the NPs Louise and the room. If we continue to assume that be does not assign a thematic role, and based on the semantic parallelism between (55a) and (55b), we suggest that in (55b) the thematic roles are assigned by the preposition in. That be does not play a role in setting up the argument structure of (55b) is confirmed by the following set of

sentences: (56)

I expect [that you will be in my office at four]. I expect [you to be in my office at four]. aosI expect [you in my office at four].

As before, the omission of be in ($6c) does not affect the semantic interpretation of the sentence. From the examples above we are led'to conclude that verbs, nouns, adjectives

and prepositions can assign thematic roles.”*

1.6

Do all noun phrases receive theta-roles?

The discussion so far has related noun phrases to the argument structure of the clause. The question arises whether a noun phrase must always have a thematic 3 Section 2.5.2. 4 We return to the syntax of the verb be in chapter 3, section 1.

The Structure of English Sentences

at

role, i.e. whether noun phrases are always arguments. The answer to this question is negative. We will discuss three types of NPs which do not have a thematic role: NPs which function as adjuncts (1.6.1), expletive NPs (1.6.2) and

quasi-arguments (1.6.3).°

1.6.1

NPs as adjuncts

Consider the following example: (57)

a.

Louise abandoned her husband yesterday.

In (57a) the verb abandon takes two arguments, Louise and her husband. The sentence contains a further NP, yesterday. That yesterday is an NP is confirmed by the fact that, like other NPs, it may function as a subject: (57)

b.

Yesterday was a terrible day.

It may also have the genitive ’s inflection typically associated with NPs:*° (57)

c.

Yesterday’s paper is still on the desk.

In (57a) yesterday functions as an adjunct (cf. 1.1.3). In the following examples the boldface NPs also function as adjuncts: (57)

d.

Iwill see you tomorrow/next week/the day after tomorrow/the next

Ad

day. You should never abandon your job this way. Don’t speak that way.

f.

1.6.2

Expletive subjects

1.6.2.1

Expletive it

Consider the following pair: (58)

a.

[That Louise had abandoned the project] surprised Sean

[ b.

sc

1

It surprised everyone [that Louise had abandoned the project}. ?

1

;

ps

i

In (58a) the verb surprise takes two arguments: (1) the clause that Louise had s, abandoned the project, and (2) the NP everyone. Abandon has two argument 5, sections 1.4.3.1.4, 25 We will return to expletive NPs in section 3.4 below and in chapter : 1.4.4 and 3.4. 26 Cf. section 2.2 and also chapter 4, section 3.

42

The Structure of English Sentences

(1) Louise, and (2) the project. (58b) contains an additional NP, it. The question

arises if it is an argument. The interpretation of the verb surprise in (58b) is no different from that in (58a): surprise has only two arguments in (58b), everyone and the clause that Louise had abandoned the project. In (58b) the clause is shifted to the right and the subject position is occupied by it. Observe that if we retain the prosodic pattern of (58b) we cannot insert any other element in the place of it. (58)

c. d.

*That surprised everyone that Louise had abandoned the project. *This surprised everyone that Louise had abandoned the project.

In (58b) it is not used as a referential element: it does not pick out or refer to an entity in the discourse. It does not have a referent. A non-referential element like it in (58b), which seems to function as a mere filler for the subject position and which fails to contribute to the semantics of the sentence, is called an expletive. That it does not make any semantic contribution to the sentence is suggested by the fact that, unlike a subject which receives a thematic role (59a, 59b), it in (58b) cannot be questioned.

(59)

a.

Who has abandoned the project? Louise has.

b.

What surprised everyone? That Louise had abandoned the project.

c.

*What surprised everyone that Louise has abandoned the project?

Observe that it is not always non-referential. Compare the following examples: (60)

a.

I like this book. It interested me very much.

b.

It is surprising that Louise should have abandoned the project.

In (60a) it is referential: it picks up a referent in the discourse; it refers to the object this book. It is an argument of interested. In (60b) it is not referential: it does not refer to any particular referent in the discourse. Rather, it anticipates the clause that Louise should have abandoned the project. In the literature, it in (60b) is sometimes referred to as the anticipatory subject, as the grammatical subject or a dummy subject; the clause which is related to it is sometimes referred to as the logical subject or as the real subject. We also say that it is in construction with a clause.

1.6.2.2

Expletive there

The element there may be used referentially, in which case it functions, for instance, as a complement to the verb (61a) or as an adjunct (61b).

(61)

a. b.

I put the bread there. I will meet my friend there after lunch.

The Structure of English Sentences

43

In (61a) and in (61b) the function of there is parallel to that of a PP:

(61)

c. d.

I put the bread on the table. I will meet my friend in the local gallery after lunch.

In the examples above there can be questioned: (61)

e. f.

Where did you put the bread? Where will you meet your friend?

There. There.

(62a) and (62b) differ minimally from each other in that the first does not

contain the element there and the logical or semantic subject occupies the initial position, while in the second, there occupies the subject position and the logical or semantic subject three women appears to its right. The thematic structure of work in (62a) is the same as that in (62b). There in (62b) does not receive a

thematic role. (62)

a. b.

Three women are working in the office. There are three women working in the office.

In (62b) there cannot be questioned: (62)

c.

*Where are three women working in the office?

There:

We will conclude that in (62b) the function of there is similar to the function of it discussed in the previous section. There is also an expletive subject. Expletive there functions as the grammatical subject of a sentence whose logical or ~ semantic subject is an NP (three women in our example). We can say that there is in construction with a noun phrase.”” The noun phrase is also called the

associate of the expletive.

1.6.3

Weather verbs

In the following sentences the subject is realized by it: (63)

a. b.

It is raining. It is snowing.

In these examples the subject it seems to have no particular semantic content. It cannot be replaced by any other element. It does not refer to any entity; it is non-referential. (64)

a. b. c.

*That is raining. *This is raining. *The weather is raining.

this chapter. For 27 For additional discussion of expletive subjects we refer to section 3.4 of 5, sections chapter to refer we structure the of the role of there in the semantic interpretation 1.4.4 and 3.4.1.

The Structure of English Sentences

44

In (63) the subject it cannot be questioned:

(65)

a. b.

*What is raining? *What is snowing?

It. It.

Weather verbs such as rain or snow do not take genuine arguments; they take a fixed subject it, which does not seem to refer to anything. One option is to say that such verbs fail to assign any theta-roles and hence that they fail to take any arguments. Alternatively, the pronoun it associated with weather verbs is called a quasi-argument. Consider (66a): (66)

a.

It is cold.

(66a) is ambiguous: either it is interpreted as a referential NP which picks up some entity which is established in the discourse: (66)

b.

Idon’t like this soup. It is cold.

Or the sentence refers to the atmospheric conditions: (66)

c.

Put ona sweater. It is cold.

In the latter interpretation, it does not refer to any particular entity: it is a quasiargument.

1.7

Summary: argument structure

In this section we have seen how the meaning of the verb determines the composition of the sentence. Depending on their meaning, verbs assign one, two or

three thematic roles or theta-roles, which must be associated with arguments in the clause. The theta-criterion establishes that there must be a one-to-one correlation between arguments and thematic roles. The arguments of the verb are the subject and the complements. In addition to the verb and its arguments, a sentence may also contain adjuncts. Thematic roles are assigned locally, i.e. to arguments which occur in the clause which contains the verb. Sometimes arguments may move away from the thetaassigner towards specific landing sites, such as sentence-initial position. Some verbs (auxiliaries) fail to assign thematic roles. On the other hand, not only verbs assign thematic roles: adjectives, nouns and prepositions may also do this. Finally, we have seen that in certain situations, noun phrases, which typically function as arguments in the clause, do not carry a thematic role. This is the case for a class of noun phrases which function as adjuncts and also for the socalled expletive and quasi-argument pronouns, it and there.

The Structure of English Sentences

2

49

Phrase structure

——

2.1

Structure: clauses_and constituents

Sentences, or clauses, to use the technical term, are not simply strings of words; they are hierarchically organized in units of different levels. Clauses have a structure. (67a) is an English sentence consisting of thirteen words, but some of these words are more closely connected to each other than others. Intuitively, we may

want to demarcate the following units: the young linguist, his friend, in the local gallery, and after lunch. Square brackets ([.. . ]) demarcate a unit of structure or a constituent. (67)

a.

[The young linguist] will meet [after lunch].

[his friend] [in the local gallery]

In this section, we examine the structure of clauses in more detail. First we shall try to formulate some diagnostic tests (‘constituency tests’) to establish the units of a clause. Then, on the basis of these tests, we examine the structural components of an English sentence. Our discussion starts from the word level and will lead to the level of the sentence.

2.1.1

The semantic criterion

In (67a) we

proposed

a first, rather intuitive, demarcation

of constituents.

-This demarcation is based on the interpretation of the units. There is a tighter semantic connection between the words that compose the strings the young linguist or his friend than there is between the words friend in the. If we consider the meaning of the sentence, we see that young modifies linguist, his relates to friend, in goes with the local gallery. It is not immediately obvious how to deal with will and meet. One might suggest that they form a single unit in a structure like (67b):

(67)

b.

[The young linguist] ?[will meet] [his friend] [in the local gallery] [after lunch].

Alternatively, it might be argued that meet assigns a thematic role to the NP his friend and hence is more closely associated with his friend than with will, suggesting the bracketing in (67c). (67)

c.

[The young linguist] ?[will] [meet [his friend]] [in the local gallery] [after lunch].

bracketings ’ The semantic criterion is hard to apply in this case, because both for us to useful be would (67b) and (67c) correspond to a semantic intuition. It — in sentence given a to have some diagnostic tests which apply unambiguously words which to as ns this case (67a) — and give sharper results than our intuitio

46

The Structure of English Sentences

‘go together’. Such diagnostic tests are referred to as constituency tests: they are used to determine which elements in a sentence form a syntactic unit or a constituent.

Before we discuss constituency tests, let us introduce some terminology. We are trying to describe the way words are put together into sentences, that is, we are interested in the structure of sentences. Sentences are ultimately divisible into words, which are therefore units that make up sentences, that is constituents; words are the ultimate constituents of sentences. We want to distinguish levels of structure between the level of the words, the ultimate constituents, and the level of the sentence. So we will identify phrases, i.e. constituents which may contain more than one word. The string his friend in (67a) is a phrase: his friend is a constituent consisting of two words, his and friend. The purpose of this section is to show what tests enable us to identify the constituents of a sentence.

2.1.2

Substitution

To identify the constituent his friend in (67a), we have relied essentially on a semantic criterion: his modifies friend and not, say, gallery: ‘the friend is his’. His friend also behaves as a unit in the structure. For example, we can replace the string his friend by the pronoun him: (68)

a.

[The young linguist] will meet [him] [in the local gallery] [after lunch].

Similarly, we can replace in the local gallery by there, the young linguist by he and after lunch by afterwards. These substitutions are compatible with the informal structure which we have assigned to (67a): (68)

b.

2.1.3

[He] will meet [him] [there] [afterwards].

Movement

The substitution test illustrated in section 2.1.2 provides us with one type of support for assigning a constituent structure to the sentence. Movement operations applied to sentences provide a second type of support. The strings which we have identified as constituents can sometimes be moved around in the sentence. In (69a) we have moved the string after lunch to the beginning of the sentence; in (69b) we have moved in the local gallery to the end of the sentence:

(69) (69)

a. b.

2.1.4 2.1.4.1

[After lunch] the young linguist will meet his friend in the local gallery. The young linguist will meet his friend after lunch [in the local gallery].

Questions: substitution and movement Movement and question formation

In some cases substitution and movement

following examples:

combine. This is illustrated in the

The Structure of English Sentences

(70)

a. b. c.

47

Whom will the young linguist meet in the local gallery after lunch? Where will the young linguist meet his friend after lunch? When will the young linguist meet his friend in the local gallery ——?

In (70a) the pronominal question word whom replaces his friend and it is also moved to the beginning of the sentence. In (70b) where replaces in the local gallery and is also moved leftward; in (70c) after lunch is replaced by when which, again, moves to the left.”* 2.1.4.2.

Some notes on wh-in-situ

Question formation in English usually requires leftward movement of an interrogative constituent. In the absence of leftward movement of this constituent, the sentence is not a genuine question.

(70)

d. e. f.

*The young linguist will meet whom in the local gallery after lunch? *The young linguist will meet his friend where after lunch? *The young linguist will meet his friend in the local gallery when?

Sentences like (70d-f) can be used only as echoic questions or echo-questions; they repeat a previous utterance and the question word replaces a constituent which the speaker might not have understood. In the non-echoic question a question word moves to a sentence-initial position. The leftward movement of the interrogative constituent is also required in embedded questions: (70)

g.

I wonder [whom the young linguist will meet in the local gallery after lunch].

h.

*I wonder [the young linguist will meet whom in the local gallery after lunch].

Observe that the interrogative element is a constituent consisting of one or several words: (70)

i.

I wonder [[which friend] the young linguist will meet after lunch].

Because interrogative constituents in English often consist of or contain a word beginning with wh- (who, what, when, where, why, which friend), we often refer to them as wh-phrases. Movement of a wh-phrase is referred to as whmovement. Wh-movement is not a universal property of question formation, however: in languages like Chinese and Japanese, wh-movement does not take

place. (71a—d) are examples from Chinese (data from Aoun and Li 1989): (71)

a.

Zhangsan kandao shenme?

Zhangsan saw what ‘What did Zhangsan see?’ among others in the 28 We return to question formation at many points in this book, 5, sections 2.2 and chapter and 4, following sections: chapter 2, section 1.1, chapter 3, section Bani

The Structure of English Sentences

48

b.

Zhangsan zai nar kandao ni? Zhangsan at where saw you ‘Where did Zhangsan see you?’

c.

Ta xiang-zhidao ni maile shenme? he wonder you bought what ‘He wonders what you bought.’

d.

Ta renwei ni maile shenme? he think you bought what ‘What does he think you bought?’

(71a) and (71b) illustrate root clauses containing the interrogative phrases shenme

(‘what’) and nar (‘where’). By analogy with English, we also refer to these interrogative phrases as wh-phrases. Observe that in Chinese, wh-phrases do not move to a peripheral position in the clause; they occupy the positions which would have been occupied by the corresponding non-interrogative phrases. (71c) and (71d) contain embedded clauses. The wh-phrase shenme (‘what’) is the complement of the embedded verb maile (‘bought’). The wh-phrase in the embedded clause has not been moved. As suggested by the English translations, the wh-phrase in (71c) is associated with the embedded clause: (71c) contains an embedded question. The interrogative phrase in (71d) is associated with the matrix clause: (71d) is interpreted as a root question; yet, once again, the whphrase remains inside the embedded clause. French seems to have a mixed situation. It is similar to English in that embedded question formation requires wh-movement: (72)

a.

Je me demande ou le jeune homme rencontrera son ami. I myself ask where the young man will meet his friend

b.

*Je me demande le jeune homme rencontrera son ami ou.

But wh-movement is not obligatory in independent questions: (73)

a.

Il rencontrera son ami ou?

He will meet his friend where b.

Ow rencontrera-t-il son ami?

where will-meet-he his friend

When a question word has not moved to the sentence-initial position it is said to be im situ, which is a Latin expression meaning ‘in place’. If a question in English contains one wh-phrase, it cannot remain in situ; in Chinese, wh-phrases

must remain in situ. There are also instances of ‘wh-in-sitw’ in English. If a question in English contains two wh-phrases, then only one of them can move leftward; the other will remain in situ: (74)

a.

I wonder who will do what.

b. c.

*I wonder what who will do. *I wonder who what will do.

The Structure of English Sentences

a

For the interpretation of (74a) the moved wh-phrase, who, and the wh-phrase

which remains in situ, what, are linked. For such a question one might expect an answer such as ‘John will plant the flowers, and Mary will buy the records’.2’

2.1.5

Deletion

Another criterion of time structure

property of constituents is that they can sometimes be omitted. This must be handled with care: only optional constituents, such as adjuncts and place, can be omitted. Constituents which realize the argument of the verb cannot be omitted because of the theta-criterion.*°

(75)

a. b. c.

2.1.6

The young linguist will meet his friend [ ] after lunch. The young linguist will meet his friend in the local gallery [ ]. *The young linguist will meet [ ] in the local gallery after lunch.

Focalizing a constituent

2.1.6.1

The cleft sentence

The constituents which we have identified so far on the basis of a semantic

intuition (section 2.1.1) and on the basis of the formal tests discussed above can also become the focal element of a sentence:

(76)

a.

It is the young linguist who will meet his friend in the local gallery after lunch.

b.

It is his friend that the young linguist will meet in the local gallery after lunch.

c.

It is in the local gallery that the young linguist will meet his friend after lunch.

d.

It is after lunch that the young linguist will meet his friend in the local gallery.

Sentences (76a-d) are paraphrases of (67a) in which one constituent XP is inserted in a string of the type: (76)

e.

it is [XP] who/that...

Structures like those in (76) are referred to as cleft sentences. In a cleft sentence, senwe cut (‘cleave’) one constituent (represented as [XP] in (76e)) out of the in and stress ve contrasti receive will it which tence and place it in a position in offers test sentence cleft The focus. ve which it will function as a contrasti

nt. “another means for identifying which groups of words form a constitue 3.2.2.1. 2° We return to the problem of wh-in-situ in chapter 5, section 30 See (33) in section 1.1.2.

The Structure of English Sentences

50

2.1.6.2

The pseudo-cleft sentence

Our diagnostic tests have confirmed the existence of the structural units, Le. constituents, which we had first identified on the basis of a fairly intuitive semantic approach. But the tests have not shed any light on the question of how to analyse will and meet. There is one type of paraphrase the function of which is to focalize on a constituent and which enables us to discard the proposal that will and meet form one constituent: (77)

a.

What the young linguist will do is [meet his friend in the local gallery after lunch].

b.

[Meet his friend in the local gallery after lunch] is what the young linguist will do.

In the two paraphrases in (77), we also cleave the sentence in two parts: the bracketed string meet his friend in the local gallery after lunch gets contrastive stress. This paraphrase separates will from the string meet... after lunch. The type of sentence illustrated in (77) is called a pseudo-cleft sentence. The pseudocleft sentence allows us to isolate the constituent containing the verb. Consider now the following pair of sentences:

(78)

a.

What the young linguist will do after lunch is [meet his friend in the local gallery].

b.

[Meet his friend in the local gallery] is what the young linguist will do after lunch.

If pseudo-clefting is a diagnostic for constituent structure, then not only do we have to assume that the string meet his friend in the local gallery after lunch is a constituent but the same conclusion applies to the string meet his friend in the

local gallery. We will return to this point later.*!

2.1.7

Further evidence for separating the verb and the auxiliary

On the basis of pseudo-clefting, we have reached the conclusion that in sentence (67a) the auxiliary will should be separated from the verb meet. These two words do not form one independent constituent. This conclusion is confirmed by another substitution test, illustrated in (79):

(79)

a.

The young linguist will meet his friend in the local gallery after lunch and his brother will do so too.

In (79a) do so too replaces the string meet his friend in the local gallery after lunch, confirming the approach suggested by the pseudo-cleft test above. Sim-

ilarly, we see in (79b) that the constituent meet his friend in the local gallery

after lunch can be fronted. We argued before* that movement of a string of 31 Tn section 2.4.1. 22 Section 2.1.3.

The Structure of English Sentences

54

words suggests that these words form a constituent. So once again, it seems that will and meet are not part of the same constituent. (79)

b.

Meet his friend in the local gallery after lunch, he will.

In (79c) the string meet his friend in the local gallery after lunch is deleted. Again the deletion does not affect the auxiliary will: (79)

c.

The young linguist will meet his friend in the local gallery after lunch. Will he?

The tests discussed above provide support for postulating a constituent containing the verb, its complement and adjuncts, which does not include the auxiliary will.

2.1.8

Summary

Our discussion of constituent structure has established that our example sentence (67a) must be decomposed at least into the following units: (80)

a.

[The young linguist] will [meet [his friend] [in the local gallery] [after lunch]].

The word is one type of constituent of the sentence. We have also identified constituents consisting of more than one word, phrases. (80a) can also be represented by means of the tree diagram in (80b).

(80) b.

S

the young linguist

will

meet

his friend

in the local gallery

after lunch

S is the symbol used for ‘sentence’ or ‘clause’. The sentence is composed of three immediate constituents:

(81)

a. b. c.

the young linguist will meet his friend in the local gallery after lunch

In order to refer to the geometry of the trees we use the following technical terms: the lines of the tree are called branches; the points where branches meet

to are called nodes; these nodes may be labelled (e.g. S). Node A will be said

dominate node B if you can go from node A to node B along a downward sentence. The branch. S, for instance, dominates all the constituents of the (80b), for material exhaustively dominated by one node is a constituent. In exhaustinstance, the string the young linguist is a constituent as it is dominated same the by d dominate material l additiona no is there ively by one node and

a2

The Structure of English Sentences

node. A node in which two branches meet is said to be binary branching; a node in which three branches meet is ternary branching. In (80b), S is ternary branching: it dominates three constituents. In (80b) there are no binary branching nodes. Structure (80b) is provisional, though; below,” we will discover the importance of binary branching in the structure.

2.1.9 Further evidence for structure: rightward movement of constituents In this section we illustrate some additional rearrangements of the sentence which can be used to demonstrate that a string of words forms a constituent. These concern rearrangements of a sentence in which a constituent is moved rightward. Consider the following examples. The bracketed string on the right edge of the clause functions as the argument of two verbs. (82)

a. b.

Louise writes, and Thelma recites, [epic poetry]. Thelma suspects, though she cannot assert, [that this message was sent from abroad].

In (82a) the noun phrase epic poetry counts as an argument of both write and recite. It is as if the constituent has been lifted, or ‘raised’, out of the two parallel object positions and functions as an argument for both of them. In (82b) the clause that this message was sent from abroad seems to be an argument both of the verb suspects and of the verb assert. Sentences such as those in (82) have a specific prosodic pattern. In (82a), for instance, there is a contrastive stress on the elements Louise and Thelma on the one hand, and on writes and recites, on the other, and there is also stress on the element that is common to

the two co-ordinated constituents, epic poetry. The construction exemplified in (82) is called Right Node Raising (RNR). Right Node Raising also helps identify a constituent. Another type of rightward movement is found in extraposition structures such as (83) and (84): (83)

a. b.

A woman [who sold second-hand books] came here yesterday. A woman came here yesterday [who sold second-hand books].

(84)

a b.

Thelma published a review [of Spielberg’s new movie] last week. Thelma published a review last week [of Spielberg’s new movie].

In (83a) a woman who sold second-hand books is a constituent: it can be replaced by the pronoun she and it can be clefted:

(83)

c. d.

She came here yesterday. It was a woman who sold second-hand books that came here yesterday.

In (83b), the NP constituent a woman who sold second-hand books is broken up: a part of this constituent has been moved rightward; the string who sold second-hand books is a constituent on its own. Constituents which have been 33 In sections 2.4 and 2.5.

The Structure of English Sentences

53

broken up are sometimes called discontinuous constituents. Similarly, in (84a),

the prepositional phrase of Spielberg’s new movie can be detached from the containing constituent a review of Spielberg’s new movie. The rightward movement of the constituents in (83b) and (84b) is referred to as extraposition. Rightward movement sometimes affects the direct object. This is illustrated in

the following example: (85)

a.

You should proof-read [three complete pages of your original text] every night.

b.

You should proof-read every night [three complete pages of your original text].

In (85a) the verb proof-read takes two arguments: you and three complete pages of your original text. In (85b) the second argument occupies the rightmost position of the clause. It is separated from the verb by the adjunct every night. In English a noun phrase complement cannot easily be separated from the verb by an adjunct. This was illustrated in examples (1b) and (2b) in section 0.1. It is also shown by the following examples. As we can see, the verb and the complement must be adjacent; non-adjacency of the verb and its complement leads to ungrammaticality. (86)

a.

a’. b. b’. c. c’.td

*You should proof-read every night [three pages].

You *You You *You You

should should should should should

proof-read proof-read proof-read proof-read proof-read

[three pages] every night. every night [these]. [these] every night. every night [them]. [them] every night.

Only noun phrase complements which are relatively long, such as that in (85), can be moved rightward across an adjunct. Short objects, and especially pronominal objects such as those in (86b, 86c), resist such separation. The rightward movement of ‘heavy’ objects is referred to as heavy NP shift (i.e. heavy ‘noun phrase’ shift).** That the string three complete pages of your original text in (85b) can undergo rightward movement suggests that it is a single constituent. In conclusion we can see that the rightward mobility of a string of words can be used to support its constituent status.

2.2

Words and categories

Sentences consist of constituents. We have distinguished two levels of constituents: (i) words, and (ii) phrases. In this section, we consider word-level constituents. We will distinguish different categories of words. It is also That sentences are made up of words is presumably uncontroversial. order. Though clear that the words that make up the sentence occur in a certain by no means there may be variation in the order of words, word-order is completely free. 34 We return to the phenomenon in chapter 2, section 1.4.5.1.

The Structure of English Sentences

54

Let us return to our sentence (67a) and the structure we assigned to it in (80b), repeated here as (87a). We cannot randomly change the order of the words, neither within the sentence as a whole (87b), nor within each constituent (87c):

(87)

a.

S

the young linguist . c.

will

meet

his friend

in the local gallery

after lunch

*[The meet gallery will his in friend linguist the local lunch young after]. *[Linguist the young] will [meet [friend his] [local in the gallery] {lunch after]].

There are constraints on the position of words in a sentence. In order to understand these constraints we will distinguish types or categories of words from each other.

Doe

iaiNouns

Consider for instance the words linguist, friend, gallery and lunch. In spite of their clear semantic differences, these words share many properties. Words belonging to the same category share morphological properties. For instance, the words linguist, friend, gallery and lunch are all singular words whose plural can be formed by adding -(e)s: (88)

a. b. c. d.

a a a a

linguist friend gallery lunch

two two two two

linguists friends galleries lunches

Words such as linguist, friend, gallery and lunch are called nouns. Another morphological property of nouns is that they can often be associated with a genitive morpheme:

(89)

a. b. c.

the linguist’s job the friend’s name the gallery’s owner

Words belonging to the same category also have a similar distribution: they appear in similar positions in the sentence. For instance, nouns can be preceded immediately by the article the or by the possessive pronoun his: (90)

a. b.

the linguist — the friend — the gallery — the lunch his linguist — his friend — his gallery — his lunch

Other words that belong to the lexical category of nouns are listed in (91): (91)

a. b. c.

mother, daughter, teacher, girl, door, window, writer, soldier, bomb love, hatred, justice, friendship, faith, hope, charity, horror information, water, food, milk, flour, sugar, cream, mud, blood, gas

The Structure of English Sentences

SS

As the reader will observe, there are differences between nouns. For instance, (91a) contrasts with (91b) semantically: (91a) lists nouns which refer to concrete

entities, objects or persons, while the nouns in (91b) refer to abstract entities. Nevertheless, by virtue of their distribution the words in (91b) are nouns: (92)a"a-

the/my love; the/my hatred; the/my justice; the/my friendship; the/my faith; the/my hope; the/my charity; the/my horror

Note, though, that the sequence the + noun in (91b) cannot always easily be used as such as a constituent in English. It must be modified by further material: (92)

b.

c.

*The love is wonderful.

The love for his country which inspired his actions moved everyone.

If they have no modifier, abstract words such as Jove are used without the article: (92)

d.

Love makes the world go round.

Several of the words in (91b) also do not easily allow for plural morphology: (92)

e.

*hatreds; *justices

The absence of a plural for words like hatred or justice derives from their meaning: such words indicate abstract entities which are not discrete and therefore not countable. These words are compatible with plural morphology when they are given an additional, countable, reading:

(92)

f. g. h.

The friendships and loves of members of the royal family always interest the public. Ihave supported several charities in my life. We should never allow mankind to forget the horrors of the First World War.

The words listed in (91c) are also usually incompatible with plural morphology: (93)

a.

*informations, *waters, *foods, *milks, *flours, *sugars, “creams, *muds, *bloods

entities; Again, the concepts expressed by these words are not concrete discrete

in (91c) are mass rather, these words refer to non-discrete quantities. The words nouns; they are not countable. (93)

b.

*an/one information; *a/one water; *a/one food; etc.

category: nouns. We have so far identified one class of words, or one lexical by a possessive and (the) Nouns can be immediately preceded by an article pronoun (my, your, etc.).

56

The Structure of English Sentences

2.2.2

Verbs

Another word class that is easily identified at an intuitive level are verbs. In our original example (67) meet is a verb. Adopting the type of criteria developed for the identification of the noun in section 2.2.1, let us try to characterize verbs formally, by using morphological and distributional properties. Verbs are identified by their inflectional morphology. In the present tense, English verbs display agreement morphology: verbs have the third person singular ending -s which attaches to the base or root of the verb. For regular verbs, the past tense form is composed of the stem of the verb followed by the morpheme -ed; for irregular verbs — the verb meet is a case in point — there is an alternative past tense form.** Verbs may also end in -ing; this form is referred to as the present participle or the gerund. Verbs may appear in the past participle form which is formed by affixation of -ed or -en to the stem. Irregular verbs form their past tenses and their participles differently. (94) contains some examples of regular (work, wait) and irregular (show, meet, go) verbs. (94)

Verb forms

infinitive work wait show meet go

present tense 3person singular work-s wait-s show-s meet-s goe-s

past tense work-ed wait-ed show-ed met went

present participle gerund work-ing wait-ing show-ing meet-ing go-ing

past participle work-ed wait-ed show-n met gone

Distributionally, the infinitival form of the verb can be preceded by elements such as will, can and must, which we call modal auxiliaries, or by the element

to, which signals the infinitival form. We return to the status of these elements below. (95)

Thelma will meet Louise in the local gallery after lunch. Thelma can meet Louise in the local gallery after lunch. Thelma must meet Louise in the local gallery after lunch.

an oP It was important for Thelma to meet Louise in the local gallery after lunch.

2.2.3

Adjectives

Adjectives such as young form a third class of words. With respect to their morphology, a subgroup of adjectives can be associated with the affixes -er and -est to express the notion of degree. The form in -er is the comparative form; the form in -est is the superlative form. For other adjectives, the same type of meaning is expressed by means of the degree words more/most: * We return to the interpretation of tense morphology in chapter 5, section 2.3.

The Structure of English Sentences (96)

a

Adjectives: comparative and superlative

adjective young kind attractive important

comparative younger kinder more attractive more important

superlative youngest kindest most attractive most important

The co-occurrence with degree words such as more and most is one distributional property of adjectives. Other degree words preceding adjectives are very, so, too, quite, rather, that, and the interrogative how: (97)

very young so young too young quite young rather young that young etree We OP how young HL

very kind so kind too kind quite kind rather kind that kind howkind

very attractive very important so attractive so important too attractive too important quite attractive quite important rather attractive rather important that attractive — that important how attractive how important

Adjectives may occupy the blank space in the following context: (98)

2.2.4

a. b.

the my/your/his/her/our/your/their/

my the the the my his

young friend young linguist local gallery new church favourite recipe red shirt

— —

noun noun

Adverbs

Just like adjectives, adverbs such as carefully can be modified by degree words: (99)

She painted the windows very carefully. She paints more carefully than her husband does. She painted so carefully that no one noticed the difference. She paints too carefully. She painted the windows quite carefully. She painted the windows rather carefully. She need not paint that carefully. How carefully have you painted the windows? aos. remo

Still, adverbs do not have exactly the same distribution as adjectives; they can- not be inserted in the same position: (100)

a.

b.

Her careful answer surprised him.

*Her carefully answer surprised him.

58

The Structure of English Sentences

The category of adverbs contains a number of distinct elements, and it is hard to give it a unified treatment. Some adverbs, such as carefully above, are morphologically related to adjectives (101a); others, such as Jong, are formally identical

to adjectives (101b); another group may be semantically related to adjectives but is formally different (the adverb well as opposed to the adjective good in (101c)). Degree words such as very, so, too, quite, rather, and so on, which modify adjectives as in (97) or adverbs as in (99), are themselves also often labelled adverbs. (101)

2.2.5

a. b. c.

She carefully prepared the dinner. The food took too long to prepare. He did not prepare it well enough.

cf. A careful preparation A long preparation A good preparation

Prepositions

A final class of words which is easily identified contains words like in and after. These words are prepositions. Morphologically, they are invariant. With respect to their distribution we observe that they can be followed by the string the + noun: (102)

a. b.

after [the party] in [the gallery]

Some prepositions also take clausal complements:*° (102)

2.2.6

c. d.

after [they left] before [I talk to him again]

Lexical categories

So far, we have identified five word classes or lexical categories: (103) a. b. c. d. €.

category noun verb adjective adverb preposition

abbreviation N Vv A Adv P n

examples friend, soldier, war, mud work, wait, show, meet, go young, local, careful, quick carefully, quickly, well, too, so in, after, before, since

In what follows we will only very occasionally refer to adverbs, as they constitute a class which needs to be more closely examined.

2.2.7

Functional categories

In our sample sentence (67), the following words remain to be identified: the, his, will. We turn to these elements in this section. °° We compare prepositions and so-called particles in chapter 2, section 4.

The Structure of English Sentences

2.2.7.1

59

Article, demonstrative and possessive

The word the is called the both singular nouns (104c).

is an article; it is characteristically associated with a noun. The definite article. In English, it is invariant and associated with

(104a) and plural (104b) countable nouns, as well as with mass For singular countable nouns, the definite article has an indefinite counterpart, a, the indefinite article. With plural nouns and with mass nouns, the definite article is the; for the indefinite variant we use either some or no article at all. In the latter case we will assume that the syntactic position occupied by the article is still available and that a non-overt or zero variant of the indefinite

article occupies this position. (104)

a. b.

singular plural

ror

definite article the woman the women

the water

indefinite article a woman some women 0 women some water 0 water

Nouns may also be preceded by words such as this/these and that/those, which are traditionally called demonstrative pronouns. This and that are the singular forms of the demonstrative pronoun; these and those are the plural forms.

(105) a. b.

singular plural

this

that

this woman these women

that woman those women

In English, nouns can be preceded either by an article or by a demonstrative but not by both. Articles and demonstratives are said to be in complementary distribution. (105)

*this the woman *the this woman *these the women

*that the woman “the that woman “those the women

*the these women

*the those women

c. d. e f.

demonstrative + definite

g. h. i i

demonstrative + indefinite *this a woman *a this woman *these some women *some these women

*that a woman *a that woman *those some women *some those women

and One way to account for the complementary distribution of demonstratives

articles is to propose that they actually occupy the same position.”” d by a Unlike the article, the demonstrative pronoun need not be followe noun:

(106)

a.

— This is a nice house. *The is a nice house.

this chapter, but we modify it in 37 We will adopt this view provisionally in section 2.3.1 of chapter 4, section 3.6.

The Structure of English Sentences

60 b.

I don’t like this/that. *T don’t like the.

Possessive pronouns (my/your/his/her/our/your/their) also precede the noun (107a). They are invariant for number. As was the case for demonstratives, English possessive pronouns do not co-occur with the article (107b); possessive pronouns and articles are in complementary distribution. As before, we can account for this by proposing provisionally that the article and the possessive occupy the same pre-nominal position. (107)

a. b. c.

her house *the her house *her the house

On the basis of the empirical data we have formulated two hypotheses: (i) the article and the demonstrative occupy the same position, ruling out (105c-4), and (ii) the article and the possessive occupy the same position, ruling out (107b-c). Taking these two hypotheses as our premises, we can deduce (iii) that demonstratives and possessives also occupy the same position. (107d) summarizes the reasoning: (107)

d.

(i)

(ii) (iii)

Premise

Premise Conclusion

Articles and demonstratives occupy the same position Articles and possessives occupy the same position Demonstratives and possessives occupy the same position

We are led to a new hypothesis (iii), simply by considering the hypotheses which we have developed. The conclusion itself is not directly based on any empirical evidence. We will check the validity of the conclusion (iii) by returning to the data. The empirical consequence of (iii) is that demonstratives and possessives do not co-occur: this prediction is borne out.** The data in (107e) are thus

evidence for the hypothesis (iii). (107)

e.

*this her house *her this house

At this point it is important to review the reasoning which we have developed. In the above discussion we have used both induction and deduction. In inductive types of reasoning we formulate a hypothesis on the basis of the empirical evidence; in deductive approaches we develop a hypothesis on the basis of the hypotheses already available. (i) and (ii) in (107d) are elaborated by induction; (iii) is the result of deduction. (iii) is in fact the conclusion which is forced upon us by the system which we have developed.

2.2.7.2

Functional categories

To refer to the set of words comprising the articles (definite and indefinite) and the demonstrative pronouns we use the more general label Determiner (Det). 58

: i re : j We will return to the distribution of possessive pronouns in chapter 4, section 3.5.

The Structure of English Sentences

61

The class Det differs from the classes N, V, A, Adv, and (to some extent) P in

several ways.

First, it is possible to list all the elements that belong to Det, while it would be well nigh impossible to list all English verbs. One can create new verbs quite easily when they are needed to express new notions. But the class of determiners is fixed. The categories N, V, A, Adv, and P constitute open classes, while the class Det constitutes a closed class. Prepositions are perhaps marginal in this respect. It is true that there is a relatively restricted number of prepositions and that new prepositions are not created every day. So in a sense, the class of prepositions is relatively closed. However, consider the following: suppose that it becomes important to be able to refer to a relation in which an element X is three centimetres to the right of an element Y. One might invent the preposition agrip for this, and it would not be unnatural to say The book is agrip the box. There is an important semantic contrast between words from the categories N, V, A, Adv, and P, and words belonging to the class of Determiners. Elements of the categories N, V, A, Adv, and P have a lot of lexical content. The difference between (108a) and (108b) is due to the choice of verb and the events described in these sentences are quite distinct:

(108)

a.

The woman met the president.

b.

The woman hit the president.

On the other hand, the choice of the versus a in (108) does not give rise to a

change in the state of affairs depicted by the sentence. Rather, the choice of the means that the referent of the woman is already salient in the things we are talking about, the universe of discourse, whereas the referent of a woman

is

newly introduced. _(108)

c.

A woman met the president.

Similarly, replacing an article by a demonstrative determiner does not alter the descriptive content of the sentence; rather, it relates the referent of the noun directly to the speaker. That contrasts with this: that N denotes a referent which is relatively removed from the speaker; this N denotes a referent which is relatively near the speaker. Demonstrative determiners, which relate the utterance to the speaker context, are deictic elements.

d.

(108)

This/that woman met the president.

The following examples show that replacing nouns (109a), prepositions (109b), adjectives (109c) and adverbs (109d) does have an impact on the type of event depicted by the sentence: (109) a. The woman/man/sailor met the president/doctor/butcher. b. I met Georgina on/under/behind the railway bridge. c. Louise is a brave/ambitious/generous/sexy woman. ly. d. Thelma corrected the text painstakingly/carefully/ quickly/generous content; the eleNouns, verbs, prepositions, adjectives and adverbs have lexical

are lexical ments belonging to the class Det have functional content. The former ies. categor nal functio categories; the latter are .

.

.

39

in chapter 4, section 3, 39 We will return in detail to the distribution of the determiners

where we will modify our analysis considerably.

The Structure of English Sentences

62

The members of functional categories are often phonetically reduced. In French, for instance, one characteristic property of the definite article is that it often forms a phonetic word with the word to its immediate right (110a) or to its immediate left (110b): (110)

a.

le + armoire

— > [armoire

the + cupboard b.

2.2.7.3

a+legarcon to + the boy

—>

au garcon

Auxiliaries

Finally, let us turn to will. Formally, it has some of the properties of a verb in that it is inflected for tense: will is in the present tense, would is in the past tense. On the other hand, elements like willivould are not associated with thematic structure and they do not influence the type of event expressed by a sentence. As mentioned

before, verbs like will are similar to inflectional ele-

ments. In (111a) will expresses that the event depicted by the sentence will take place in the future time-sphere. In other languages (French, for instance), futurity is expressed by verbal inflection: (111)

“a. b.

Thelma Thelma Thelma

will meet the president. rencontrera_ le président. meet + future the president.

While English future time is expressed by means of the auxiliary will, past time is expressed by a verbal inflection: (111)

c.

John walk-ed to the station. walk + PAST

The auxiliary will does not express the type of semantic content which is associated with lexical verbs, but rather that associated with functional elements. As a first approximation, we can label it AUX (for auxiliary) or we can label it modal. The latter term highlights the semantic function of will, which refers to a future world, or to a possible world. The category Auxiliary is like the category Det: it is a closed class. Only a restricted number of elements belong to the class of auxiliaries, illustrated in the following examples.

(111)

d. Thelma may meet the president. Thelma Thelma Thelma Thelma

must meet the president. can meet the president. should meet the president. has met the president.

Thelma is meeting the president. so The president is met by Thelma. =Soy

Auxiliaries do not depict situations; rather, they express certain modifications of time, mood or aspect, with respect to the type of situation expressed by the verb and its arguments. The category auxiliary is a functional category.

The Structure of English Sentences

63

Recall that one of the properties of functional words is that they may be

phonetically reduced. This also applies to auxiliaries:*° (111)

2.2.8

a’. h’. i’. J.

She'll meet the president. She’s met the president. She’s meeting the president. He’s met by Thelma.

Summary

On the basis of this first informal discussion we can label the terminal (lowest) nodes in our tree diagram as follows:

S

(112)

Pee

=

[oe

NE

NUK

eV

Dele

wIN

rs Deen

IN

Po

ele Pelt pe Rr eee ee ee

the young linguist will meet his friend in the local gallery after lunch There remain a number of problems with the labelling in (112), which we shall tackle presently. An obvious point, which we correct immediately, is that while the young linguist, a sequence Det-A-N, is considered a constituent, the formally analogous sequence the local gallery is not. In (112) it looks as if the elements the, local and gallery all have the same relationship to the preposition

_in. This clearly is not correct: the local gallery behaves as one constituent, just like the young linguist. Observe, for instance, that it can be substituted for by one word, there:

(113)

The young linguist will meet his friend in there after lunch.

We will treat the string the local gallery on a par with the string the young linguist and replace (112) by (114):

S

(114)

Derek

ON

AUR

Der

Ne Fe pete sa

N

PR,

N

e e e inth 1 in the local gallery after lunch friend his meet will linguist the young , i.e. constituents In the next section we examine the internal structure of phrases

_»

after lunch, in the such as the young linguist, meet his friend in the local gallery local gallery, etc. section 2.5.2. 40 We return to the discussion of auxiliaries in

The Structure of English Sentences

64

2.3 2.3.1.

Phrases Noun Phrases or NPs

We have already suggested that the strings the young linguist and the local gallery have something in common. For one thing, they contain the same components: Det-A-N. This is also true of the following strings: (115)

a.

determiner the the this those these

adjective young smart old pink fine

noun linguist teacher car T-shirts paintings

an

important

step

As possessive pronouns were seen to be in complementary distribution with the article and the demonstrative, we might provisionally classify them with determiners: (115)

b.

determiner

adjective

noun

my his

smart old

teacher car.

A property of the sequences in (115a) and in (115b) is that they can be replaced by pronouns, as shown in (115c):

(115)

c.

The young linguist He/she

is ill.

The smart teacher He/she

has written a novel.

His old car It

was badly damaged.

Those pink T-shirts They

have faded.

These fine paintings They An important step It

| were badly damaged. has been taken.

Pronouns such as he/she/they/it typically replace strings containing at least an N element. Within the constituent the young linguist, it is intuitively clear that some of the component elements are more important than others. From the semantic

point of view, it is the element linguist that is the most important. First of all, we cannot leave it out without radically altering the meaning of this phrase: the string the young refers to young people in general. It has no more relation with

The Structure of English Sentences

65

young linguists than with young architects. When we replace the N linguist by the N architect as in the young architect the reference of the string changes entirely. If we remove the adjective young, the resulting string, the linguist, can still refer to the same entity as the string the young linguist. As mentioned before, the substitution of a for the does not affect the descriptive content of the string. In (116a) the string a young linguist introduces a referent which is later referred to by the string the young linguist in (116b): (116)

a. b.

A young linguist went to the door and talked to a policeman. The young linguist looked very nervous.

Let us propose a first analysis.*! Based on semantic considerations, we propose

that the most important element of the string the young linguist is the N linguist. We label the entire string a noun phrase (NP). The noun determines the category of the constituent. We say that the N linguist heads the NP the young linguist; the N linguist is the head of the NP. Another way of expressing the relation between the phrase and its head is to say that the entire phrase (in our example a noun phrase) is a projection of its head (here a noun). (hb

arta:

NP [projection/phrase] Det

the

A

N [head]

young _ linguist

The same analysis will apply, by analogy, to the other strings in (115a) and (115b). One problem with this analysis is that it does not account for the fact that Det is often a non-omissible component of the NP, suggesting that it too determines

the nature of the phrase:* (117)

b.

*Young linguist arrives tomorrow.

For the time being we leave aside the central role of the Det and focus on the other components of the NP. imply The discussion leading up to diagram (117a) should not be taken to propThe . that NPs are invariably composed of exactly the sequence Det—A-N is ent constitu the erties which we single out as diagnostics of NP are (i) that this Under . headed by an N and (ii) that it can be replaced by a pronoun characterization the following strings are also NPs: (107);

‘ce >[hy [xp [yp [yp

thé*teacher] the daughters of the butcher] the teachers from France] the angry young women]

[wp Some young women]

[yp the two women with cowboy hats]

3. 41 To be revised considerably in chapter 4, section 3. section 4, r chapte in point this “2 We return to

66

The Structure of English Sentences

Consider, for example, the string the daughters of the butcher. In (118a) the string is the argument of the verb come. As shown by (118b) the string is a constituent: it can be replaced by the pronoun they. We postulate that when a constituent can be replaced by a pronoun it is a noun phrase (NP). (118)

a. b.

[yp The daughters of the butcher] are coming to the party. They are coming to the party.

What is the head of the NP the daughters of the butcher? The head of an NP is by definition a noun; the string contains two nouns: the plural noun daughters and the singular noun butcher. Semantically speaking, daughters functions as the head of the NP in that it determines the referent of the NP. The string refers to girls or women whose father is a butcher. Moreover, the N daughters determines the properties of the full constituent. For instance, we replace the string by a plural pronoun, they, which picks up the plurality of daughters, and not by a singular pronoun he, which would pick up the singular number of butcher: (118)

c.

*He are coming to the party.

The NP the daughters of the butcher gives rise to plural agreement on the verb be (are), again corresponding to the number of daughters rather than that of butcher. We propose that it is daughters which is the head of the NP: (118)

d.

[yp The daughters of the butcher] are/*is coming to the party.

If we replace plural daughters by singular daughter, the entire NP is replaced by the singular pronoun she and triggers singular agreement:

(118)

e. f.

[yp The daughter of the butcher] is/*are coming to the party. She is coming to the party.

We conclude that while the NP the daughters of the butcher contains two nouns, daughters and butcher, it is the head noun, daughters, which determines the number of the full noun phrase. The singular N butcher, which is also contained in the bracketed NP, does not influence the number of the NP because

it is not the head of the NP. The features of the head project up to the maximal projection:

(118) g.

NP [a sg] Det

N’

N

[a sg]

where @ is + or —; +sg = singular; —sg = plural. Sometimes, an NP consists of just one overt element:

(119)

a.

[yp Women] are very ambitious. They often compete with [jp men].

The Structure of English Sentences

67

In1 (119a) women is a noun phrase: : it can be replaced b a pro ( they). Similarly men in (119a) is a noun phrase. 4 ‘gala ad In our initial example (67) there was one NP which consists of just a bare N. The N lunch can be replaced by a pronoun such as it or that (119b). It can also be part of a bigger NP (119¢): (119)

b. c.

The young linguist will meet his friend in the local gallery after that. The young linguist will meet his friend in the local gallery after a late lunch.

We assume that the nouns women and men in (119a) and the noun lunch in (67) head NPs with non-overt determiners:

(119)

d.

NP Det

N

* 0

lunch women

If we say that NPs are constituents that can be replaced by pronouns, this amounts to saying that pronouns share the relevant properties of NPs and should themselves be categorized as NPs. (119)

2.3.2

e.

[yp IJ have met [yp them].

Prepositional Phrases or PPs

In our example (67) we encountered two sequences consisting of a preposition (P) followed by a noun phrase (NP): (120)

a. b.

in the local gallery after lunch

The string in the local gallery is to be distinguished from the string the local gallery. The two tend not to occur in the same syntactic position, as illustrated by (121). An asterisk inside parentheses (121a, c) means that the insertion of the material in the parentheses leads to ungrammaticality; an asterisk outside parentheses (121b, d) means that the material in the parentheses must be inserted for the clause to be grammatical. In (121a), for instance, the insertion of in leads to 1c) ungrammaticality, whereas in (121b) a preposition is required. Similarly, in (12 be. must it 121d) ( lunch cannot be accompanied by a preposition, whereas in

* (121)

a. b. c. d.

(*In) the local gallery is having a special menu for Christmas. I always meet my friend *(in) the local gallery. Iam having (*after) lunch with Louise. Iam meeting Thelma *(after) lunch.

The Structure of English Sentences

68

The sequence P + NP is thus distinct from NP. The preposition characterizes the nature of the string. P heads the string P + NP. We refer to constituents introduced by a preposition as prepositional phrases or PPs:

end

cgi

P

NP

in after before

the local gallery lunch her departure

Some prepositions may also select a finite or a non-finite*’ clause:

(122)

b.

tage aor: P after

before

S they had had lunch ec having had lunch she left ec leaving

Prepositions may also themselves select a PP complement: (120)

2.3.3.

Tas.dameiae 0 P

PP

for

after the party

from

before the war

Verb Phrases or VPs

We have still not provided any label for the string consisting of the V meet, the NP his friend and the PPs in the local gallery and after lunch. This constituent is central in the sentence because it contains the verb (V) the argument structure

of which determines the minimal components of the sentence.** Because -V determines the obligatory components of the string under examination and because it is also in a sense semantically central in determining what kind of event is

depicted, we consider V the head of the constituent. We then label the whole string verb phrase, VP. * The subject of the non-finite clause is non-overt. Cf. section 1.3 above.

* See section 1 of this chapter.

The Structure of English Sentences

69

Certain constituents in the string labelled VP are not obligatory. For instance, the PPs in our example are not obligatory: (123)

a.

The young linguist will meet his friend.

In (123a) the VP is meet his friend. It can be replaced by do so, and it can be the focus of a pseudo-cleft sentence: (123)

b. c.

The old linguist will do so too. What the young linguist will do is meet his friend.

It is not the case that a VP must obligatorily contain an NP complement: (124)

a. b. c.

The young linguists will assemble in the local gallery after lunch. The old linguists will do so too. What the young linguists will do is assemble in the local gallery after lunch.

In both (123) and (124) do so substitution and pseudo-clefting identify the strings meet his friend and assemble in the local gallery as constituents, and in both it is the V that heads the phrase. There are also VPs which contain just a V: (125)

a. b. c.

The young linguists will resign. The old linguists will do so too. What the young linguists will do is resign.

We conclude that the VP minimally contains a V-head, and that sometimes a VP contains just the V-head. (126) provides a representation for some of the VPs discussed above:

V

NP

PP

PP

meet

his friend

in the local gallery

after lunch

che

(123a)

VP

b. Vv

NP

meet

his friend

(124a)

VP

. Vv

PP

ye

assemble

in the local gallery

after lunch

70

The Structure of English Sentences d.

(125a)

VP

resign

VP is a constituent at the phrasal level headed by V. As a diagnostic for VPhood, we can use the do so substitution test or the pseudo-clefting test.

2.3.4

Adjective Phrases or APs

So far, we have identified three constituents of the phrasal type: NP, PP, VP.

(127) illustrates the fourth type: (l27\s

a b. c.

d

the *the the the

rather talented linguist rather linguist talented linguist rather shy/brave/old/rich linguist

In (127a) we have added the string rather talented to the NP the linguist. The adjective talented is the head of the string rather talented: the adverb rather modifies the adjective talented. We cannot insert the degree adverb rather unless there is an adjective inside the NP (127b), while the adjective talented may be inserted without the degree adverb (127c). Rather and talented form one constituent, headed by the adjective talented. Such a constituent is an adjective phrase or AP. The structure of the NP in (127a) is given in (127e):

(137)

NP Det

AP Deg

the

A

rather talented _ linguist

But if rather talented in (127a) is an AP, talented in (127c) is the same type of constituent, the only difference being that this time the phrase consists of just the head talented. Analogously to NPs and VPs, we allow for APs to contain just a head A:

(427) of.

NP

melee fivuetat die cesar Det

AP

N

the

ait young shy

linguist

:

The Structure of English Sentences

7

Consider now (128): (128)

a.

John is rather intelligent.

b.

John is rather proud of the results.

In (128a) the adjective phrase rather intelligent is a constituent, witness the fact that it can be deleted (129a) and that it can be substituted for by so (129b).

The same criteria will also identify rather proud of the results in (128b) as a constituent. (129)

John is rather intelligent. ats nee So is Mary.

a, b.

John is rather proud of the results. Is he? So is Mary.

In (128a) the adjective phrase rather inteiligent functions as the predicate of the sentence. It expresses a property of the subject NP John, to which it is linked by the copula be. The same is true for rather proud of the results in (128b). In the last example, the adjective phrase contains the head, proud, the adverbial modifier rather, and in addition it contains the PP of the results. This PP functions as the complement of the adjective. The structure of the AP in (128b) is as follows:

(130)

AP a Deg

ae A

PE

Paks P NP pe ae

proud

rather

of

Det

N

i

ai

When adjectives function as the heads of predicates, they can be accompanied by a complement. When they are modifiers of the noun phrase a contrast emerges between pre-nominal (131a) and post-nominal (131b) adjectives: (131)

a.

b.

*A proud of his children man would not do this.

A man proud of his children would not do this.

a Pre-nominal adjectives cannot take any complements. Adjectives which modify noun and take a complement must occur in post-nominal position. Analogously to APs, headed by adjectives, we can also postulate AdvPs, headed

by adverbs: - (132)

a. b. c. d

John John John John

writes [,q,p quite elegantly]. ; writes [,qp quite well]. [,qp rather quickly] realized what was going on. got the message [avr rather too late].

AQ.

The Structure of English Sentences

Adverbs modifying a verb tend not to take complements, even when they are morphologically related to complement-taking adjectives. In (133a), for instance, proudly is related to proud, but unlike the adjective, the adverb cannot take a complement:

(133)

a.

John refused the offer proudly (*of his work).

b.

John proudly (*of his work) refused the offer.

Some adjective-based adverbs do take complements, however. Independently is one example: (133)

c.

d.

2.3.5

Independently of all other considerations, the fact remains that we are short of cash. She acted quite independently of any personal considerations.

Summary: lexical categories and phrasal categories

Let us summarize section 2.3. On the basis of a number of constituency tests and of a typology of words we have identified five categories of phrasal constituents corresponding closely to the lexical categories which head them: (134)

a.

An NP

isa constituent headed by N. is a projection of N.

Dasa Ve

is a constituent headed by V. is a projection of V.

Cea PP

is a constituent headed by P. is a projection of P.

d.

An AP

isa constituent headed by A. is a projection of A.

e.

An AdvP is a constituent headed by Adv. is a projection of Adv.

The five statements in (134) can be collapsed. We can formulate a more general principle, a generalization:

(134)

f.

An XP

isa constituent headed by X. is a projection of X.

The same information can be represented in tree diagram format:

(134) g.

XP X

In (134g) X is the head of XP. The head X can be preceded or followed by further material. In NPs, for instance, the Determiner occupies a position to the left of the head, and in VPs V may be followed by NPs and/or by PPs. On the basis of the analysis of individual phrases we have developed the hypothesis that

The Structure of English Sentences

vi)

each lexical head heads a corresponding phrase. The tree diagram in (135)

summarizes our analysis of the sentence we started out with. Each node exhaustively dominates one constituent. For instance, the string the young linguist is a constituent, but the string the young is not. NP does not dominate the young exhaustively. Some nodes in the tree are binary branching: two branches spring from the one node. This is the case, for instance, for the _ PPs, and also for the NP node dominating his friend. The node S is ternary branching: three branches spring from that node. In the next section we will see

that we can reduce all branching nodes to binary branching nodes.

S

(135)

Dever

os

Ne

hUX

P

pe Det

in

the

Sa A

lunch

N

local gallery

A lexical category, such as N, heads a phrase (NP). NP, VP, AP, AdvP, and PP are constituents organized around a head: they are endocentric. A question that will arise is whether functional heads such as AUX (will) and Det (the) can also

head phrases.*°

2.4

Layering

2.4.1

VP-layers

for On the basis of the substitution test, we have arrived at structure (135) this In nce. convenie reader’s the for sentence (67), repeated here as (136a) friend), and representation, the verb phrase consists of a verb (meet), an NP (his

two

that PPs, in the local gallery and after lunch. Further empirical data suggest

er in relation to the NP in 45 We discuss AUX in section 2.5.2 and we return to the determin

.

chapter 4, section 3.

The Structure of English Sentences

74

our analysis above is not adequate and that we need a more articulated structure for the VP.

(136)

The young lunch. He will do He will do He will do

a. . c. d.

linguist will meet his friend in the local gallery after so indeed. so before lunch. so at the university before class.

In (136) we use substitution by do so to replace the following strings: (137)

a.

meet his friend in the local gallery after lunch

b. c.

meet his friend in the local gallery meet his friend

This means that each of the strings in (137) must be a constituent. But this conclusion is incompatible with representation in (135). In (135) VP does not exhaustively dominate the strings meet his friend in the local gallery (137b) and meet his friend (137c). According to (135), only (137a) qualifies as a constituent. We conclude that the VP structure represented in (135) must be decomposed into separate constituents:

VP

(138)

V

NP

[Ae AGE his friend

meet

P

Recepatiemal

NP

after

lunch

in the local gallery

In (138) we decompose the VP into distinct layers. The structure in (138) represents a hierarchical organization in which the V meet and the NP his friend form a constituent, meet his friend. The constituent is headed by the verb, but it

is not the full VP. We label it V’. This constituent combines in turn with the PP in the local gallery to form another V’, meet his friend in the local gallery, which finally combines with after lunch. The highest projection of V is labelled VP. VP is called the maximal projection of V; V is the head of the projection. The V’ constituents are also projections of V since their head is V, but they are not maximal projections: they are intermediate projections. The intermediate projections display a semantic hierarchy: the lowest V’ is composed of V and one of its arguments; a higher V’ is composed of V’ and an

optional element.*

P * In ; : 4 : ; section 2.4.5, we will propose an alternative analysis of the relation of the adjunct

to VP.

:

The Structure of English Sentences

75

An argument dominated by V’ is an internal argument. The term direct object is also used to refer to the NP in the lowest V’ with the head V. His friend is the internal argument or the direct object of the V meet. The argument of the verb that is realized outside the VP is called the external argument; in sentence (136a)

the NP the young linguist is the external argument.” The question arises how to analyse the structure of the following VPs with _ respect to the layered structure elaborated here: (139)

a.

Louise will abandon her husband.

b. c.

Thelma will dance after lunch. Louise will dance.

In (139a) the V abandon has two arguments, one internal (her husband) and one external (Louise). The sentence contains no adjuncts. In (139b) there is only an external argument (Thelma); there is no internal argument, but there is an adjunct (after lunch). In (139c) there is an external argument (Louise), but there is no internal argument or adjunct. We propose to maintain the layered structure for VPs. For (139a) we propose that the V’ level dominates V and its internal argument her husband. For (139b) we propose that the lowest V’ is non-branching: it simply dominates V, and the adjunct after lunch is attached to a higher projection. For (139c) we propose that again V’ and VP are non-branching. (140)

VP

a.

Vv’

Bd NP (eaten abandon her husband V

Co

VP

b. Ve

rr

VE, Vv’

| nnn Pta NP V Dakowhewdance Pserelt werupchre lunch dance after V

The representations in (140) show that abandon has an internal argument, while dance does not. The bare V in (139c) is dominated by VP because it behaves like aNP:

(141)

a. b.

What I won’t do is dance after lunch. What I won’t do is dance.

Given the parallelisms between VP and the other phrasal categories, we may wonder whether the layering of the VP proposed in (140) can be extended to the other phrasal categories, NP, AP, AdvP and pp,**

2.4.2

NP-layers

Consider the bracketed NP in (142a):

(142)

a.

Yesterday, I met [xp the students of English from Paris].

47 See also chapter 2, sections 2 and 3. . We return to NPs in 48 In this section we provide a preliminary discussion of this question

_

will be formulated. chapter 4, section 3, where a more complex proposal

76

The Structure of English Sentences

Adopting our first analysis of the NP we might propose the structure in (142b):

(142)

NP

b.

ee, AO gE Det

N

PP.

PP

the

students

of English

from Paris

But the substitutions in (142c) and (142d) suggest that this structure is inadequate: (142)

c. d.

Ihad met [xp the ones from Paris] before. I had met [yp the new ones] at a party.

In (142c) ones replaces students of English, and in (142d) ones substitutes for students of English from Paris. If substitution tests can give us indications as to constituency, then the one-substitutions suggest that the string students of English is a constituent. This is incompatible with structure (142b): the material students of English is not exhaustively dominated by one node. The NP the students of English from Paris must be decomposed into a more articulate structure: (142)

NP Det

N’

N’

ite

ae N

EP.

P the

students

|

NP

i

ee

ae

NP =

We conclude that, just like the VP, the NP can be assigned a layered structure. The layering shows that the N students has a closer relation with the PP of English than with the PP from Paris. This is not surprising; the relation between students and of English closely resembles that between the V study and the direct object English in (143a). The VP in (143a) would have the structure in (143b):

(143) a. Thelma will study Englishin Paris. b. VP NG

pala | ue study

English

PP.

in Paris

The Structure of English Sentences

ad

Just as English is an argument of the V study in (143a), of English is an argument of the N students in (142e).” Consider also the following noun phrase, in which we have already bracketed the intermediate projection N’: (144)

a.

[yp the [y Queen of England]]

One pronominalization confirms that the string Queen of England, containing the head N of the NP, but not containing the determiner, is a constituent: (144)

b.

The first Queen of England was a spinster, the second one wasn’t.

There are a number of additional arguments for the existence of the N’ node. In certain contexts the constituent N’ may appear in isolation. N’ may function as a predicate of a copula: (144)

c.

Elizabeth is [Queen of England].

d.

Elizabeth became [Queen of England] when she was very young.

A constituent N’ can be co-ordinated with another constituent:

(144)

e. f.

Victoria became [Queen of England] and [Empress of India]. The [prisoner’s boyfriend] and [father of her child] is in prison for dishonesty.

Right node raising further confirms the intuition that the string Queen of England is a constituent separately from the determiner:

(144)

g.

She is the youngest, and possibly the last, Queen of England.

‘As was the case for VPs, NPs are assigned a layered structure even when they are realized as a bare N: (145)

2.4.3

a.

c.

Ihave met students.

I have bought wine.

Det

N’

ne

0

N students

0

)

N wine

AP, AdvP and PP

We have pointed out the similarity in structure between NP, VP, AP each case we have a lexical head projecting a phrase. We have also more articulate structure can be imposed on the VP and the NP. As this modification, all the branching nodes dominated by VP and

and PP: in seen that a a result of by NP are

and that of the noun 49 For further comparisons between the argument structure of the verb

see also chapter 4, section 3.4.1.

The Structure of English Sentences

78

binary branching. The same type of layering can be imposed on the structure of AP, AdvP and PP, thus reducing all branching to binary branching:

(146)

a.

AP ot

aa

Deg

A’

oo) grit Selec A quite

hae

b.

of any other considerations

AdvP Deg

quite

ly

Adv’

art So AES

independently

(3

— of any other considerations

PP. ee

ee

Deg

Pi ee

P

right

2.4.4

ste PE

en

NP

peetheByspotSE

‘

The X-bar format of phrase structure

The result of adopting such layered structures is that we obtain a more elegant and economic way of dealing with phrasal projections: all projections can be represented in terms of a single binary branching system. The schema in (147a) summarizes the format for lexical projections. (1a)

ea:

XP

specifier

2» Xx

complement

(147a) is the blueprint for all structures in English (and in other languages). Phrases are endocentric. The phrase is a projection of a head with the structure in (147a). The hypothesis summarized in (147a) is referred to as X-bar theory or

X’-theory. X or X’ is the head of the projection. XP is the maximal projection

The Structure of English Sentences

pe)

(the topmost projection of X); X’ is an intermediate projection. X’ dominates

the head X and the complement; the maximal projection XP dominates an intermediate projection X’ and the specifier. The specifier of XP is sometimes abbreviated as [Spec,XP]. X’-theory defines the local relations of a head, X. Every head bears two local

relations: the head is locally related to its complement and to the specifier of its projection. The locality constraint on grammatical relations®’ restricts poss‘ible syntactic relations: it allows a constituent A to enter into a grammatical relation with a constituent B provided A bears a local relation to B. We will see that locality restrictions play a role throughout the grammar. Notably, local-

ity has an impact on selection,’' on case-assignment,* on movement,’ and on interpretation.” The relation between a head and its complement is also characterized in terms of the traditional notion of government. We say that the head governs the complement.

2.4.5.

The X-bar format and adjunction

A complication to of sentence-medial ated by AUX, and often and the verb (148)

a.

the X-bar format above arises when we consider the position adverbials such as often or always. In (148a) will is dominthe verb buy is inside the VP. We see that will precedes very follows it:

Louise [yx will] very often [yp buy novels].

What is the position of the adverb phrase very often in the structure of the sentence? We propose that the adverb is associated with the verb phrase, buy novels, which it quantifies:

(148)

b.

S NP

VP2

INFL

VW

Louise

will

Vv

NP

|

pattie

buy

_ © Cf. section 1.2 above for a first discussion. 5! Section 2.5.8. %2 Section 3.7.

8 Chapter 2, section 1.4.3, chapter 6, section 4.2. 54 Chapter 5, sections 1.6 and 2.3.3.

novels

80

The Structure of English Sentences

The adverb phrase headed by the adverb often combines with the lowest maximal projection, VP1, also called the minimal maximal projection, to form the higher maximal projection VP2. The labels VP1 and VP2 do not have any theoretical significance; they simply serve to distinguish the two maximal projections or segments. The complete VP is the combination of the segments VP1 and VP2. The structure resulting from this attachment is called an adjunction structure: the adverb phrase is adjoined to the VP or VP-adjoined. Adjunction structures allow us to expand an already existing maximal projection by adding an additional level. The general format for adjunction is given in (147b); the left-hand representation illustrates left-adjunction, the right-hand representation rightadjunction. As before, the numbers associated with the labels XP1 and XP2 merely serve to identify the segments of XP; they have no theoretical significance. XP1 is the minimal maximal projection.

(147)

b.

XP2

3

XP2

ee

ZP.

ae

XP1

XP1

ie mole

Kk ah orm

Spec

x’

Spec

Le.

x’

a aes x

complement

xX

complement

In sentence (148c) two AdvPs separate the auxiliary from the verb. This sentence illustrates a case of multiple adjunction. (148d) is a partial structure: (148)

c.

Mary will probably always remember this story.

d

VP ae

ee

AdvP

VP pene

lie

AdvP

VP

f

ce

View probably

always a

NP vas

If we assume that the sentence-medial adverb phrase in (148a) is VP-adjoined, then the question arises whether we ought not to modify our analysis of the VP outlined before, and assume that post-verbal adjuncts are also VP-adjoined. Whereas our initial account of VP-layering (2.4.1) would have led us to structure (149b) for the VP of (149a), a generalization of the adjunction account leads us to posit (149c).

The Structure of English Sentences (149)

a.

81

Mary will read this book very often.

b.

VP

Debate von Ne vile eas Weal. |

]

AdvP

NP

read

PN

c

very often

VP2 i

VP1

AdvP

I

Tae

V

“Ke

NP a

very often

Obviously, if we take this step for the VP-structure, we should also consider it for the other phrases. Post-nominal modifiers would then be NP-adjoined, for

instance.°° Analysing all adjuncts in terms of adjoined structures restricts the content of the lower maximal projection (“XP1’) to just the arguments of the head; adjuncts are adjoined to that projection, giving rise to (recursive) additional segments.”° So far, we have elaborated the X’-format for VPs, NPs, APs, AdvPs and PPs. Clauses (S) seem not to be determined by the general format, and this for two reasons. (i) S is ternary branching; the sentence has three immediate constituents: NP, AUX and VP; (ii) we have not yet identified a head for S.”’

2.5

2.5.1

Functional projections

S, binary branching and AUX

We have described projections of lexical heads and we have established that their structure can be represented in the X’-format. Phrases are endocentric: they are built up around a nucleus, a head. The structure of S was left outside this system. Consider the following examples: 55 We return to this point in chapter 2, section 1.2. we will extend them 56 We will return to adjunction structures in chapter 3, section 1, where

n in the NP and to all categories. In chapter 4, section 3.7, we reconsider the role of adjunctio

n structures in the “in the clause. In chapter 5, section 3, we turn to the role of adjunctio

representation of the interpretation of a sentence. with an opportunity 57 We turn to these questions in the next section. They will provide us AUX. labelled position the of to reconsider the syntax

The Structure of English Sentences

82 (150)

a. b.

The teacher will invite the student after lunch. The teacher invited the student after lunch.

In (150a) we find the pattern that we have already come across. The sentence divides into three immediate constituents: the NP the teacher, the auxiliary will, and the VP invite the student after lunch: (TL50)

ia ae

c

ag

S

VP

AUX

NP

Lae

| will

the teacher

invite the student after lunch

At first sight, representation (150c) cannot apply to sentence (150b), which does not contain any auxiliaries. However, there are arguments for isolating an AUX node in this example too. Consider the following sentences. The sentences in (151) correspond to (150a), and those in (152) to (150b).

(151)

a.

What the teacher will do is invite the student after lunch. Invite the student after lunch is what he will do. Invite the student after lunch, he will.

c.

(152)

a. . c.

What the teacher did was invite the student after lunch. Invite the student after lunch is what he did. Invite the student after lunch, he did.

Consider first pseudo-clefting in the (a) sentences. In (151a) the VP invite the student after lunch is separated from the auxiliary will. In (152a), in exactly parallel fashion, the VP is isolated and the past tense inflection associated with the verb in (150b) is now associated with the auxiliary do. These sentences provide a first motivation for assuming that the tense inflection of the verb has

an auxiliary-like status. Recall that will itself is also inflected for tense: it is the present tense form, would being the past tense form. In (151b) the VP is fronted, stranding the modal auxiliary will. Similarly, in (152b) the VP is fronted and the past tense morpheme is stranded and realized on did, the past tense form of the auxiliary do. We conclude that the past tense inflection on the verb in (150b) is parallel to the auxiliary will in (150a). In order to express the syntactic parallelism between will and the past tense morpheme, we assign the same structure to sentences (150a) and (150b), locating the past tense morpheme -ed in the same position as the auxiliary will. Will is inflected for present tense; its past form is would. From this point of view, what is common to will and the -ed past tense morphology is that both realize tense

inflection. We represent this by relabelling the AUX node INFL for Inflection. (150)

d.

S NP f; the teacher

ix

a i, -ed

invite...

The Structure of English Sentences

83

INFL not only encodes tense properties of the verb, it also dominates person morphology, as can be seen from the following examples: (153)

a.

What the teacher does is invite the student after lunch.

b.

Invite the student after lunch is what he does.

c.

Invite the student after lunch, he does.

INFL dominates the tense and agreement (AGR) inflection of the verb. (150)

e.

S NP

the teacher

INFL [Tense] [AGR] will -ed

VP | invite...

-S

The INFL node can be seen to dominate either free morphemes such as will or bound morphemes or affixes such as -ed, -s. If INFL dominates a bound morpheme then this bound morpheme will have to be united with a lexical stem. Bound morphemes, by definition, must be associated with another morpheme: they cannot remain independent in the structure. (150)

f. g.

*The teacher -ed invite the student after lunch. *The teacher -s invite the student after lunch.

In language there is a general prohibition on leaving bound morphemes or affixes stranded in the structure. This ban will mark as ungrammatical all strings which contain a bound morpheme or affix which is unattached. The ban on unattached or stray affixes is not just confined to English, as shown by the following examples: (154)

a.

French

Jean rencontrait |’étudiant a Paris. Jean met the student in Paris

a’.

b.

by:

*Jean -ait rencontre |’étudiant a Paris. Jean -past meet the student in Paris

Dutch

*Jan -te ontmoet de student in Parijs. Jan -past meet the student in Paris

Jan ontmoette de student in Parijs. Jan met the student in Paris

eme unites with V in We will examine the process by which the bound morph English in the next section.

84

The Structure of English Sentences

2.5.2

Lexical verbs and auxiliaries

2.5.2.1.

Lexical verbs remain inside the VP

2.5.2.1.1 SENTENCE-MEDIAL ADVERBS AND VERB POSITIONS We have already pointed out that representation (150e) cannot correspond to the surface string of the sentence: the stray affixes in (150f) and (150g) lead to ungrammaticality. (150e) is an abstract representation which gives us the underlying structure or the base structure of the sentence. The affixes and will originate in the same position in the sentence. The original position which an element occupies in the structure will be called its underlying position or its base-position. As we have already seen,** constituents may be moved away from their base-position. The set of all the base-positions of the elements in the sentence is the underlying structure of the sentence, the deep or the D-structure. The structure obtained after various movements have rearranged elements is the derived or surface structure, S-structure. The inflectional morpheme of the verb is a bound morpheme or affix, which must be united with a verb stem. In order to derive the surface string for (150b) we have to unite V with its tense and agreement morpheme. This could be achieved either (i) by lowering the affix onto the V as in (15Sa), or (ii) by raising the V towards the affix as in (155b):

(iss)

ba NP

atell INFL

VP

[Tense] [AGR] the teacher

—

invite-d

a

invite-s

bidunnhle7

b.

S NP

INFL [Tense]

LAGR |e the teacher

VP

$2

_invite-d — socia bellies invite-s

In order to choose between the lowering analysis and the raising analysis, we must look at the distribution of inflected verbs with respect to elements that are located between I and VP. If V moves to I then V will cross such elements and %8 Section 1.2.

The Structure of English Sentences

85

end up to their left. If INFL lowers onto V, then V remains to the right of the constituents which sit between I and V. One type of element that intervenes between I and V are sentence-medial

adverbs such as often, always, already. We proposed above” that such adverbs are VP-adjoined: (156)

a.

S NP

INFL

VP2

AdvP

VP1 | ee .V

NP

| Louise

will

often

a

read

this book

Modal auxiliaries always precede sentence-medial adverbs. Such auxiliaries are always tensed: for example, can is present tense, could is past tense. We propose that modal auxiliaries are inherently tensed and must be inserted under INFL. In what follows we will use the position of sentence-medial adverbs such as often as signposts to determine the position of the verb with respect to INFL. Consider the sentence in (156b):

(156)

b.

Thelma will already have read the book.

In (156b) will precedes already. We assume, as before, that it is located under INEL. The VP contains two verbs, have and read. Given X’-theory, the presence of the two verb heads leads to the creation of two VPs, one VP headed by the auxiliary have, the second one headed by the participle of the lexical verb read. The sentence-medial adverb precedes have. We assume that it is adjoined to the VP:

S

(156) c. NP

VP

INFL

VP

AdvP

F

ae ee

Thelma 59 Section 2.4.5.

will

already

have

Vy’

Vv

NP

Ais

the book

86

The Structure of English Sentences

In (156b) have is not a finite verb; it does not carry agreement or tense inflection. It is a verbal root. Its complement is the VP headed by the participle read, another non-finite form. Let us now consider (157a): (157)

a.

Thelma has already read the book.

In (157a) there are again two verbs, has and read. Again, by analogy with (156b), we propose that there are two VPs in the structure: that headed by have,

and that headed by read. The tense and agreement affix associated with have is inserted under the designated node INFL. The D-structure or the underlying structure of (157a) is as in (157b):

(1577) tub.

S NP

INFL

[present] [3sg]

aol AdvP

t WE

ee

Foe

V

VP

|

Wig

ee

V

Thelma

-s_

already

have

VP

|

Oa

read

the book

But we know that the bound morpheme -s cannot remain stranded under INFL: it must associate with the verb have. In (157a) has precedes already. This we will take to mean that in this sentence have has united with INFL by moving up and incorporating into INFL. The affix and the verb thus form one word: (157)

ee

S NP

INFL have + -s

VP AdvP

VP

| Vv’

V

VP

|

ee ees V

Thelma

has

already

cae

—— ol

— read

NP

the book

The Structure of English Sentences

87

On the basis of its distribution with respect to the adverb already we conclude that the auxiliary have moves up to INFL to unite with the inflection. The same reasoning applies to the boldfaced auxiliaries in (158): (158a) contains progressive be, (158b) contains passive be. : ail (158) Now

a. b.

Thelma is already reading the novel. Thelma is often invited to parties.

consider (159a). In this example there is only one verb, read, a lexical

verb. The sentence will contain only one VP, headed by read. (159)

a.

Louise often reads novels.

b.

S NP

INFL

VP2

[present]

[3s]

advp

VP1

a

Louise

often

-S

V

NP

read

novels

How does the verb read unite with the inflectional affix -s? If the verb were to - move to INFL, we predict that we would end up with a sentence in which the verb precedes the adverb: (159)

c.

*Louise reads often novels.

The resulting string is ungrammatical. Apparently, a lexical verb like read canVPnot escape from the VP to move to its inflection. Rather, the verb remains ed, unattach left being avoid to order internal, i.e. to the right of the adverb. In INFL lowers onto the lexical verb:

(159) d.

S NP

INFL

VP2

AdvP

VP1

|

ee

V

| Logice

set

olten fread + :S

NP

|

novels

88

The Structure of English Sentences

The discussion so far has revealed a number of important points about the distribution of verbs in English. Let us summarize our findings: 1

2

3

Modal auxiliaries such as will, may, can, and so on precede VP-adjoined

sentence-medial adverbs. We assume that they are dominated by INFL. Modal auxiliaries are always inflected for tense; we assume that they are inherently associated with tense and must be inserted under INFL. Auxiliaries such as have and be follow VP-adjoined sentence-medial adverbs when they are non-finite, but they precede them when finite. We propose that to unite with their finite inflection, they move to INFL. Lexical verbs such as read always follow VP-adjoined sentence-medial adverbs. We propose that they are not able to move out of the VP; INFL lowers onto them. If we adopt a distributional analysis of the contrast between auxiliaries and

lexical verbs, then we are led to conclude that copula be in (160a) behaves like an auxiliary in terms of its distribution.

(160)

a.

Louise is already bored.

In (160a) the verb under analysis is not followed by any other verb. It is the only verb of the sentence. Nevertheless, since it precedes the sentence-medial adverb, we conclude that, like auxiliaries, it must be able to leave the VP. The same conclusion applies to the status of have in sentences such as (160b) which are sometimes accepted in formal British English. The symbol % is intended to mean that the judgement is not shared by all the speakers of the language. (160)

b.

%Thelma has already enough money.

Let us consider the distribution of the verb be in (160a) in more detail. In (160a) be functions as a copula: it relates a predicate, an AP, to the subject NP. (160c) shows the base-position of be in (160a). Be moves out of its baseposition and raises to INFL (160d), producing (160a). (160)

c.

. NP

S

“INEL [Tense]

[3s8]_

VP

Advp

VP Vv’

Vv

AP INS

A

Louise

-s_

already

be

bored

The Structure of English Sentences d.

89

S NP

INFL [Tense]

[3se]

Adv

VP

.

ear St (toe gn

be +s

Vv

AP

l

!

Louise

is

already

——

lg

The same analysis would apply to possessive have for those speakers who accept (160b). Again, the fact that have may precede the adverb shows that it can leave the VP and move to INFL. However, note that (160b) is unacceptable in many varieties of English in which (160e) is the only option:

(160)

e.

Thelma already has enough money.

~ In (160e), possessive have is a lexical verb and remains inside the VP. 2.5.2.1.2 NEGATION The difference between auxiliaries and lexical verbs is also clear when we con-

sider their distribution with respect to the negative marker not: (161)

Thelma Thelma Thelma Thelma Thelma moao op Thelma

will not write any books. may not write any books. could not write any books. has not written any books. is not writing any books. is not bored.

ed as auxiliarIn the examples in (161a-f) the boldfaced verbs, which we classifi

sentence-medial ies on the basis of the fact that they precede a VP-adjoined In contrast, lexical adverb, also precede the marker of sentential negation not. verbs cannot precede negation:

(161)

g.

*Thelma writes not any books.

ial adverbs, the inflection Interestingly, in contrast to sentences with sentence-med

: cannot lower across not onto the verb either

(161)

h.

*Thelma not writes any books.

90

The Structure of English Sentences

In order for the bound morpheme of the inflection to survive, the verb do is inserted: (161)

i. | Thelma does not write any books.

Do is inserted in (161i) as a last resort operation to enable the sentence to survive. The inflectional morpheme must not remain isolated; the lexical verb cannot move up to it, nor can the inflection lower onto the verb. So do, which functions as an auxiliary here, is inserted to support the bound morpheme.”

2.5.2.1.3 LEXICAL VERBS VERSUS AUXILIARIES AND STRENGTH OF INFLECTION On the basis of their distribution with respect to sentence-medial adverbs such as often, already, etc., and with respect to the marker of sentential negation not, we have distinguished two kinds of verbs. English lexical verbs cannot precede either VP-adjoined sentence-medial adverbs such as often or the negation marker not. We concluded that lexical verbs must remain inside the VP. When INFL is adjacent to the verb, or when only an adverb intervenes, the inflectional morpheme is lowered onto the verb. In sentences which contain a negation marker

not between INFL and the VP, the lowering of the tense morpheme is blocked and do is inserted under INFL to carry the tense morpheme. Finite forms of auxiliary verbs such as have and be precede sentence-medial adverbs and the negative marker not. They can move to INFL, where they unite with tense and agreement inflection. Copular be behaves like an auxiliary. Possessive have usually behaves like a lexical verb, though it may behave like an auxiliary or like a lexical verb in some formal varieties of British English. Modal auxiliaries such as will and may are inherently tensed and are inserted under INFL. They always precede sentence-medial adverbs and the negation marker not. While we offer an account for the fact that modals are invariably inserted under INFL in the structure, the question arises why it is that the finite forms of the auxiliaries have and be move to INFL to pick up the finite inflection, while lexical verbs must remain VP-internal. In order to answer this question we will briefly look at the distribution of the verb in another language, French. In French, lexical verbs systematically leave the VP and unite with the inflection in INFL. This is shown by the fact that lexical verbs in French precede sentencemedial adverbs such as souvent (‘often’) or toujours (‘always’) and the negation marker pas: (162)

a.

b.

Louise mange toujours du pain. Louise eats always bread *Louise toujours mange du pain.

Louise ne mange pas de pain. Louise ne eats pas (‘not’) any bread *Louise ne pas mange de pain.

°° For more careful discussion of do-insertion and its role in the interpretation, of the sentence see also chapter 5, section 3.4.2.

The Structure of English Sentences

91

(162a) has the structure in (162c):

(162)

c.

S NP

INFL

VP2 AdvP

VP1

xsoircane hae i

| Louise

ROY

mang-e

toujours

NP

ae du pain

What property distinguishes the grammar of French from that of English? The answer to this question might be related to the nature of the verb or else to that of the inflectional morpheme. One important contrast between English and French is that English verb morphology is relatively impoverished compared to its French counterpart. Column (163a) is the present tense paradigm of the English verb finish, (163b) that of the French verb finir (‘finish’): (163)

a. English finish

1sg 2sg 3sg Ipl 2pl 3pl

I finish you finish he/she finishes we finish you finish they finish

b. French finir (‘finish’) je finis tu finis il/elle finit nous finissons vous finissez

ils/elles finissent

The present tense paradigm for French finir has four different forms (the forms finis and finit are not distinct phonetically), while that for English finish has two forms. These distinct forms reflect agreement (AGR) properties of the verb: finissons, for instance, is the first person plural; finissez is the second person a plural. We will formulate the hypothesis that an inflectional paradigm with and ‘strong’ as zed substantive number of distinct forms of agreement is characteri forms to that strong inflection can attract the verb. A paradigm with few distinct verb.°’ lexical the mark agreement is ‘weak’ and weak inflection cannot attract English. in ies auxiliar Let us return to the contrast between lexical verbs and are, is, was, were), The finite paradigms of be contain several distinct forms (am,

The present which we might invoke to account for the movement of be to INFL. forms, just two only s tense paradigm of the auxiliary have, however, contain points in the book. In chapter 5, 61 We return to the notions ‘weak’ and ‘strong’ at various contrast between strong and the f o s etation section 3.5, we will discuss some recent interpr weak inflection and its role in grammar.

92

The Structure of English Sentences

like a lexical verb. So why is it that perfective have can move to INFL while the lexical verb cannot do so? The answer to this question may well rest in the interpretation of the auxiliary have. Recall” that there is a semantic difference between lexical verbs and auxiliaries: lexical verbs assign thematic roles, auxiliaries such as have do not assign thematic roles. Interpretively speaking, auxiliary verbs are ‘lighter’ than lexical verbs. We might say that the weak inflection of English may not be strong enough to attract the lexical verb but that it is strong enough to attract the lighter auxiliaries. The movement of be to INFL would also be accounted for in terms of its semantic lightness.

2.5.2.2

Auxiliaries and question formation

The analysis proposed above also allows us to account for inversion phenomena in English. Consider the data in (164). (164)

a.

Is Louise writing anything?

b. c.

Has Louise written anything? May Louise write anything?

d.

Must Louise write anything?

In the above examples the auxiliary precedes the subject NP. As a first approximation, we propose that questions such as those in (164) are formed by moving INFL to the left of the subject. Since the auxiliaries can move into INFL, they are carried along by movement: (164)

e.

base structure NP

(AUX) + INFL VP

f. question formation (AUX + INFL) NP

VP

Lexical verbs cannot move to INFL. When INFL inverts with the subject as in (164f) it is expected that the lexical verb will not be able to be carried along by that movement, since the lexical verb remains in the VP. The data in (165) confirm this prediction: (165)

a.

*Writes Louise anything? Does Louise write anything?

b.

*Has Louise to write anything? Does Louise have to write anything?

c.

*Got Thelma invited?

Did Thelma get invited?

In the grammatical sentences in (165) the subject is preceded by an inflected form of the auxiliary do. Here again, the INFL-node has inverted with the © Section 1.4.

The Structure of English Sentences

93

subject in order to form a question. The lexical verbs cannot move out of the VP to carry the inflection. INFL itself must not lower onto V, since that would destroy the question configuration. As was the case in negative sentences, we insert do to carry the stray INFL affix. (165)

d.

base structure

Thelma e.

see anything

Thelma

see anything

Thelma

see anything

question formation

linri-S] f.

do-insertion or do-support

line. Do-es]

2.5.3

Liei-S]

S asa projection of I

After having established more clearly the relation between the node INFL and the verb, let us return to the question we asked earlier:** can the structure of clauses be integrated into the X-bar format in (147b)? We outlined an analysis of sentences in which every S has an INFL node dominating tense and agreement inflection.® We discussed the difference in the distribution of lexical verbs and auxiliaries. The main point of the latter discussion was that lexical verbs cannot leave the VP: hence they cannot precede adverbs such as already or the negative marker not, and they cannot precede the subject in questions. The reader will recall that the sentence structure which we have been developing differs from the X-bar format proposed for phrasal categories in (147b) in that S is not binary branching. Nor does the structure at first sight seem to have a head. In this section we adapt the structure we have proposed to the binary branching format and we show that S is endocentric. Lexical projections such as NP and VP are endocentric: they are projections of the head. It is the head which determines the properties of the projection. NPs are headed by N: the category of the head determines the category of the phrase. The same observation applies to VP, AP and PP. We also saw®’ that other properties of the head determine those of the projection. (166), for instance,” shows that the number of the NP is determined by the number of its head: the bracketed NP in (166a) is singular (cf. the singular verb is), while that in (166b)

is plural. (166)

a. b.

[yp The daughter of the butcher] is/*are coming too. [xp The daughters of the butcher] are/*is coming too.

later sections of this 63 We will return to aspects of the formation of questions in various of do-insertion we on discussi the For 3.2. and 2.2 2.1.1, book, especially in chapter 5, sections refer to chapter 2, section 1.1 and chapter 5, section 2.2.3.

Towards the end of section 2.4.5. In section 2.5.1. In section 2.5.2. In section 2.3.1. 68 Already discussed in section 2.3.1.

64 6° 6 67

94

The Structure of English Sentences

If we want to harmonize the structure of the sentence with the endocentric structure of NPs or VPs we have to identify its head. Consider the following pair of sentences, focusing at this point on the bracketed strings: (167)

a. b.

I hope that I hope for

[Thelma will dance after lunch]. [Thelma to dance after lunch].

In (167a) the bracketed string is a sentence. It consists of a sequence NP (Thelma), INFL (will), VP (dance after lunch). In (167b) the bracketed string is quite

similar to that in (167a), semantically as well as formally. We have already seen that will is inflected for tense; we say that will is finite. To has the same distribution as the auxiliaries but it is invariant for tense: to is a non-finite inflection which is associated with the infinitival form of the verb. The difference between the finite sentence Thelma will dance after lunch and the non-finite sentence Thelma to dance after lunch is determined by the INFL node: will is finite, while to is non-finite. The finite/non-finite contrast has an impact on the realization of the subject. First, when we replace Thelma by a pronoun we see that the choice of finite versus non-finite INFL determines the form of the subject pronoun: she is the nominative case and her is the accusative case of the third person singular feminine pronoun.” Regardless of their different morphology both pronouns, she and her, function as subjects of the bracketed clauses: (167)

a’. b’.

I hope that I hope for

[she will dance after lunch]. [her to dance after lunch].

Second, recall” that external arguments (i.e. the arguments realized as subjects) may sometimes be non-overt (represented by ec for empty category). Here again, the nature of INFL determines the nature of the subject; in English, non-overt subjects are restricted to non-finite clauses:

(168)

a.

*I hope

b.

Ihope

ae d.

Told -®lstold

that ec will dance after lunch.

ec to dance after lunch. him him

that he should dance. ec to dance.

In (168a) hope takes a finite clausal complement and the subject of the complement clause must be expressed overtly. In (168b) hope takes a non-finite clausal complement whose subject is non-overt (ec); the non-overt external argument of dance is controlled by I, the subject of hope. In (168c) tell takes three arguments, realized by the subject (I), the indirect object NP him, and the clausal apo: Ma that he should dance. In (168d) the clausal complement is nonfinite and its non-overt subject is controlled by him, the indirect object. Because the properties of a sentence (‘finite’/‘non-finite’) are a function of the features of its INFL, we propose that INFL heads the sentence. The sentence is a projection of I[NFL], IP The next question is whether we can represent the structure of the sentence in terms of the (binary branching) X-bar format developed for lexical projections. °° We return to the alternation she/her in section 3.7. 7 Section 1.3.

The Structure of English Sentences

95

INFL, the inflection, is the verbal inflectional morphology; it is primarily associated with V which heads VP. We abbreviate INFL as I. We will say that I selects VP with which it forms an intermediate projection, I’. I’ combines with the subject NP to form IP, the sentence. The structure with ternary branching in (169a) is now replaced by the structure with binary branching in (169b):

(169)

a

a.

S

NP

INFL

VP

the teacher

will -ed -§

invite...

he

ees hr

NP

ie

the teacher

I

VP

will -ed

invite...

-S

Tense and agreement inflection end up associated with the verb. This is reflected in (169b): the node I has a local relation with VP; I governs and selects VP. There is also a local relation between I and its specifier, the subject. As seen above, the nature of I influences the realization of the subject. In finite clauses, I agrees with the subject. While selectional restrictions are usually expressed in terms of head-complement relations, agreement relations tend to be expressed on the basis of specifier-head relations.

2.5.4

Las AGR and T (i)”

inflectional Clauses are projections of the inflection of the verb. In English the overt morphoovert only the work, like verb regular a morphology is impoverished. For -s singular person third the is m paradig logy associated with the present tense

ending:

(170)

a.

I work you work he work-s we work

you work they work refine the structure of IP. 71 In chapter 3, section 2, we will further

96

The Structure of English Sentences

In the past tense paradigm, there is no morphological variation with respect to person and number of the subject. Only the tense ending is realized: (170)

b.

I work you work he work we work you work they work

-ed -ed -ed -ed -ed -ed

The inflection of the verb be is slightly stronger, with three distinct forms in the present tense and two in the past tense: (170)

c.

present tense

d.

past tense

Iam

I was

you are she is we are you are they are

you were she was we were you were they were

For finite tenses, we assume that the agreement features, abbreviated as AGR, are instantiated even if they have no morphological reflex. AGR features which are not overtly realized are abstract features. Similarly, even though in English only the past tense corresponds to a morphological ending, we will assume that abstract tense features are also instantiated in the present tense. I thus contains two components: AGR and tense. The question arises whether AGR and T should be amalgamated under I. If we turn to languages other than English we

see that they provide arguments for keeping T and AGR separate. For example, French verbs have the paradigm in (171): (171)

a. 1sg 2sg 3sg_ 1p! 2pl 3pl_

present tense je parl-e I speak tu parl-es il parl-e nous parl-ons vous parl-ez ils parl-ent

b.- past tense je parl-ai-s I spoke tu parl-ai-s il parl-ai-t nous parl-i-ons vous parl-i-ez ils parl-ai-ent

c.

future tense je parl-er-ai I will speak tu parl-er-as il parl-er-a nous parl-er-ons vous parl-er-ez ils parl-er-ont

In the paradigm of the verb parler (‘speak’) in (171) we can systematically isolate tense morphemes and AGR morphemes. For instance, the first person plural forms of the present tense, the past tense and the future tense all terminate in -ons. Past is apparently encoded by the -i- element attached to the root parl-, future tense by -er-. We could decompose the verb forms into a root, the tense morphology and the agreement morphology: (17:1),

adaeroot

nous parl nous parl nous parl

tense

AGR

i er

ons ons ons

The Structure of English Sentences

97

A closer look at the inflectional categories suggests that we should not just postulate one head I, an amalgamation of T and AGR, but rather two separate

heads, AGR and T. If AGR and T constitute separate functional heads, then each will head its own projection. On the basis of the discussion above, IP would

then also be decomposed into AGRP and TP. This hypothesis has come to be known as the Split-INFL hypothesis.” For the time being we continue to use the label I, but the reader should bear in mind that this is a first approximation.” 2.5.5

IP and CP

The bracketed sentences in (172) are constituents of a larger clause: they are subordinate clauses or embedded clauses.

(172)

a. b.

I expect [that [she will dance after lunch]]. [For [her to dance after lunch]] would be surprising.

In (172a) the clause she will dance after lunch is part of the sentence I expect that she will dance after lunch. The finite subordinate clause she will dance after lunch is introduced by that, a word of the category complementizer. In the traditional literature complementizers are referred to as subordinating conjunctions; that introduces finite subordinate clauses. In (172b) the infinitival subordinate clause her to dance after lunch is introduced by for, a preposition which here functions as the complementizer associated with non-finite clauses. In order to represent the structure of the sentence we must include the complementizer, which we abbreviate as C. A complementizer selects a clause, an IP, as its complement. If we adopt the binary branching hypothesis for syntactic structure we represent the relation complementizer-embedded clause as in (173):

(173)

Ce C

IP ee

NP

ee aoe

ie

that for

she her

I’ ee

I

VP

will to

dance after lunch dance after lunch

we offer additional empirical 7 We will elaborate it in detail in chapter 3, section 2, where , arguments for the decomposition of I. of the etation interpr the in tense of role the 73 In chapter 5, section 2.3, we return to sentence.

98

The Structure of English Sentences

C’ is a projection of C. Question formation provides us with additional evidence that there must be a head position to the left of the subject: (174)

a. b.

The teacher will the teacher

Will

invite the student after lunch. invite the student after lunch?

(174a) is a declarative sentence; the auxiliary will is dominated by INFL, a head. In (174b) will has moved to a position to the left of the subject. Let us assume that heads move to other head positions:”* this means that in (174b) will occu-

pies a head position to the left of the subject. In (173) there is a head position to the left of the subject: C. An obvious option is to say that will moves to C. Under this assumption, we predict that the complementizer and the auxiliary to the left of the subject are in complementary distribution. The co-occurrence of a complementizer and an auxiliary to the left of the subject NP should be excluded, as both would have to occupy the same position, C. This prediction is borne out: (174)

cc. d.

*I wonder that will the teacher invite the student. *I wonder will that the teacher invite the student.

Embedded clauses introduced by the complementizers that and for, and questions such as (174b), provide evidence for postulating a head position to the left of the subject. Once we postulate that C is available, X’-theory forces us to postulate a projection, comprising the intermediate level C’, which dominates C and IP, and also the level of the maximal projection, CP. The maximal projection CP would dominate C’ and a specifier, [Spec,CP]. (174e) offers support for the full instantiation of the projection CP. (174)

e.

At what time will the teacher invite the student?

In (174e) the fronted auxiliary will is preceded by the PP at what time. We have to provide a position for the PP. The CP projection associated with the head C will provide such a position: (175

Jena:

Cr ee

ee

PP

C’ a

pants

ee

C

IP pe

ee eee

NP

if oe

I will

the teacher

”* We return to movement in chapter 2, section 1.

ey

VP invite the student

The Structure of English Sentences

99

As was the case for the other projections, the maximal projection, CP, is assumed, even if there is no overt filler in [Spec,CP].

(175)

b.

CP

i

ae Soa

sess0

€

IP divest

NP

odWi

y Vee

that

the teacher

I

VP

will

invite the student after lunch

If C is the head of the clause, then, by analogy with the other structures already discussed (IP, NP, AP, AdvP, VP, PP), the properties of C should determine the properties of the clause. Consider the fillers of C in (176): (176)

I hope [cp that [Thelma will dance after lunch]]. I hope [cp for [Thelma to dance after lunch]]. I wonder [¢p whether [Thelma will dance after lunch]]. I wonder [¢p whether [ec to dance after lunch]]. > elo 2 I wonder [cp if [Thelma will dance after lunch]].

The bracketed CP is an embedded or subordinate clause. That means that it is a clause which is a constituent of another sentence. The embedded clauses in (176) are complements of the verbs of the higher clauses. Recall that the lower clause is embedded in the higher clause, the matrix CP. The verb of the matrix clause is called the matrix verb. The choice of complementizer is related to the type of embedded clause. There (ii) are two dimensions along which complementizers vary: (i) finiteness and complethe , dimension first the to illocutionary force or mood. With respect mentizers that and if introduce finite clauses, while for introduces non-finite in that it (infinitival) clauses. Whether takes a special position in the system to illorespect With clauses.” l) introduces both finite and non-finite (infinitiva and if whether while clauses, e cutionary force, that and for introduce declarativ the of type the s determine ntizer introduce interrogative clauses. The compleme embedded clause. Consider (177a) and (177b):

(177)

a. b.

Iexpect [that Mary will dance after lunch]. I expect [Mary will dance after lunch].

clause, introduced by The embedded clause in (177a) is a finite declarative is not present. As that but , same interpretation as (177a)

that. (177b) has the ative, and as it is parallel in the embedded clause in (177b) is also a declar n 1.1.2. 75 We return to this point in chapter 2, sectio

100

The Structure of English Sentences

interpretation to that in (177a), we will propose that the CP level is projected in (177b) but that the complementizer of the embedded clause is non-overt. (177)

c.

Iexpect [cp 0 [jp Mary will dance after lunch]].

The non-overt declarative complementizer cannot freely alternate with its overt counterpart. If we front the complement clause of (177c) then the complementizer has to be overt: (177)

d.

[cp That /*0 [pp Mary will dance after lunch]] I don’t expect.

The complementizer that cannot easily be non-overt when it heads the complement of a noun (177e): (177)

e.

Our expectation [¢p that /*0 [pp Mary will dance after lunch]].

As a first approximation, we can say that the omission of that is dependent on the presence of a verb to its left.” In the matrix clauses of (176) above there is no overt evidence for the CP projection: neither C nor [Spec,CP] are overtly realized. However, if we assume that the illocutionary force of the clause is always encoded by the C position, then we will be led to conclude that declarative clauses also have a CP projection. We will assume that in matrix clauses declarative C is non-overt. Under this assumption, the sentences in (176) have the structure in (176f): CLS

ae

CEI Cll eal

D5

(Gil

IP lt Sas

NP

l’ as

I

VP

| Vv’

ee

ae

V

CP2

embedded clause

| C2 es

ee

@))

IP olan

NP

l’ —~Saney te

I

I

pres

hope

that

wonder

for if whether

VP

| Thelma

will

Thelma to Thelma _ will ec to

dance after lunch 7 w y!

’° We return to a more precise formulation of the dependency between the verb and the null complementizer in chapter 4, section 3.5.2.4.2. In chapter 6, section 1.2.2, we will consider the question of how the speaker of English learns the distribution of the null complementizer.

The Structure of English Sentences

101

In (176f) we identify the clauses by numbering them. CP2 is embedded in CP1. Recall that a clause which is not embedded in any other clause is called the root clause. Root clause and matrix clause are two terms which refer to the same

thing, the highest clause in the structure. A verb may select a CP complement: certain verbs select an interrogative complement clause (wonder, enquire), others select a declarative (think, hope). For the sake of completeness note that while finite clauses are assumed always

to be dominated by CP,” the CP level is not always present in infinitival clauses. Consider the sentences in (178):

(178)

a. I believe [

"Before breakfast would suit me fine.

the following: There are some speakers who would also admit (217)

d.

e.

attention. %Under the chair attracted the cat’s

. %ln capital letters will have the best effect

are generally judged ungrammatical: On the other hand, the examples below (217766

g.

*Under the chair pleases the cat.

*Under the table surprised the cat.

120

The Structure of English Sentences

3.3.3

Small clause subjects

In the following sentences a small clause functions as a subject:

(219)

a. b. c. d.

Workers angry campaign was Workers angry 45) Mandela free

about the pay is just the sort of situation that the ad destined to avoid. (Safir 1983) about the pay displeases the government. (Aarts 1992:

would pose a greater threat than Mandela behind bars. (Aarts 1992: 45) Mandela behind bars would undoubtedly suit the government.

Note that in (219a) the subject small clause triggers singular agreement on the verb (is versus *are), confirming that the subject of the sentence is not the plural NP workers but rather the small clause workers angry about the pay. The NP workers is the subject of the small clause.

3.4 3.4.1

Expletive subjects It

Above”? we discussed the expletive subject it construed with an extraposed clause.

(220)

a. b.

That Louise resigned surprised everyone. It surprised everyone [that Louise resigned].

In (220a) the external argument of surprise is a clause, a CP. The internal argument is an NP. Compared to (220a), (220b) might at first sight appear to have one additional argument. The pronoun it occupies the canonical subject position and the clause that Louise resigned is extraposed. A consideration of further examples reveals that the clause must be the rightmost element, as it follows arguments and adjuncts:

(220)

c.

It surprised everyone last week that Louise resigned.

We will assume that the extraposed clause is right-adjoined to IP. The expletive subject it functions as the grammatical subject; it is involved in SAI: (220)

d.

Did it surprise everyone last week that Louise resigned?

It fills the subject position but since it has no semantic contribution to make, we call it an expletive element or a dummy. The expletive is a place-holder-for the clausal subject; it is construed with or given content by the extraposed clause. As in the case of the preposed clauses of the Dutch examples in (215), the relation between the expletive and the extraposed clause is indicated by coindexation. (220)

e.

It; surprised everyone [p; that Louise resigned].

* Tn section 1.6.2.1.

The Structure of English Sentences

121

In (221) expletive it is the subject of an embedded clause: in (221a) the sale clause is finite, in (221b) it is non-finite, and in (221c) it is a small clause:

(221)

3.4.2

a. b. c.

Iconsider that {it, is a pity [that she has resigned]]. I consider [it; to be a pity [p; that she has resigned]]. I consider [it; a pity [cp, that she has resigned]].

Existential there

In (222) we illustrate the use of expletive there.”' (222)

a. b.

A woman is working in the garden. There; is a woman, working in the garden.

In (222b) there is the grammatical subject of the clause, as can be seen by the fact that it inverts with the finite auxiliary in (222c): (222)

c.

Is there a woman working in the garden?

There does not play an important role in the interpretation of the sentence. There is not assigned a theta-role; rather, it functions as a place-holder for the logical subject, a woman. The co-indexation between there and the NP shows that there anticipates the NP. We say that expletive there is in construction with an NP; the NP is also referred to as its associate.” There occurs as the subject of a restricted class of verbs expressing existence or coming into existence: (223)

a. b.

*There live three students in that flat. *There work three women in the garden.

For many speakers be is the only verb which can be used with this kind of construction. Some speakers also admit other verbs:

(223)

c. d. e.

There exist several solutions to this problem. There arose a terrible outcry. There appeared a new journal on the market.

on, the Sentences with there introduce an entity into the domain under discussi und universe of discourse. Because such sentences assert or bring to the foregro s. sentence al the existence of certain entities they are often labelled existenti is there pronoun When used as the dummy subject in existential sentences, the often referred to as existential there. the verb. ComThe post-verbal subject in the existential sentence agrees with pare (222b) and (223c) with the following:

(222) (223)

b’. There are two women working in the garden. c’. There exists one major problem.

1 Cf. section 1.6.2.2.

(see section 3.4.1). * Expletive it is in construction with a clause

122

The Structure of English Sentences

The post-verbal subject co-indexed with existential there is usually indefinite:

(224)

a. b.

*There; are the two women, working in the garden. *There; arose the violent storm,.

Definite subjects are possible in list contexts, however:” (224)

3.4.3

There, were [Thelma, Louise, Patsy and Edina], working in the garden.

c.

The subject of weather verbs

We have already™ discussed the use of the pronoun it in the following type of examples: (225)

a.

It is snowing in Norway.

b. c.

It is raining all the time. It is bitterly cold.

In these examples the subject does not contribute much to the description of the event and it can only be realized by the pronoun it. On the basis of subject— auxiliary inversion in the questions in (226) we infer that it is the grammatical subject of these sentences: (226)

a.

Is it snowing in Norway?

b. c.

Is it raining all the time? Is it bitterly cold?

When used as the subject of weather verbs, it is sometimes called a quasiargument. In this use, the pronoun is referred to as weather it or atmospheric it.

3.5 3.5.1

The object NP objects

In the traditional literature on sentence structure, subjects are distinguished from objects. In (227a) Thelma is the subject and Louise is the object: (227)

a.

Thelma invited Louise.

«

In our representation of the sentence Thelma is the NP which is immediately dominated by IP, [Spec,IP]. The object in (227a) is the NP which combines with V to form V’ as in (227b). Recall that we say that the subject is the external argument of the V, realized outside the VP; the object is the internal argument, realized inside the VP. * For further discussion of existential sentences see also chapter 2, section 3.2, and chapter

5, sections 1.4.4 and 3.4.1.

** Section 1.6.3.

The Structure of English Sentences

(227)

b.

123

VP

eet V

NP

V and the direct object have a close relation. A verb assigns a thematic role to its complement. In passive sentences the arguments of the verb are reorganized: the internal argument of the verb occupies the canonical subject position. In the active (227a) Louise is the object, while in the passive (227c) it has become the subject. In passive sentences the external argument may appear optionally in a PP adjunct. In (227c) the verb invited does not govern the NP Louise.” (227)

3.5.2

c.

Louise was invited (by Thelma).

Speculations on the double object construction in English

Consider now the following sentences. (228)

a. b.

Thelma gave the draft to Louise. The draft was given to Louise.

In (228a) the NP the draft functions as the object: it combines with V to form V’. The V’ projection combines in turn with the PP to Louise:

.

(228) c.

Wi

Vv’

give

PP

the draft

to

Louise

d by another NP, In (229a), on the other hand, the NP the draft is precede Louise. (229)

sal

b. c.

Thelma gave Louise the draft.

Louise/she was given the draft. *?The draft was given Louise/her.

chapter 2, section 1.3. °5 We discuss the process of passivization in detail in

124

The Structure of English Sentences

Semantically, and also structurally, (229a) is very close to (228a). If the draft is the object of the verb in (228a) one would like to say that it has the same function in (229a). The draft must be a complement of the verb, for it cannot be omitted:

(229)

d.

*Thelma gave Louise.

If the NP the draft in (229a) can be argued to be an object, on the basis of the parallelism between (229a) and (228a), the NP Louise in (229a) also has object-

like properties: it becomes the subject of a passive sentence (229b) — an option which is less obvious for the NP the draft (229c) — and the NP Louise also occupies the position adjacent to V. Sentences like (229a) are often referred to as double object sentences: one could argue that both the draft and Louise are objects. In the literature, the NP the draft in such structures is called the direct object and the NP Louise is called

the indirect object. This suggests that the NP the draft is more closely (‘directly’) related to the verb than the NP Louise (‘the indirect object’). One representation for the VP in (229a) is that in which Louise occupies the position immediately dominated by the lower V’, and the draft occupies a higher position. (23)

€,

VP

I

we

We Pgh

NP

aise

Vv

NP

a

a

the draft

(229e), however, fails to express the intuition that the draft is the direct object of give, i.e. that it has a closer relation with give than does the indirect object Louise. This intuition leads us to expect that the direct object, as its name suggests, should be governed directly by V, which is not the case in (229e). Conversely, we might perhaps expect that the indirect object should not be directly governed by V, which it is in (229e). An alternative representation has been gaining ground in the recent literature. This proposal tries to capture the intuition expressed in the term ‘double object construction’, that is, the notion that both the NP the draft and the NP Louise are objects of the lexical verb give. Suppose we pursue this path. If we continue to assume that an object must be governed by a verb, then we would be led to the conclusion that a single VP will not be able to accommodate two objects: one head V will govern only the constituent in its governing domain, V’. On this basis one might propose a more complex structure of the VP along the following lines:

The Structure of English Sentences (229

ast

125

VP1 v'1 cdin widen

v1

VP2 ae

Spec

V2 cnet

Ears

v2 Louise

NP

ue

a

In this analysis it is proposed that the verb give projects a double VP: the lower VP is headed by the lexical verb give, the higher VP is headed by an abstract V (V1). The two VPs projected by give are referred to as VP-shells. The VP2-shell contains the verb give, the direct object the draft (in the complement position) and the indirect object Louise (in the specifier position). If we assume that an object is a constituent which is governed by the verb, then in our structure the verb give would have to govern both its objects: in (229f) give governs the object NP. In order to govern the NP Louise, give incorporates to V1:

(229)

g.

VP1 Val oi

eee

V1

VP2 Shean

t.

Spec

ota

Vi2 nihepsecailae- eA

V2 Loutse

|

NP pes

proposal In (229g) give governs Louise. It is important to note that in the

condeveloped here the constituents Louise and the draft in (229a) form one

stituent: the node VP2 exhaustively dominates both NPs.

3.5.3.

Non-NP objects

3.5.3.1

Clausal objects

Clauses can function as objects of V: it]]. (230) a. I expect [cp (that) [ip you will like first]]. there go to b. I prefer [cp (for) [p him

126

The Structure of English Sentences

We have already seen that when the complement clause is adjacent to the verb which selects it, the complementizer may be non-overt. However, when the complementizer is separated from the verb it can no longer be non-overt: (231)

a. b.

Iexpect very much [c *(that) [jp you will like it]. I prefer very much [cp *(for) [jp him to go there]].

We have seen” that verbs like believe can select an infinitival IP complement: (230)

c.

I believe (*for) Mary to be innocent.

In (230c) the insertion of the complementizer for leads to ungrammaticality. When the clausal complement cannot be introduced by the complementizer it must be adjacent to the verb which selects it: (231)

c.

3. 523.4

*I believe very much [jp Mary to be innocent].

DE ZOUseCTs

We saw above that PPs can function as subjects of a restricted class of verbs: (232)

a. b.

After four is a good time to meet. After four would suit me fine.

In (232c) and (232d) the PP is the subject of the clausal complement of consider: (232)

c. d.

They considered [[pp on foot] to be too slow]. I consider [[pp after four] the best time to meet].

For some speakers — hence the % — PPs also function as objects: (233)

a.

%They planned until Christmas in detail.

That the PP until Christmas functions as the object of planned is confirmed by the fact that speakers accepting (233a) also accept (233b) in which the PP becomes the subject of a passive sentence. As is to be expected, speakers rejecting (233a) also reject (233b). (233)

3.6

b.

%Until Christmas was planned in detail.

The subject requirement

We have tried to provide a systematic description of the English sentence, identifying constituents and distinguishing the grammatical functions subject and object. There is an important difference between these two functions, however. While not every sentence has an object, every sentence has a subject. While © Section 2.5.5.

The Structure of English Sentences

127

transitive sentences have both subject and object, intransitive sentences have only a subject. There are no sentences which have an object but no subject:

(234)

a. b. c.

Louise has bought the flat. Louise is dancing. *Has bought a flat.

If the constituent which realizes the external argument of the finite verb does not occupy the canonical subject position of the finite clause, this position is filled by an expletive, as in (235a) and (235b), or a non-overt element, as in (235c):”” (235)

a. b. c.

It, would surprise me [cp; that Louise should resign]. There; is [xp; a woman] working in the garden. [cp That Louise should resign] [ec,] would surprise me.

We have also seen that some non-finite clauses lack an overt subject; such clauses contain a non-overt subject. In (236a) the non-overt subject (ec) is identified or controlled by the matrix subject I. In (236b) there is no controller. We continue to assume that there is a non-overt subject which realizes the external argument of invite. Here, the non-overt subject receives an arbitrary interpretation. (236)

a. b.

I wonder [whether ec to go to the cinema]. [ec to invite Thelma] would be a smart move.

Generalizing the discussion, let us formulate the hypothesis that all sentences have a subject, or, to be more precise, that the position [Spec,IP] must be projected. We postulate a subject requirement: it is a property of the I node that it must be associated with a subject.

3.7

3.7.1

Case

Pronouns and morphological case

Consider the following sentences: (237)

a. b. c. d.

Thelma invites Louise. She invites Louise. Thelma invites her. She invites her.

NPs, Thelma and Louise In (237a) both subject and object are realized as full n, she. In (237c) the respectively. In (237b) the subject NP is realized as a pronou ar

third person singul object is realized as a pronoun, her. The form of the pronoun functions as the feminine pronoun differs depending on whether the ” Section 3.3.1.

The Structure of English Sentences

128

subject or as the object of a sentence: she is the subject, and her is the object. A similar contrast is found with the pronouns I, he, we and they: (237)

e.

Isaw him and he invited me.

f.

We saw them and they invited us.

The different forms of the pronoun are distinct case forms: the subject of the finite clause appears in the nominative case and the object in the accusative case. (238)

Case:

nominative I you

accusative me you

he she it we you they

him her it us you them

For the second person pronoun you and for the third person neuter it, nominative and accusative case are morphologically identical. This is called case syncretism.

3.7.2.

The distribution of nominative and accusative case

As a first approximation, we could say that the nominative case form is used for the subject NP and that the accusative case form is used for the object NP. Further data show that this generalization is not adequate, however. (239)

She/*her invites her/* she. I expect [,» her to invite Thelma]. [For [, her to invite Thelma]] was entirely unjustified. I consider [, her a good candidate for the job].

peo They talked

to her/*she.

In (239a) the nominative form she is used for the subject of the finite clause, and the accusative form her is the direct object. In (239b) the accusative form her functions as a subject of the non-finite complement of expect. In (239c) her is the subject of the infinitival subject clause, and in (239d) her is the subject of a small clause. In (239e) her is the complement of a preposition.

Let us try to determine the distribution of case forms of pronouns in terms of the syntactic structures in which these case forms appear. As a working hypothesis, we assume that all syntactic relations, including case relations, are expressed in terms of local relations such as that between the head of the projection and its complement, or between the head of the projection and its specifier.” All the sentences of (239) have a pronoun subject. The pronoun has a nominative form in (239a) (she), in the matrix clauses in (239b) and (239d) (I), and *8 Sections 2.4 and 2.5.6.

The Structure of English Sentences

129

in (239e) (they). It has an accusative form in the embedded clauses in (239b-—d)

(ber). In (239a), in the matrix clauses of (239b) and (239d), and in (239e), the nominative pronoun is the subject of a finite clause: the INFL of the clause is marked for agreement and tense. (239f) is the structure of (239a):

(239)

£.

IP NP

I’ ee

I

VP

i

| Fi

she

-S

V invite

a

NP her

There are two ways of expressing the interdependence of nominative case and finite inflection. One option is ‘dynamic’: we could assume that the AGR features of the finite inflection assign nominative case to the subject or that the finite inflection case-marks the subject by virtue of the presence of finite AGR features. Another way of looking at the distribution of case forms of NPs is to conceive of case realization not in terms of ‘dynamic’ assignment relations in which the head assigns case to the case-bearing element, but rather in terms of a more ‘static’ checking relation, in which a head checks or licenses the case of an NP. According to the latter option, the nominative case of the subject is licensed by virtue of the specifier—head relation between the NP in the canonical subject position, [Spec,IP], and the finite inflection. In this book we will take the dynamic view of case relations in terms of case-assignment.”’ Regardless of whether we adopt the case-assignment view or the case-checking view, the question remains of how we determine the distribution of accusative case. This case is realized on (i) the complement of a verb, (ii) the complement of a preposition, (iii) the subject of a non-finite clause, and (iv) the subject of a

small clause. Let us start with the object position, [NP,V’]. The case of the direct object is richer intimately linked with the verb. Readers familiar with languages with such in that know morphological case systems such as German or Latin will in instance, For languages the verb determines the case of the NP complement. (ihm, case dative the German the verb helfen (‘help’) selects a complement in in the accusat‘him’ in (240a)) while the verb sehen (‘see’) selects a complement ive case (ihn, ‘him’ in (240b)). (240)

a. b.

Er hilft ihm/*ihn.

‘he helps him DAT/*ACC Er seht ihn/*ihm. he sees him ACC/*DAT

the reader to chapter 5, section 3.5.2. For a brief discussion of Checking Theory we refer

130

The Structure of English Sentences

In the dynamic representation of case relations, the verb could be said to casemark its object NP. In the static checking approach, we can say that a transitive verb licenses the case of its object NP. The case-assignment or licensing relation between V and its object is a local relation: (240)

c.

(oleae

Spec

k

beondeaieen V

NP

helfsehinvite

ihm ihn her

In German, V assigns either dative or accusative. In English, only one case is assigned or licensed by the transitive V, which we refer to as accusative case. The case relation between a P and its complement is analogous to that between V and its object: P governs the complement and P case-marks — or licenses the case of — its complement. (241)

PP Pp’

P

NP

for

her

Let us now turn to the examples in (239b—d) in which accusative case is realized on subject NPs. We give a partial structure for these examples. (242)

a.

IP essi hayeS

penn etheneae

we

Siti ep Sa Vv IP sen

eae

Cor ae

‘es ea V her

to

| invite

NP

ioe Thelma

The Structure of English Sentences

131

IP

b

emmaaiary ohbytld PETeae l CP

ae ek

i

alae

IP

C

Ry

gs

He

ae

ah

oe

NP

lV

ees $8 eat a I

VP

gink-aaia ee le38 Vv

her (2

to

NP

a

An

IP eee NP

I’

shee I

ele VP

[

pecs olVi oy Vv

IP

pDaLk aitrs NP

l’ Blt I

I

consider

her

NP

a good candidate for the job

and Recall that accusative case is associated with either V or P. Let us call V (IP), clause a of subject the is pronoun ve P case-assigners. In (242a) the accusati which is the itself the complement of V. In (242b) it is the subject of a clause (IP)

accusative complement of the prepositional complementizer for. In (242c) the of V.'°° ent complem the itself clause, small a pronoun functions as the subject of 100 For arguments for (242c) see section 2.5.9.

132

The Structure of English Sentences

In each example, the accusative pronoun functions as the subject of an XP which is itself the complement of a case-assigner. We will say that this caseassigner, P or V, case-marks the subject of its complement. This means that the

case-assigner can govern into the maximal projection to reach the specifier position. We have to conclude that IP is transparent for the governing V in (242a) and for the governing P in (242b). To put it differently, the maximal projection IP does not constitute a barrier for case-assignment to its specifier. That government by a case-assigning head is essential for accusative caseassignment is seen in (242d): (242)

d.

*[cp [p she/her to invite Louise]] would be a smart move.

In (242d) the subject of the non-finite clause cannot be assigned case. It does not have a specifier—head relation with a finite I. On the one hand, she/her is not in the specifier position of would, the matrix I. On the other hand, she/her is the specifier of to; but to being non-finite, it cannot license the case of its subject. Nor is she/her governed by a case-assigner: there is no lexical head V or P which governs the specifier of the non-finite clause. (242d) is ungrammatical precisely because the subject NP of the non-finite clause is not in a position in which it can be assigned case. As soon as we insert a case-assigner the sentence becomes grammatical: (242)

e.

[c For [p her to invite Louise]] would be a smart move.

The complementizer for is a preposition and assigns accusative case to the specifier of the transparent IP.

3.7.3.

The Case-Filter

We have examined the case form of pronouns in which case is morphologically realized. The reader might infer that case is irrelevant for NPs. In (243) the NPs Thelma and the girl have the same form regardless of their position: (243)

Thelma has invited the girl. The girl invites Thelma.

For the girl to invite Thelma was unexpected. I expect the girl to invite Thelma. oe I consider the girl the best candidate. poo This conclusion would be too rash, however. If case were irrelevant for NPs, then (243f) would be grammatical with a full NP as the subject of the infinitive:

(243)

f.

*[cp [p The girl to invite Thelma]] would be a smart move.

But just like (242d), (243f) is ungrammatical. Like (242d), the sentence is res-

cued if we insert the case-assigner for: (243)

g.

[cp For [p the girl to invite Thelma]] would be a smart move.

(243f) can also be rescued if we eliminate the overt subject. Recall that the

subject position of a sentence must be projected but that non-finite sentences

The Structure of English Sentences

133

may have non-overt subjects.'*' In (243h) the subject of to invite Thelma is nonovert:

(243)

h.

[cp [p ec to invite Thelma]] would be a smart move.

Apparently, the non-overt subject is not constrained by the same conditions as its Overt counterpart, whether the latter be a pronoun with overt case morphology or an NP with no overt case-marking. Based on the observations above, we formulate the hypothesis that not only pronouns but all overt NPs must be assigned case. With respect to overt NPs, nominative and accusative case are abstract. They do not have any morphological reflex. Nominative case is assigned or licensed by specifier-head agreement with finite inflection; accusative case is assigned or licensed by a governing verb or preposition. We postulate that the grammar contains a Case-Filter which filters out all sentences which contain overt NPs (full NPs or pronouns) that lack

case. (244)

The Case-Filter *[NP —case] where NP is overt

Anticipating the discussion in chapter 5,'°* we can say that an NP can only

be interpreted if it is identified by case. Case renders the NP visible. Case is thus a way of licensing an NP: an NP can only function as an argument of V and saturate a theta-role if it has case. Consider the following examples: (245)

a. b. c.

I wonder whether [jp ec to invite Thelma]. *I wonder whether [jp I/me to invite Thelma]. *I wonder whether [,p Louise to invite Thelma].

In (245b) and (245c) the subject of the non-finite clause is overt. The sentences are ungrammatical because the subject NP cannot be assigned case. Whether is a complementizer, but unlike for, it is not a preposition, i.e. it is not a caseassigner. Hence, the subject position of the non-finite IP lacks case. This means

that the only way to render the sentence grammatical is to insert a non-overt NP say in the subject position: (245a) with a non-overt subject is grammatical. If we (245a) of lity grammatica the then NPs, overt to only that the Case-Filter applies subject follows. Observe, though, that we shall have to admit that a non-overt case.’” of lack its of spite in le like ec in (245a) is interpretab

3.7.4

Locality and case-assignment

subject to locality In this section we will show that case-assignment is also

considerations. '”

101 Sections 1.3 and 3.6 above. 102 Section 1.4.3.

in chapter 4, section 2 and in chapter 5, 103 We return to the nature of non-overt subjects section 1.4.3.1.2. we saw

instance, in section 1.2 14 T ocality relations play an important role in syntax. For saw that locality plays a role we locality on thematic structure; in section 2.5.8,

the impact of in selection.

The Structure of English Sentences

134

In (246a) a pen is an overt NP. By hypothesis, it needs case. The structure of the VP in (246a) is shown in (246b). (246)

a.

Louise writes with a pen.

b.

Hs Vv’ mse ag teeny V 1 ts

(et

Ns

a

Ve

es NP

|

wae a pen

with

The question arises whether it is V or P which assigns case to the NP a pen. Both P and V are case-assigners. P definitely governs the NP; we now have to determine whether V also governs the NP a pen. Recall the locality hypothesis

for selection:'°° a head selects the head of the projection which it governs, and a head cannot select at a distance. The locality condition on selection was interpreted in terms of a locality condition on government. If government of ZP by X

is blocked by the intervening YP in (247)'°° and if accusative case is assigned or licensed under government, then we predict that X cannot assign case to ZP.

(247)

XP x’ a

x

|

7 Y’

dee

on

X stands for V and Y stands for P in (247). X cannot assign case to Z because Y can also do so and Y is closer to Z in the structure. We must consider this minimality condition on government more carefully,

however, in the light of the data on case-assignment. Recall'”’ that expect casemarks her in (248a): (248)

a.

I expect [jp her to invite Thelma].

105 Section 2.5.8. 106 Cf. sections 1.2 and 2.5.8. 107 From section 3.7.2.

The Structure of English Sentences

135

In (248a) expect assigns case to the specifier of its complement, IP: (248)

b.

VP

|

ee

ee

pam

Vv

IP aie ie

NP

i fhe ith ae I VP

expect

her

I

Ores,

If accusative case-assignment is dependent on government, IP must be trans-

parent and V must be able to govern [Spec,IP]. Refining our hypothesis, we say that in (248b) X governs YP and also governs its specifier. This extension is not surprising. Consider a finite clause: there the subject NP is in [Spec,IP]. The subject agrees in its AGR features, person and number, with I. We can generalize the agreement relation between a specifier and the related head and extend it to all grammatical features, represented here as [F1, F2].

(249)

a.

+ xa

x

YP [F1, F2] Spec

fasten

uf

Oe | x

ZP

[F1, F2] Given the Let us assume that in (249a) the features of Y percolate to YP. with its features in agrees Y nt, hypothesis of generalized specifier-head agreeme of the features the share [YP] and YP] specifier. This means that ultimately [Spec,

specifier of head Y. If X governs and assigns case to YP, it can assign case to the and the specifier the of xation YP, which shares the features of Y. The co-inde l promaxima the of rency head may now be used to account for the transpa YP is of specifier the and X jection to case-assignment. The relation between ; still local. ZP. While X can In (249b) X takes a complement YP. The head of YP selects ZP: of er specifi the govern the specifier of YP, it does not govern

The Structure of English Sentences

136

(249) b

XP

Poe

Te

eee |

Spec

Xx’ S

«.

Xx

YP 2

ea

Spec

x? ee

y4

LE. a

Spec

a

Z

By agreement between [Spec,YP] and Y, the head of YP, the specifier and the projection YP share the same features; if X governs YP it can govern its specifier. But X does not govern ZP. The head Y is the closer potential governor of ZP and it is Y that governs ZP. Hence since X does not govern ZP, it does not

govern its specifier.'”® (249b) corresponds to the structure in (249c): in this example the matrix verb

believe cannot case-mark the subject of the finite IP-complement since C and the CP projection intervene:

(249) c.

vP Spec

Vv’ Pa

Pea

V

CP Ue

eee

Spec

C Pe

og

iG

IP ea

nL,

Spec

If pee

ale

ay

I

NP

:

the best candidate

a believe

3.7.5

0

he *him

Case-assigners

We have proposed that V and P assign accusative case. The other lexical categories, N and A, fail to assign case to their complement: (250)

a. b. c.

John envies Mary. John is envious *(of) Mary. John’s envy *(of) Mary.

'®*0 In chapter 2 we examine the impact of locality on movement; in chapter 5, sections 1.6 and 2.3.3 we discuss the impact of locality on interpretation.

The Structure of English Sentences

137

In (250a) the verb envy assigns accusative case to its complement Mary. In (250b) and (250c) the preposition of case-marks the NP Mary. If we omit the preposition the structure is ungrammatical. The preposition of has to be inserted

in order to guarantee that the complement of the N or of the A receives case.!” Note, though, that not all verbs assign case to their complement: (251)

a b.

(252)

She asked the time. She asked what time it was.

*She inquired the time. ae

She inquired what time it was.

In (251) the verb ask is compatible with either a clausal complement or an NP complement. We conclude that ask is a case-assigner (or a case licenser, if we use a checking approach). The semantically analogous inquire takes a clausal complement; it cannot select an NP complement. We may conclude that this is because inquire fails to case-mark its complement. This verb lacks a caseassigning feature in its lexical entry.

3.7.6

Summary

On the basis of the distribution of the nominative and accusative forms of pronouns we have proposed that the grammar of English contains a Case-Filter which regulates the distribution of overt NPs. Case is assigned — or licensed — locally, by virtue of the relation between a head and its specifier or its complement. Nominative case is assigned or licensed by an agreement relation between the subject of the finite clause and the AGR features in I, while accusative case is assigned or licensed by virtue of the government relation between the head and its complement. We have seen that non-overt subjects do not appear in the contexts in which overt NPs occur. As a first conclusion, we assume that they do not need case.

Summary nn

ee

This chapter provides a first survey of the factors determining the structure of the English sentence.

Section 1 The meaning of the predicate plays a major role in the composition of the sen-

nouns tence. Depending on their meaning, lexical heads such as verbs, adjectives, which es, and prepositions assign one, two or three thematic roles or theta-rol e relation are associated with arguments in the sentence (or clause). The one-to-on

terion. between thematic roles and arguments is referred to as the theta-cri

by the noun we refer to 109 For further discussion of the limitations on case-assignment chapter 4, section 3.4.

138 (1)

The Structure of English Sentences Theta-criterion

a. b.

Each argument must be associated with one and only one theta-role. Each theta-role must be associated with one and only one argument.

Theta-role assignment is subject to a locality condition: theta-roles are assigned to arguments in the minimal domain of the theta-role assigning head. As a first approximation, we propose in this chapter that the domain of theta-role assignment of a verb is the sentence. Arguments may undergo movement away from their thematic position, i.e. the position in which they receive their thetarole, towards a sentence-initial landing site. Though verbs are the prototypical theta-role assigners, not all verbs assign theta-roles. A distinction is made between lexical verbs and auxiliaries: the former assign one or more theta-roles; the latter do not assign theta-roles. Though NPs are the prototypical theta-role receivers, not all NPs receive thetaroles. Expletive and quasi-argument pronouns are not assigned a theta-role. To maintain the theta-criterion in its most general form we postulate that in the non-finite clause in (2a), the verb trust assigns its theta-role to a non-overt subject, represented as ec for empty category in (2b): (2)

a. b.

[To trust your friends] is important. [ec to trust your friends] is important.

In addition to the verb and its arguments, a sentence may also contain adjuncts (of time, place, manner, etc.), constituents which modify the clause but which do not receive a theta-role from the verb.

Section 2 The sentence and its constituents are endocentric: they are organized around a central unit, the head. Among potential heads of constituents, a distinction is made between lexical elements and functional elements. Lexical elements are nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs and prepositions; they contribute to the descriptive content of the sentence. Functional elements, such as auxiliaries, articles and conjunctions, do not contribute to the descriptive content of the sentence. The properties of a constituent are determined by the properties of its head. Or, to put it differently, the features of the head percolate to its projection, the phrase. Thus, a head of the category V(erb) heads a projection of the category V(erb)P(hrase), an N heads a N(oun)P(hrase), and so on: (3)

a.

An XP is a constituent headed by X. is a projection of X.

This information can be represented in the tree diagram format: (3)

Dt

XP

Bir pees = Xx

The Structure of English Sentences

139

An examination of phrasal categories reveals that all projections can be represented in terms of a single binary branching system. The schema in (3c) summarizes the X-bar format for projections.

(S)hec

XP specifier

ae X

complement

(3c) is the blueprint for all structures in English (and in other languages). The phrase is a projection of a head. X is the head of the projection XP; XP is the maximal projection, X’ is an intermediate projection. X’ dominates the head X and the complement; the maximal projection XP dominates an intermediate projection X’ and the specifier. The specifier of XP is abbreviated as [Spec,XP]. Adjuncts or modifiers combine with — or adjoin to — the minimal maximal projection XP1 to form a higher maximal projection XP2. XP1 and XP2 are called segments. The complete XP is the combination of the segments XP1 and XP2. The structure resulting from the attachment of a modifier/adjunct to a maximal projection is called an adjunction structure: the modifier/adjunct is adjoined to XP or XP-adjoined. (3)

d.

sadjunct so XP2

specifier

ee xX

complement

The X-bar format defines the local relations of a head, X. Every head enters into two local relations: the head is locally related to its complement and to the specifier of its projection. The locality constraint on grammatical relations restricts possible syntactic relations: it allows a constituent A to enter into a grammatical relation with a constituent B provided A bears a local relation to B. The relation between a head and its complement is characterized in terms of the traditional notion of government: we say that the head governs the complement.

The X-bar format is common to both the lexical projections (NP, VP, AP, AdvP and PP) and the functional projections. Clauses are projections of V aug-

mented by two types of functional projections: IP and CP. The IP level is organized around the inflectional heads corresponding to the verbal morphology (tense and agreement); the CP level encodes the illocutionary force of the sentence (interrogative [+wH] versus declarative [-wH]).

not and Their distribution with respect to the marker of sentential negation

English auxiliaries sentence-medial adjuncts (often, always, never) reveals that

140

The Structure of English Sentences

and lexical verbs have a different distribution. The auxiliaries have, be and do move from their base-position V to I; modal auxiliaries (will, must, etc.) are always tensed and are inserted under I; lexical verbs do not leave the VP. The tree diagrams in (4) show how X-bar theory applies to the major sentence types. (4)

a.

Finite root declarative

Gr C4

G

IP NP

I’ I

VP Vv’

you you b.

will

j

NP

invite invited

Mary Mary

Finite root interrogative

CP Spec

Ce

C

iF NP

»

5 I

VP Vv’

poe to

when when

will did

you you

eae

V

NP

invite invite

Mary Mary

The Structure of English Sentences c.

ic

Finite embedded declarative

Ge

ees. Spec

Re

C’

Br

C

IP ee

ea

NP

I’ ee

ee

I

VP

eet

that that

d.

you you

will

re

Vv

NP

ah invited

Zs Mary

Finite embedded interrogative

CP no

cat

Spec

Ce pits

sg

C

IP ioses (Tete

NP

a

l’ Ba

ee

I

Le

when when

you you

will

[

VE

sh invited

ee

Mary Mary

The Structure of English Sentences

142 e.

Non-finite embedded declarative

GP Picci

adie

Spec

Cc

ie ie,

=

IP

oe

NP

I’ en

a

I

VP

t

bin

eee

V for

f.

you

to

NP

-e

a

Non-finite embedded interrogative

CP es

Spec

Cs neceegsiie

C

IP Laer

eae

NP

ii¢ i eg

[

I

VP

or

Vv when

ec

to

le

ee

NP ~

So-called small clauses, or verbless clauses or tenseless clauses, such as Mary clever in (Sa), are projections of the predicate (here an AP) augmented with a

functional projection of the predicate-related inflection:

The Structure of English Sentences (5)

a.

tas:

Iconsider Mary clever.

b

IP een

eres

NP

ile ie

I

AP

I

Mary

i

Section 3 The traditional notions of subject and object are not primitive notions of the grammar we are elaborating. They are derivative notions which are defined in configurational terms. The canonical subject position is the specifier position of IP; the canonical object position is the NP-position immediately dominated by V’. While the prototypical subject is an NP (cf. (4)), subjects may also be realized _as PPs (6a) or as small clauses (6b): (6)

a. b.

[pp After four] would suit me fine. [jp BBC journalists angry about pay] is the last thing we need.

Finite clauses functioning as subjects (7a) do not occupy the specifier position of IP. Rather, such clauses are IP-adjoined and co-indexed with a non-overt nominal in [Spec,IP]: (7)

a.

That John came surprised me.

b.

IP2

pick bem FLpaiass!23 CP

IP1

pashan NP

that John came;

é¢;

Tanah PE

big

cca

I

VP

-ed

surprise me

144

The Structure of English Sentences

Expletive subjects are pronouns in the canonical subject position which do not contribute to the descriptive content of the sentence. They are not assigned a theta-role by the predicate. We distinguish three types: (i) the existential expletive there, which is in construction with a logical subject (8a); (ii) the expletive pronoun it which is in construction with extraposed clauses (8b), and (iii) weather it, or quasi-argument it, the subject of atmospheric verbs (8c).

(8)

a. There are three women waiting in my office. b. It is strange that they should be there. Coaltsvcold:

The object of a verb may be realized as an NP (9a), a finite clause (9b), a nonfinite clause (9c), a small clause (9d) and — for some speakers — a PP (9e). (9)

I considered the issue seriously.

I consider that this is not a good solution. I consider this not to be a good solution. I consider this a good solution. % They planned until Christmas in detail. Oe While not all sentences have objects, all English sentences must have a subject. Because of the subject requirement, expletive subjects are inserted to fill the specifier of IP. The grammar of English contains a Case-Filter which regulates the distribution of overt NPs. All overt NPs must be assigned case. In English, case is realized morphologically on personal pronouns only: I is nominative case, me is accusative case, and so on. For lexical NPs, nominative

and accusative

case

do not have a morphological reflex; they are abstract cases. The Case-Filter rules out sentences which contain caseless overt NPs (full NPs or pronouns). (10)

The Case-Filter *[NP —case] where NP is overt

Case is assigned (or licensed) locally, by virtue of the relation between a head and its specifier or its complement. Nominative case is assigned by an agreement relation between the subject of the finite clause and the AGR features in I, while accusative case is assigned by virtue of the government relation between a verb or a preposition and its complement. The categories N and A do not assign case. In order to avoid a Case-Filter violation, the preposition of is inserted in their complements: (11)

a.

b. (12)

a. b.

“John’s envy Mary

John’s envy of Mary *John is envious Mary. John is envious of Mary.

The Structure of English Sentences

145

Non-overt subjects of non-finite clauses are in complementary distribution

with overt NPs, leading to the hypothesis that they do not need case. (13)

a. b.

For John to go back would be nice. *For ec to go back would be nice.

Se

*John to go back would be nice. ec To go back would be nice.

(14)

Exercises Section 1 Exercise 1.

Embedded

clauses

Identify the embedded clauses in the following sentences. Classify them according to whether they are finite clauses, non-finite clauses, or small clauses.

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15)

That Louise should have left surprises everyone. The news that Louise has left surprises everyone. | consider Louise an impossible choice. | wonder when they will announce that Louise has left. | wonder whom | will meet at the party. | asked her what to do. The woman whom you will meet at the party is his sister. | need a knife to cut the bread with. | consider that Louise is the best choice. For Louise to have left surprised everyone. 1 consider Louise to be the best choice. When they had announced that Louise had left everyone was relieved. 1am not certain that Louise has already announced that she is going. They all expect for Jim to come back. They arranged for us to meet Bill at the cinema.

Exercise 2.

Arguments and non-arguments

Identify arguments and adjuncts in the following sentences. Sometimes you may not find the distinction easy to draw. Discuss problematic examples.

(1)

a. b.

John has abandoned his family. John and Mary have abandoned their family.

(2)

a. b. c.

John encountered Mary in the park. John met Mary in the park. John and Mary met in the park.

(3)

a. b.

Mary suddenly left the house at four thirty. After dinner, Mary left.

The Structure of English Sentences

146

Soon after her departure, Mary found a job. ae Mary found the job very interesting. Mary found her son another job. John called a taxi.

sed

They called him a taxi. John called him a thief.

Exercise 3.

Argument structure

Discuss the argument structure of the following sets of sentences: (lea: b.

| told John that he should buy the bicycle. | told John to buy the bicycle.

(2)

b.

| expect that John will return. | expect John to return.

a. b.

| want my coffee to be piping hot. | want my coffee piping hot.

a. b. C

| consider that it is rather surprising that Mary has left. | consider it to be rather surprising that Mary has left. | consider it rather surprising that Mary has left.

(3)

ima:

Exercise 4.

Non-overt arguments

Discuss the problems raised by the paired sentences below:

(a)

ras

b.

| have eaten a hot meal. | have eaten.

(2)

a. b.

She is smoking cigars. She is smoking.

(3)

ea: b.

She is writing a letter to her friends. She is writing to her friends.

(4)

a. b.

She is writing a novel. She is writing.

(5)

a.

She drinks a lot of wine. She drinks.

b.

In the above pairs of sentences we see that one argument of the verb apparently can be omitted. When the object is not overtly realized we still interpret the sentences as referring to an activity involving two arguments. For instance, if we omit the object of eat in (1b), we still understand the sentence to mean that ‘I ate something’. There is a relatively small class of verbs in English which allow the direct object to be omitted. Discuss the semantic effect of object omission in the sets of sentences below: (6)

a.

b.

She is expecting an important visitor. She is expecting.

The Structure of English Sentences (7)

a. b.

The teachers kissed the students. The teachers kissed.

(8)

a. b.

The children are washing their dolls. The children are washing.

(9)

a. b.

John and Mary met Jane in the park. John and Mary met in the park.

47

In examples (6)—(9), Semantic restrictions on the implicit object cannot be derived in any obvicus way from the structure. The omissibility of the object as such is not predictable: eat, for instance, allows for an understood object, while devour, which is closely similar in meaning, does not. Similarly, desert allows the omission of the object while abandon does not:

(10)

a. b.

Louise is eating. “Louise is devouring.

(11)

a. b.

Bill is deserting. *Bill is abandoning.

There is an important difference, then, between the implicit subjects of an English nonfinite clause, discussed in section 1.3, and the implicit objects which can be postulated in some examples. Non-overt subjects are not constrained by the lexical properties of the verbs whose arguments they are; the phenomenon is productive in English (and indeed in other languages): given the right configuration, a non-finite verb may have a non-overt subject. But implicit objects are lexically constrained. We will say that a lexical rule allows the object of a certain number of transitive verbs in English to be implicit, while syntactic rules require implicit subjects for non-finite sentences.

Section 2

Exercise 5.

Movement

of constituents

In the following sonnet by William Shakespeare, certain constituents have been moved from an underlying post-verbal position to a pre-verbal position. Identify these constituents. Are they arguments or adjuncts? Are these movements grammatical in modern

English?" Sonnet 12 William Shakespeare When | do count the clock that tells the time, And see the brave day sunk in hideous night; When | behold the violet past prime, And sable curls are silvered o’er with white; When lofty trees | see barren of leaves, Which erst from heat did canopy the herd, And summer’s green all girded up in sheaves, Borne on the bier with white and bristly beard;

English we refer the reader to 1 For some discussion of word-order patterns in earlier chapter 6, section 2.3.3.

148

The Structure of English Sentences

Then of thy beauty do | question make, That thou among the wastes of time must go, Since sweets and beauties do themselves forsake, And die as fast as they see others grow, And nothing ’gainst Time’s scythe can make defence, Save breed, to brave him when he takes thee hence.

Exercise 6.

The internal structure of phrases: VP

Use the do so test to reveal the structure of the VP in the following sentences. Which constituents may be either included in or left out of the VP replaced by do so? What does this tell us about how the do so substitution rule should be stated? ) ) ) ) ) )

John will go to Paris on Tuesday. Louise will write a letter tonight. Thelma will dance after lunch. Thelma will dance. John will speak about linguistics. John will talk to Mary in a few hours.

Exercise 7. X’-theory and the internal structure of the noun phrase Show the internal structure of each NP below by means of a tree diagram.”

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

The picture of John by a famous photographer The student with blue eyes The student of English This student A tall girl The girl with long hair in a mini-skirt The specialist in physics from Germany Their recent ban on shoes with metal tips in school The journey from Paris to Rome on Sunday That girl at the dance last week

Exercise 8.

Verb movement

How can we account for the contrasts below?

(1)

a. b.

Louise is not sleeping well. *Louise sleeps not well.

(2)

a. b.

Louise often sends material to Thelma. “Louise sends often material to Thelma.

(3)

a. b. c.

Women need not apply for this job. *Women need not to apply for this job. Women don’t need to apply for this job.

We examine the nature of the nominal projection again in chapter 4, section 3.

The Structure of English Sentences

(4) (5)

op a.

149

Thelma does not have to write a report. *Thelma has not to write a report.

Thelma did not have John fix the sink.

b.

*Thelma had not John fix the sink.

(6)

a. b.

Thelma did not get invited. “Thelma got not invited.

(7)

a. a

%Louise hasn’t enough money. (British) Louise does not have enough money. (American, British)

Exercise 9.

The structure of the clause

Explain why the following sentences are ungrammatical and modify them so that they become grammatical: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

*l wonder for John to come. *I think for John to come. *That John came. *That will John come? *I think that will John come. *I wonder will that the teacher interview the student. *l wonder if John to come. *l wonder whether John to come. *l want that he leaves immediately. *I believe for her to be the best choice.

| Exercise 10.

The structure of non-finite clauses

Discuss the structure of sentences (1)-(3). Explain why (4) and (5) are ungrammatical. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

| remember | remember | remember *Il remember *l remember

Exercise 11.

him going to school. him never going to school. him not talking to anyone. them talking not to anyone. them talking never to anyone.

Small clauses

es with an abstract IP. Conin the text we propose that all small clauses are sentenc sider the data below: (1)

a. b. c.

| want my coffee boiling hot. | want you in my office at four. *l want you the winner.

small clauses of a certain type: As can be seen in the examples, verbs may select predicate (1a) and with a PP AP an want, for instance, selects a small clause with with an NP predicate. What clause small a predicate (1b), but it does not select sion in the text? problems does this raise for our discus

150

The Structure of English Sentences

Section 3

Exercise 12.

Clause structure

Say why the sentences come grammatical. (1) (2) (3) (4)

below are ungrammatical and modify them so that they be-

*I think that that John is wrong is evident. *We wonder if for Mary to be invited would please you? *They found that she should leave unthinkable. *l consider for someone to leave a party early impolite towards the host.

Exercise 13.

Control

We have seen that a non-finite sentence may have a non-overt subject, ec. This subject is sometimes controlled or identified by another NP in the sentence. Alternatively, ec may have an indefinite or arbitrary interpretation. On the basis of the examples below, and using the concepts and terminology developed in this chapter, try to formulate some of the structural conditions which determine the interpretation of the empty

subject.° 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18)

| want [ec to go to the party]. | promised Bill [ec to go to the party]. | allowed Bill [ec to go to the party]. | threatened [ec not to go to the party]. | convinced Bill [ec not to go to the party]. [ec not to go to the party] would be impolite. [ec to go to the party] or [ec not to go to the party], which is worse? Bill thinks that [ec to go to the party] would annoy Susan. Bill said that Mary decided [ec not to go to the party]. That Mary decided [ec not to go to the party] annoys Bill. The director was urged [ec to obtain more funding]. We urged the director [ec to obtain more funding]. We need a book [ec to study syntax]. Mary arranged with Bill [ec to go to the party together]. | asked Mary [whether ec to go to the party]. | asked Mary [ec to go to the party]. Any attempt [ec to overthrow the government] is doomed to failure. The party’s attempt [ec to overthrow the government] failed.

Exercise 14.

The realization of arguments

In the discussion of the thematic structure of the clause we asked three questions: (1) (2) (3)

Do all verbs assign theta-roles? (1.4) Do only verbs assign theta-roles? (1.5) Do all noun phrases receive theta-roles? (1.6)

What would logically be the fourth question to ask? Discuss this issue in the light of sections 3.3 and 3.5.3. * For a discussion of empty subjects see chapter 4, section 2.

The Structure of English Sentences

Exercise 15.

iy

PP subjects

In section 3.3.2 we discussed sentences with PP subjects: (1)

a. b.

After four would suit me fine. After four would be a good time.

The types of verbs which admit such PP subjects are restricted; be and suit are the most natural: (2)

a. b.

*Before breakfast makes everyone happy. *After four would please everyone.

At first sight, the examples in (3) contradict the restriction imposed on the choice of verbs:

(3)

a. b. c.

After four appears to suit everyone. After four seems to suit everyone. Before breakfast turned out to be the best time for everyone.

Would examples such as (3) lead us to broaden the class of verbs subjects? In your answer you may take into account the examples in paraphrases of (3). What is the argument structure of the matrix verb of in (4)? What is the role of the subject pronoun it in these examples? boldface PP subject in the examples in (4) receive its thematic role?*

(4)

a. b. c.

admitting PP (4), which are the sentences How does the

It appears that after four suits everyone. It seems that after four suits everyone. It turned out that before breakfast was the best time for everyone.

The paraphrases in (4) show that the examples in (3) respect the restriction imposed of on the occurrence of PP subjects: the PP subjects in (3) are actually arguments the to extended be can reasoning this how Discuss (3c). be of or 3b) (3a, suit either following sentences:

(5)

a. b. c.

After four was believed to be the best time to meet. After four was thought to be an appropriate moment. After four was said to suit everyone.

Existential there

Exercise 16. In section 3.4.2 we verbs:

(1) a. b. c. d. e.

There There There *There *There

certain class of indicated that existential there is restricted to a

are three students working in the garden. were three students sick. ep. arrived three more candidates on my doorst . work three students in the garden talked three policemen to the crowd.

expletive subjects in chapter 2, section 3. 4 We will return to the class of verbs with

is2

The Structure of English Sentences

Consider the following examples in the light of the restriction:

(2)

There There There There aoop

appeared to be more people turned out to be a big crowd was believed to exist a need was thought to be no cause

than expected. at the theatre. for more discussion. for concern.

You may also take into consideration the discussion in exercise 153

Exercise 17.

/t as a subject

The pronoun it is ambiguous in the following examples. Discuss. (1)

a. b. c.

It is cold. It appeared to be too cold to drink. It turned out to be too cold to eat.

Consider the use of it in (2), distinguishing expletive it, atmospheric it and referential it (2)

It is very interesting. It is very interesting that she should want to go there at all. It is raining all the time. It seems to be raining. It turned out that John was leaving home at once. It is surprising that John won't stay. It is likely to rain all night. aoop amo

In (2c), (2d) and (2g) you will probably have identified it as atmospheric it. Does the fact that the matrix verb in (2d) and (2g) is not actually a weather verb raise any particular problem? When considering the answer to this question, you may wish to turn to the

discussion in exercises 15 and 16.°

Exercise 18.

Passive and the reorganization of arguments

In the text discussion we say that passivization implies a reorganization of the arguments of the sentence: the object becomes the subject and the subject becomes optional.

(1)

a. b.

The police have arrested John. John was arrested.

On the basis of the following examples discuss the question of whether passivization always implies that a direct object must become a subject:

(2)

a. b.

I believe that John is innocent. It is believed that John is innocent.

(3)

a.

| believe John to be innocent.

b.

John is believed to be innocent.

° For more discussion of the verb types in (2) see also chapter 2, section 3. ° For the class of verbs represented by (2d) and (2g) see also chapter 2, section 1.3.

The Structure of English Sentences (4)

a. b. c. d

153

| believe that John has already left. It is believed that John has already left. | believe John to have already left. John is believed to have already left.

The following sets of sentences seem to have some of the properties of active/passive

pairs: discuss.’ (5)

(6)

a.

It turned out that John was innocent.

b.

John turned out to be innocent.

a. b.

It seems that John has left. John seems to have left.

Exercise 19.

Modification of argument structure

Discuss the following sentences in the light of the discussion of passivization. (1)

a. b.

You should wash your shirt regularly. These shirts wash easily.

(2)

a. b. c.

The enemy sank the ship. The ship was sunk by the enemy. The ship sank.

(3)

a. b.

They rolled the stones down the hill. The stones rolled down the hill.

Exercise 20.

The realization of arguments

_ Discuss the following sentences: a. b. c. d.. e. f.

They *They They *They They *They

considered considered considered considered considered considered

Exercise 21.

seriously that in the garden is the best place to meet. seriously in the garden is the best place to meet. in the garden to be the best place to meet. seriously in the garden to be the best place to meet. in the garden the best place to meet. seriously in the garden the best place to meet.

The Case-Filter

NPs must have case. In our text, we propose that the Case-Filter requires that all overt examples: following the of light the in ter Case-Fil the of Discuss the formulation

(1)

‘*John to be the best candidate was amazing. For John to be the best candidate was amazing. *After lunch to suit everyone is remarkable. SF Ao For after lunch to suit everyone is remarkable. a.

Exercise 22.

NP complements and direct objects

problems they raise for our discusConsider the following sentences and discuss the the object to the subject position. sion of passivization as involving raising of related structures see chapter 2, section 1.3. 7 For more discussion of passivization and

154

The Structure of English Sentences

(1)

a. b.

Mary weighs fifty kilos. *Fifty kilos are weighed by Mary.

(2)

a. b.

This shirt costs fifty pounds. *Fifty pounds are cost by this shirt.

(3)

a. b.

Mary stayed a week at the seaside. *A week was stayed at the seaside by Mary.

(4)

a.

b. (5)

a. b.

Mary married John.

?John was married by Mary. Mary resembles John. *John is resembled by Mary.

Though a verb like weigh is followed by an NP in (1a) this NP does not become the subject in a passive sentence. It would seem that the NP fifty kilos does not function as an object of weigh: rather, it is a measure phrase. Compare (1) with (6): (6)

a. b.

Mary weighed the apples. The apples were weighed by Mary.

In (6) weigh is again followed by an NP, which, this time, becomes a subject in the passive. In (6) the NP the apples is the object of weigh. The NP the apples expresses the THEME of weigh, i.e. the element that undergoes the action or is affected by the action.

General exercises

Exercise 23. The subject of infinitival complements of believe In the text we assign to sentences in which a matrix verb selects an infinitival complement a structure as in (1): (1)

| believe [|p John to be the best candidate].

In (1) the subject of the infinitival clause is inside the IP complement of believe. We assume it can be case-marked by the verb believe. Consider the following examples: they are accepted by many, though not all, native speakers. Discuss the problems raised for the analysis of believe complements: (2)

| have found Bob recently to be morose. | suspect him strongly to be a liar. Amber believes Becky sincerely to be intelligent. | have wanted Mary for a long time to finish that chapter. Jane proved Bob unfortunately to be a werewolf. | believed Nixon incorrectly to be interested in ending the war. | can prove Bob easily to have outweighed Martha’s goat. emoaoop

In the sentences in (2) the subject of the embedded clause is followed by an adjunct with matrix scope. In (2a), for instance, recently may modify found, in (2b) strongly modifies suspect, and so on. To account for this pattern, Postal (1974) proposes that in

The Structure of English Sentences

155

the sentences in (2) the subject of the embedded non-finite clause moves into the object position, [NP,V’], of the matrix verb. This movement is called ‘Subject-to-Object

Raising’. Discuss the problems that such an approach raises for the theta-criterion. For discussion see also Kayne (1985), Wyngaerd (1987), Johnson (1991), Branigan (1992), Koizumi (1993). While some native speakers accept the sentences in (2), they all reject (3): (3)

“I’ve believed there for a long time now to be no solution to this problem.

ae can we differentiate the embedded subject in (3) from the embedded subjects in

Exercise 24.

Arguments for postulating non-overt subjects

Consider the following sentences. In the (a)-variant the non-finite clause has an overt subject; in the (b)-variant there is no overt subject. Consider how, for each paired set of sentences, the data in the (c)- and (d)-sentences may support postulating a non-overt subject. (1)

a. b. c. d.

For John to want his own To want one’s own office Mary wants her/*his own *For Mary to want his own

(2)

a. b. c. d.

For John to behave himself at the party was surprising. To behave oneself at a party is important. You should behave yourself/*himself. *For Bill to behave herself was surprising.

_Exercise 25.

office was surprising. is surprising. office. office was surprising.

The imperative

Consider the following sentences. What problems do they raise for the grammar we have developed so far?

(1)

a. b. c. d. e.

Behave yourself/*herself. Don't try to talk to me like that. Don't you try to talk to me like that. Don’t be too proud of yourself/*herself. Eat your own food.

Exercise 26.

Argument structure and lexical heads

differences between the Discuss the following examples, bringing out similarities and examples which we have grouped together.® (1)

a.

a

The Italians have invaded Albania. The Italian invasion of Albania was atrocious. The Italian invasion was atrocious. Albania was invaded by Italy. Albania was invaded.

Albania’s invasion by Italy was atrocious. Albania’s invasion was atrocious. invasion was unexpected.

samo ao The

NPs we refer to chapter 4, section 3. 8 Bor the difference between clauses and

156

(2)

The Structure of English Sentences The enemy destroyed the city. *The enemy destroyed. The city was destroyed. The city’s destruction The destruction was terrible. pa290p

Mary is conscious of the problem. ois Mary is conscious. John believes Mary. *John’s belief Mary is well-founded. John believes that Mary is innocent. John believes Mary to be innocent. John’s belief that Mary is innocent is well-founded. *John’s belief Mary to be innocent is well-founded. Mary is believed to be innocent. *oa0o0p sa *Mary’s belief to be innocent is well-founded.

Exercise 27.

Whether and if

In the text we adopt the hypothesis that both whether and if are complementizers. Discuss the relevance of the following data for this point:® (1)

a. ’.

| very much doubt whether he can come. Whether he can come, | very much doubt. | very much doubt if he can come. ~ *If he can come, | very much doubt. Tom

(2)

The question whether he can come remains unanswered. Sat *The question if he can come remains unanswered.

(3)

The main question is whether he will accept the offer. *The main question is if he will accept the offer.

(4)

We argued about whether he will come. *We argued about if he will come.

(5)

| wonder whether or not he will come.

Morte *| wonder if or not he will come. Mente er

Exercise 28.

The structure of the noun phrase

Discuss the problems raised by the following data for the text analysis of the structure

of the NP."

(1) Italian

il mio libro the my book

(2)

Italian

questo mio libro this my book

(3)

Early Modern English

this our ould friend

(4)

Early Modern English

these our gifts

” We return to the difference between whether and if in chapter 2, section 1.1.2. We also refer the reader to the discussion in chapter 3, section 2.5.3.1.2.

'© For discussion see chapter 4, section 3.

The Structure of English Sentences

Exercise 29.

157

The structure of the noun phrase

Discuss the problems raised by the following data for the text analysis of NPs." (1) (2) (3) (4)

How important a role will she play in the discussion? So vivid a picture did he draw of the situation that everyone agreed at once. That big a turnout | had not expected. This would be too easy a solution for the question.

Exercise 30.

Diachronic changes

The following are examples from Old English. Identify some of the differences between the syntax of Old English and that of present-day English:'? (1)

and heora an sona his swurd ateah (ASL, XXXI, 468) and of them one immediately his sword drew ‘and one of them instantly drew his sword’ (from van Kemenade 1987: 16, her (2c))

(2)

gif hie him pees rices upon (Parker 755) if they him the kingdom granted ‘if they would grant him the kingdom’ (from van Kemenade 1987: 16, her (2e))

(3)

pest hiera kyning fulwihte onfon wolde (A 878.21) that their king baptism receive would ‘that their king would receive baptism’ (from Bean 1983: 59, her (11))

Exercise 31.

Argument/non-argument asymmetries

Consider the following sentences: in each example a constituent is extracted from the lower clause (as suggested by the empty position [——]). However, the resulting sentences have different levels of acceptability. Using the concepts and terminology developed in this chapter, try to describe the factors that may influence the contrasts. which (Observe that where adjuncts are fronted, the intended reading is the one in reason the for asks why instance, for the adjunct modifies the embedded clause. In (4), consider for the invitation. For the ungrammatical sentence with adjunct extraction, from extracted is adjunct the assume we if better become would whether the sentences the main clause, for instance, if why in (4) bears on wonder."*)

(1) (2)

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

Why did you say [that Mary had been invited [——]]? Whom

did you say [that Mary had invited [——]]?

??Whom did you wonder [whether Mary had invited [——-]]? [——]]? | *Why did you wonder [whether Mary had been invited [——]]? invited had Mary [that Whom did they not tell you [——]]? | *Why did they not tell you [that Mary had been invited [——]]? car the repair should [we that say you did How

section a0: \! For discussion of such examples see chapter 4,

,

in chapter 6, section 263938 12 We will consider some properties of these examples 1.1.5. nt/adjunct asymmetry illustrated here in chapter 2, section

13 We return to the argume

The Structure of English Sentences *How *How *Why *How *Why *Why How *How How *How

did you wonder [whether we should repair the car [——]]? did they not say [that we should repair the car [——]]? did no one say [that Mary had been invited [——]]? did no one say [that we should repair the car [——]]? did you tell no one [that Mary had been invited [——]]? did you never tell me [that | should repair the car [——]]? important do you think [that the decision will be [——]]? important do you wonder [whether the decision will be [——]]? quickly do you think [that they can change the wheel [——]]? quickly did you ask [when they will change the wheel [——]]?

Exercise 32.

Syntactic movement

Using the concepts and terminology developed in this chapter, describe the structure of the following sentences.

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

This book, John does not like.

Not a single paper did he write during the term. To which university did you say that Mary was going? You should proof-read every night three complete pages of your original text. A letter arrived last night which had been posted two months ago. So vivid a description of the place | have never seen. So vividly did he describe the accident that we would always remember his account.

Exercise 33.

Word-order and word-order variation in English

Using the concepts and terminology introduced in this chapter, discuss the distribution of the underlined constituents in the following sentences.

(1)

Mr Gresham was now an embarrassed man and though the world did not know it, or at any rate, did not know that he was deeply embarrassed, he had not the heart to throw open his mansion and park . . . (Anthony Trollope (1858), Dr Thorne; Wordsworth Classics 1994, 7)

(2)

It can hardly be expected that anyone will consent to go through with a fiction that offers so little of allurement in its first pages; but twist it as | will | cannot do otherwise. (Anthony Trollope (1858), Dr Thorne; Wordsworth Classics 1994, 15)

(3)

Roger Scatcherd had also a reputation . . . (Anthony Trollope (1858), Dr Thorne; Wordsworth Classics 1994, 17)

(4)

Relations she would undoubtedly have had none, had she been left to live or die as a workhouse bastard. (Anthony Trollope (1858), Dr Thorne; Wordsworth Classics 1994, 22)

(5)

He had been before pure bachelor; not a room in his house had been comfortably furnished; he at first commenced in a makeshift sort of way, because he had not at his command the means of commencing otherwise . . . (Anthony Trollope (1 858), Dr Thorne; Wordsworth Classics 1994, 30)

(6)

Before the reader is introduced to the modest country medical practitioner who is to be the chief personage of the following tale, it will be well that he should be

The Structure of English Sentences

15?

made acquainted with some particulars as to the locality in which, and the neighbours among whom, our doctor followed his profession. (Anthony Trollope (1858), Dr Thorne; Wordsworth Classics 1994, 1) (7)

Child as she was, she-understood the joke. (Anthony Trollope (1858), Dr Thorne; Wordsworth Classics 1994, 35)

(8)

The characters and situations in this work are wholly fictional and imaginary, and do not portray and are not intended to portray any actual persons or parties.

(Raymond Chandler (1939), The Big Sleep; Penguin edn 1948, 5) (9)

| presume they both had, and still have, all the usual vices. (Raymond Chandler (1939), The Big Sleep; Penguin edn 1948, 18)

(10)

Genuine journalist he may be — but he is a phoney witness. (Colin Dexter (1996), Death is Now My Neighbour, Pan edn 1997, 126)

(11)

Whilst the guest night was still in progress, whilst still the port and Madeira were circulating in their time-honoured direction, an over-wearied Morse had decided to retire comparatively early to bed, where almost unprecedentedly he enjoyed a deep, unbroken slumber until 7.15 the following morning, when gladly would he have turned over and gone back to sleep. (Colin Dexter (1996), Death is Now My Neighbour, Pan edn 1997, 155)

Exercise 34.

Discontinuous constituents

in the discussion of extraposition in section 2.1.9 we showed that noun phrases may be broken up as a result of extraposition. In (1b) the subject is discontinuous.

(1)

a. b.

Awoman who sells second-hand books came here yesterday. A woman came here yesterday who sells second-hand books.

Describe the discontinuous constituents in the following examples:

(2)

a. b.

All the girls have bought the book. The girls have all bought the book.

(3)

a. b.

Both her sons died in the war. Her sons both died in the war.

up. The In (2b) and in (3b) the NPs all the girls and both her sons have been split This sons). (girls, modify they noun quantifiers all and both are separated from the floating are both and a// float; quantifier as literature phenomenon is referred to in the

quantifiers."

Exercise 35.

Syntax and register variation (1)

the author reproduces Consider the italicized sections in the following extracts in which ed in this chapter, develop s concept the and ogy terminol some dialogue. Using the extracts: the of es properti c syntacti discuss the

(1)

yet’. He patted a stomach ‘Sorry to keep you, need the workout, didn’t expect you

office with pictures of black that showed no signs of flab and led the way to a small

2.1. 14 We return to quantifier float in chapter 2, section

160

The Structure of English Sentences athletes round the walls. He was a well-set-up Afro-Caribbean, perhaps in his late thirties, handsome, a spring in his step, his manner easy. ‘Get you something? Soft drink, no alcohol here. Fine place, eh? Had to knock a few heads together before the council said yes to it. Who'll use it, some of ‘em said, but the youngsters, a lot of ‘em are in the pool every night, and we’ve had to put up an advance booking list for the ring. We got a Golden Gloves winner comin’ out of here, that'll shake ’em.’ (Julian Symons (1996), A Sort of Virtue; Pan edn 1997, 124-5)

(2)

Bannock’s nostrils widened, he gave an enormous snort. ‘Layman’s dead. Told you about him — doctor treated the Calendars — all the family — friendly with them. This is Layman’s brother, younger brother — several years younger — close to Layman — old man now but still got all his marbles —’ Allen Pitcombe found the irritation unbearable. ‘Bernard, I’m happy to know Dr Layman’s brother is sane, but what is the point you’re making?’ Bannock glared. ‘Happened in the sixties — doctor certified a young boy — mentally unstable — put in an institution — Surrey, a place near Guildford. Boy's name was Calendar.’ (Julian Symons (1996), A Sort of Virtue; Pan edn 1997, 140)

(3)

‘Tried to make it look like an accident, not much doubt it was deliberate. Just look at the back and side of the car, where it’s scraped, reckon he was pushed off the road.’ Catchpole dutifully looked, nodded. ‘Happened around nine thirty, just getting dark, nobody to see, reckon our client knew the area, picked his place. Drove on a yard or two after giving a nudge to this Ford Orion, then came back, mark up the road where he stopped. Might still have been an accident, you're saying? Afraid not. Victim’s badly shaken up,... Our client opens the passenger door, says, “Very sorry, went out of control didn’t you, not my fault, but let me help,” or something similar. Leans over, applies pressure to the right spot, carotid artery, does the trick. That's what our forensic god reckons happened. Client hops back into his car, probably stolen, goes off without saying good-bye.’ Three cars had passed while he was talking. (Julian Symons (1996), A Sort of Virtue; Pan edn 1997, 158)

(4)

‘Won't offer you a smoke. Or a drink for that matter. Know you don’t usually drink with suspects.’ He darted’a sharp glance at Dalgleish to see his reaction, but receiving no comment, he established his pipe with a few vigorous sucks and began to talk. ‘Won't waste your time saying what an appalling thing this is. Difficult to believe really. Still, someone killed her. Put his hand round her neck and throttled her. Terrible for Mrs. Maxie. For the girl, too, of course, but naturally | think of the living. Stephen called me in at about seven-thirty. No doubt the girl was dead, of course. Had been for seven hours, as far as | could judge. The police surgeon knows more about that than me. Girl wasn’t pregnant.’ (P. D. James (1962), Cover Her Face; Penguin edn 1989, 101)

As can be seen, the extracts above reproduce informal or casual language use. The register of casual informal English has some properties that set it apart from other types of usage or registers.

Exercise 36.

Syntax and register variation (2)

Using the concepts and terminology developed in this chapter, describe the syntactic properties which set the language of the following text apart from everyday English.

The Structure of English Sentences

161

Body Scrub exfoliating This fragrant body scrub has been specially formulated to help refine the skin’s texture and appearance. Exfoliating beads will help remove surface impurities and dead skin cells while seaweed extracts help tone. Leaves the skin feeling soft, smooth and revitalised. Directions Massage over your body in the shower or bath concentrating on problem areas.

Rinse well. Avoid contact with eyes. (The Boots Company plc, Nottingham, England)

The text illustrated above is an informative text found on a commercial product. The text belongs to a specific register, or specialized use of the language for a particular purpose. As can be observed, the grammar of special registers may differ from that of everyday language.

Exercise 37.

Syntax and register variation (3)

Selecting an English newspaper of your choice, discuss some of the syntactic properties of newspaper headlines. lf you have access to newspapers in other languages, compare their headlines with English newspaper headlines. Headlines belong to a specific register, or specialized use of the language for a . particular purpose. The register of headlines is sometimes referred to as ‘headlinese’ of that from differ may registers special of As you will no doubt observe, the grammar ‘everyday language. in chapter 6. We will discuss some aspects of register-related syntactic variation

Exercise 38.

Syntax and register variation (4)

es that set it off from Consider the following recipe text; identify the syntactic properti y everyda spoken English:

Moules escargot Ingredients per serving 1 mussel platter

100g/3+ oz butter 2 garlic cloves, crushed 1 tablespoon chopped fresh parsley splash of Pernod salt and pepper wedge of lemon, to serve e for in a bowl and leave at room temperatur Cut the butter into small pieces, place using her d and seasoning and mix toget 30 minutes. Add the garlic, parsley, Perno refrigerator and dot with the flavoured the from r a fork. Take the mussel platte a lemon for three minutes. Serve at once, with butter, then lace under a hot grill wedge.

The Structure of English Sentences

162

(From Denis Blais and André Plisnier (1996), Belgo Cookbook, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Reproduced in Observer Sunday Review, ‘Close-up with the Mussel Men’, 2.3.1997, p. 45, col. 3)

Exercise 39.

Gapping and constituency

Consider the examples in (1), which illustrate the application of a rule of ellipsis referred to as gapping. (1)

a. b.

John reads The Independent and Sue reads The Guardian. John reads The Independent and Sue The Guardian.

Gapping involves the co-ordination of two constituents or conjuncts; the second conjunct contains an empty slot (a gap) corresponding to some element in the first constituent. In (1b) the gap in the second conjunct corresponds to the verb reads. (1)

c.

John reads The Independent and Sue [reads] The Guardian.

Identify the category of the gapped constituent in (2): (2)

Mary went to London in 1997 and George in 1994.

On the basis of (1b) and (2) we could argue that the gapped constituent projection of V. Would this assertion be compatible with the following data? answer this question you should first identify the gapped material and then whether it is a constituent, i.e. whether the gapped material is exhaustively by one node. 3) 4) 5) 6)

(7) (8) (9) (10)

is a V or In order to determine dominated

Mary will buy a Mercedes and George a Volkswagen Golf. Mary has bought The Guardian and Jane The Independent. John wants to try to write a play and Mary a short story. Paul Schachter has informed me that the basic order in Tagalog and related languages is VOS; Ives Goddard that the unmarked order in Algonkian is OVS; and Guy Carden that the basic order in Aleut is OSV. (from Ross 1970: 250) Time believes Agnew to have been guilty and Newsweek Nixon. (from Sag 1980: 274) Arizona elected Goldwater senator, and Pennsylvania Schweiker. (from Jackendoff 1971: 74) Jane sometimes beats her husband, and Ted his wife. (adapted from Jackendoff 1971: 23) Some Republicans want Ford to run for the Presidency in 1976, and others Reagan. (from Kuno 1976: 307)

Exercise 40.

Right node raising

Consider text example (82), repeated here as (1) for the reader’s convenience. In this example, the NP on the extreme right-hand edge of the sentence, epic poetry, functions as the object of two different verbs, writes and recites. (1)

Louise writes, and Thelma recites, [epic poetry].

Yet, the theta-criterion requires that each argument be associated with one and only one theta-role. If epic poetry is the object of both write and recite, isn’t the theta-criterion violated? How could the theory of empty categories enable us to avoid such a violation?

The Structure of English Sentences

Exercise 41.

Adjunction and the NP

In the discussion structure in (1b):

in section 2.4.2 we proposed

(1)

a.

these students of English from Paris

b

NP ae

touiins:

163

that an NP such as (1a) has the

Base

Spec

N’ RE

OE

TO

N’

PP

oe

N these

PP.

ley

—

from Paris

If we assume, though, as suggested in section 2.4.5, that all adjuncts are XP-adjoined, then we should replace (1b) by (1c).

NP2

(1) ¢. oy

al

ey

PP

NP1 Nile Thovata Spec

N’

re N these

mis

PP

aa

from Paris

What problems are raised for this representation by the following example?

(1)

d.

I like these students of English from Paris more than those ones.

In chapter 4 we reconsider the structure of the NP.

Exercise 42.

Noun phrases and adjunction

r such as quickly in (1) is a VPIn section 2.4.5 we proposed that a pre-verbal modifie adjoined constituent.

(1)

deterioration of the situation. The minister will quickly intervene to prevent a

reasonable that analogous preIf pre-verbal modifiers are VP-adjoined, then it seems of the following examples, basis the On nominal modifiers should also be NP-adjoined. which we elaborated in re structu NP the for matic show how this assumption is proble section 2.4.2.

164

The Structure of English Sentences

2 A quick intervention was desirable. 3 The minister’s quick intervention was unexpected. 4 A careful analysis of the data is needed. i) John’s careful analysis of the data revealed many problems. 6)ed This careful analysis of the data deserves praise. ~ aN On the basis of the examples above, and assuming that pre-nominal modifiers are NPadjoined, we must conclude that determiners, possessives and demonstratives cannot

occupy [Spec, NP]."°

Exercise 43.

Lexical verbs and auxiliaries

On the basis of their distributional properties discuss the status of the boldfaced verbs in the following examples: (1)

a. b. c. d.

| have to do this. Do | have to do this? | always have to do this. | don’t have to do this.

(2)

a. b. c. d.

| had my students write an essay on verbs. | didn’t have my students write an essay on verbs after all. Did you have your students write an essay on verbs? | always have my students write an essay on verbs.

In (1) have has an interpretation close to that of the modal auxiliary must. On the basis of the distributional criteria developed in this chapter, show that must in (3) is an auxiliary. (3)

| must do it.

Would this semantic resemblance between have in (1) and must in (3) justify treating have as an auxiliary? In (2) the interpretation of have is close to that of make in (4): (4)

| made my students write an essay on verbs.

Have in (2) and make in (4) are called causative verbs: their subject causes an event to take place (here ‘the students write an essay on verbs’). We concluded from the examples in (1) and (2) that verbs may have dual status in a given language. Perfective have in (5a) is an auxiliary; possessive have in (5b), modal have in (1) and causative have in (2) above are lexical verbs. (5)

a. b.

| haven't written any essays on verbs. | don’t have enough time.

What is the status of have in (6)? (6)

a. b om d.

We always have a great time. | never have a bath in the morning. | always have too much work to do. %A circle hasn't any corners. (formal British English)

'S We will reconsider the structure of the NP in chapter 4, section 3.

The Structure of English Sentences

165

In (7) the verb get is quite similar in meaning to be. On the basis of a comparison with the syntactic properties of have in the examples in (1) and (2), decide whether the semantic similarity between have and get justifies treating get as an auxiliary.

(7)

a. b. c. d.

John got arrested for theft when he was young. John often got arrested for theft when he was young. Did John get arrested for theft when he was young? John didn’t get arrested for theft.

Exercise 44.

Copulas: auxiliaries or lexical verbs?

The boldfaced verbs in the examples below are copular verbs; they relate a subject NP and a predicate. On the basis of examples of your own, decide whether these verbs have the status of lexical verbs or that of auxiliaries. (1) (2) (3) (4)

John John John John

seems very happy. got very worried. became very worried. appeared very reluctant to reply.

Exercise 45.

Small clauses

In the text we assigned to the small clause complement in (1a) the analysis in (1b):

(1)

a. b.

[heard him leaving the main building. [ip him [)] [ve leaving the main building]].

same structure be In this example, the verb hear takes an IP complement. Would the appropriate for the boldfaced string in (2)? (2)

| saw three books containing long bibliographies.

The following data may help you along in the discussion. 1 saw him leaving the main building. Did you see it too? you see them too? | saw three books containing long bibliographies. Did

(3)

a. b.

(4)

a b.

*It was him leaving the main building that | saw. that we saw. It was three books containing long bibliographies

(5)

a. b.

ia. *We got him leaving the building sent to Austral es sent to Australia. graphi biblio long ning contai We got three books

(6)

a b.

spectacle. Him leaving the building was/*were a terrible sold last night. were/*was bibliographies Three books containing long

l analysis is appropriate for the relevant You will probably conclude that while the clausa containing long

(2) the string three books string in (1a) it is less so for that in (2). In that the plural N books is its head and that ting bibliographies has NP properties, sugges is a post-nominal modifier like the PP in (7): the string containing long bibliographies (7)

hies. | saw three books with long bibliograp

there.) Felser (1995), and the references cited (See Akmajian (1977), Reuland (1983),

166

The Structure of English Sentences

Exercise 46.

Ellipsis

Consider the sentences in (1): (1)

a. b. c.

Jane will buy the book if Mary will. Jane didn’t go there but Mike did. Matt might be going to Australia and George might too.

In each of the examples in (1), the VP in the second clause is missing. It is interpreted as identical to the VP in the first clause: thus (1a) is interpreted as (1a’). The phenomenon illustrated in (1) is referred to as VP-ellipsis. (1)

a’.

Jane will buy the book if Mary will buy the book.

On the basis of examples (2)-(4) describe the syntactic environments in which VPellipsis is acceptable and those in which it is not. In the discussion you should focus your attention on the element which precedes the ellipsis site. For discussion see Napoli (1985), Lobeck (1995), Potsdam (1997).

(2)

a. b. c.

(3)

John has not written the text yet but he will. pe er John has not written the text yet but he definitely will. c. *John has not written the text yet but he will definitely.

(4)

a. b.

I'll try the “I'll try the I'll try the (adapted

soup soup soup from

if | must. if | must absolutely. if | absolutely must. Potsdam 1997: 534, his example (6))

John has not written the text yet but he probably will. *John has not written the text yet but he will probably.

Bibliographical notes Introductory texts The following textbooks offer more detailed discussion of the theoretical points developed in this chapter: theta theory, case theory and phrase structure theory.

Haegeman, Liliane (1994) Introduction to Government and Binding Theory, Oxford: . Blackwell. Ouhalla, Jamal (1994) Transformational Grammar, London: Arnold. Radford, Andrew (1988) Transformational Grammar, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Radford, Andrew (1997) Syntactic Theory and the Structure of English. A Minimalist Approach, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Riemsdijk, Henk Van and Edwin Williams (1986) Introduction to the Theory of Grammar, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Roberts, Ian (1997) Comparative Syntax, London: Arnold.

The Structure of English Sentences

167

Specialized articles and sources of examples Aarts, Bas (1992) Small Clauses in English, Amsterdam: De Gruyter. Akmajian, Adrian (1977) ‘The complement structure of perception verbs in an autonomous syntax framework’, in Peter Culicover, Tom Wasow and Adrian Akmajian (eds) Formal Syntax, New York: Academic Press, 427-60. ROH peed and Audrey Li (1989) ‘Scope and constituency’, Linguistic Inquiry, 20,

Baker, Carl L. (1971) ‘Stress level and auxiliary behavior in English’, Linguistic Inquiry, 2, 167-81. Baker,

Mark

(1997)

‘Thematic

is Elements of Grammar. -138. Baltin, Mark

(1984)

roles and

syntactic

structure’,

in Liliane

Haegeman

A Handbook of Generative Syntax, Dordrecht: Kluwer,

‘Extraposition

rules and discontinuous

constituents’,

Linguistic

Inquiry, 15, 157-63. Bean, Marian (1983) The Development of Word-Order Patterns in Old English, London:

Croom Helm. Branigan, Philip (1992) ‘Subjects and Complementizers’, Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation. Bresnan, Joan (1970) ‘On complementizers: toward a syntactic theory of complement types’, Foundations of Language, 6, 297-321. Campbell, Richard (1991) ‘Tense and agreement in different tenses’, Linguistic Review, 8, 159-84. Chao, Wynn (1996) On Ellipsis, New York: Garland. Chomsky, Noam (1970) ‘Remarks on nominalizations’, in Roderick Jacobs and Peter Rosenbaum (eds) Readings in English Transformational Grammar, Waltham, MA: Ginn. (Also in Chomsky, Noam (1972) Studies on Semantics in Generative Grammar, The Hague: Mouton.) Emonds, Joseph (1970) ‘Root and Structure Preserving Transformations’, Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation, distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club. _ Felser, Claudia (1995) ‘The Syntax of Verbal Complements. A Study of Perception Verbs in English’, University of Géttingen: dissertation. Guéron, Jacqueline (1980) ‘On the syntax and semantics of PP extraposition’, Linguistic Inquiry, 11, 637-78. Linguistic Guéron, Jacqueline and Robert May (1984) ‘Extraposition and Logical Form’, Inquiry, 15, 1-31. 2, 21-35. Jackendoff, Ray (1971) ‘Gapping and related rules’, Linguistic Inquiry, ed by the distribut Mimeo, ntion, X’-Conve the to tion Jackendoff, Ray (1974) Introduc Club. cs Linguisti ty Indiana Universi , Cambridge, MA: MIT Jackendoff, Ray (1977) X’ Syntax: A Study of Phrase Structure Press. Journal of LinguisJaworska, Ewa (1986) ‘Prepositional phrases as subjects and objects’, re. tics, 22, 355-75. ge and Linguistic Theory, 9, Johnson, Kyle (1991) ‘Object positions’, Natural Langua : ' 577-636. Branching, Dordrecht: Foris. Kayne, Richard (1984) Connectedness and Binary , in Jacqueline Guéron, HansKayne, Richard (1985) ‘Principles of particle constructions’ tical Representation, Dordrecht: Georg Obenauer and Jean-Yves Pollock (eds) Gramma .

Foris, 101-40 Morphological Case in the History of ~ Kemenade, Ans van (1987) Syntactic Case and ze English, Dordrecht: Foris. hypothesis >in Jonathan VP split the and ent agreem ‘Object (1993) Koizumi, Masatoshi 18. Papers

Working Papers in Linguistics David Bobaljik and Colin Phillips (eds) MIT

MA: MIT, 99-148. on Case and Agreement 1, Cambridge,

168

The Structure of English Sentences

Kuno, Susumo (1976) ‘Gapping: a functional analysis’, Linguistic Inquiry, 7, 300-9. Larson, Richard (1988) ‘On the double object construction’, Linguistic Inquiry, 19, 335-91. Larson, Richard (1990) ‘Double objects revisited: reply to Jackendoff’, Linguistic Inquiry, 21, 589-632.

Lobeck, Anne (1995) Ellipsis: Functional Heads, Licensing, and Identification, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Muysken, Pieter (1981) ‘Parametrizing the notion head’, Journal of Linguistic Research, 2, 57-75. Napoli, Donna J. (1985) ‘Verb phrase deletion in English: a base-generated approach’, Journal of Linguistics, 21, 281-320. Postal, Paul (1974) On Raising, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Potsdam, Eric (1997) ‘NegP and subjunctive complements

in English’,

Linguistic

Inquiry, 28, 533-41.

Reuland, Eric (1983) ‘Governing ing’, Linguistic Inquiry, 14, 101-36. Ross, John (1970) ‘Gapping and the order of constituents’, in Manfred Bierwisch and Kurt Heidolph (eds) Progress in Linguistics, The Hague: Mouton, 249-59. Safir, Ken (1983) ‘On small clauses as constituents’, Linguistic Inquiry, 14, 730-5. Sag, Ivan (1980) Deletion and Logical Form, New York: Garland. Stowell, Tim (1981) ‘Origins of Phrase Structure’, Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation. Stowell, Tim (1982) ‘Subjects across categories’, Linguistic Review, 2, 285-312. Stuurman, Frits (1985) X-bar and X-Plain. A Study of X-bar Theories of the Phrase Structure Component, Dordrecht: Foris. Stuurman, Frits (1991) ‘If and whether: questions and conditions’, Lingua, 83, 1-41. White, Lydia (1989) Universal Grammar and Second Language Acquisition, Amsterdam: Benjamins. Williams, Edwin (1983) ‘Against small clauses’, Linguistic Inquiry, 14, 287-308. Wyngaerd, Guido van den (1987) ‘Object shift as an A-movement rule’, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 11, Cambridge, MA: MIT.

2

Movement and Locality

0

Aim and scope of this chapter

In this chapter we consider the distribution of the constituents of a sentence, concentrating on the fact that a constituent may occupy a number of distinct positions in the structure, depending on the type of sentence. For instance, while the direct object of an active verb may occupy a VP-internal position in a declarative sentence, it may also be shifted leftward to a position preceding the subject. In a passive sentence, the direct object seems to become the subject. We will examine the relations between the various positions that a constituent may occupy in a sentence. One principle that will again be shown to play a part in the distribution of syntactic elements is the principle of locality, which says that syntactic relations ~ must be established in terms of minimal local relations. We have already examined the impact of locality on the assignment of thematic roles, on selection”

and on case-assignment.**

1

Movement

e ee e ee e ee

1.1

Questions

1.1.1 1.1.1.1

Preliminary description Direct questions in English

only occasionSo far, we have mainly discussed declarative sentences and have structure ally referred to interrogative sentences. In this section we return to the s: example of English interrogative sentences. Consider the following Chapter 1, section 1.2. Chapter 1, section 2.5.8. 3 Chapter 1, section 3.7.4. 1

ps

locality on interpretation. In chapter 6, 4 In chapter 5 we will also discuss the impact of locality constraints on movement certain of section 4.2, we will show that the implementation

may vary cross-linguistically.

170

Movement and Locality

Cat b. c. d. (2)

Thelma will Will Thelma Thelma met Did Thelma

meet Louise meet Louise Louise after meet Louise

after lunch. after lunch? lunch. after lunch?

a.

Whom will Thelma meet after lunch?

b.

Whom is Thelma meeting after lunch?

c. d.

Whom has Thelma met after lunch? Whom did Thelma meet after lunch?

(1a) is a declarative root sentence.° (1b) is an interrogative root sentence; more precisely, it is a yes/no question: the answer to questions of this type is either yes or no. We have already discussed the formation of yes/no questions:° the inflected auxiliary is moved to the left of the subject (1b) or, if there is no auxiliary present (1c), the finite inflection moves to C and is supported by the auxiliary do (1d). In English, root interrogatives are characterized by I-to-C movement. (2) illustrates another type of question, often referred to as a constituent question or wh-question. English constituent questions begin with an interrogative constituent such as whom in (2). Other interrogative constituents are what, where, when, why, and so on. Recall that because the typical interrogative elements in English often begin with wh- we call them wh-constituents or whphrases. The answer to constituent questions provides information which completes the sentence; it replaces an interrogative phrase in the question by an informative constituent. For instance, an appropriate answer to each of the questions in (2) would be: Louise. This NP would provide the constituent corresponding to the sentence-initial interrogative constituent whom. In the examples in (2), one argument of the transitive verb meet is realized by the subject NP Thelma. The second argument of the verb is realized as the constituent whom, the interrogative element. This constituent occupies an initial position. In (2) the constituent whom is the internal argument of meet: we would therefore expect it to occupy the object position, i.e. the position dominated by V’, [NP,V’]. Let us propose that whom starts out as the object of meet: its base-position is [NP,V’]. Another way of phrasing this is to say that whom is base-generated in the [NP,V’] position. (2e) is the underlying structure, deep structure or D-structure of (2a). Note in passing that we adopt the hypothesis that adjuncts such as after lunch are VP-adjoined.’

> Cf. chapter 1, section 2.5.5. ° Cf. chapter 1, section 2.5.2.2. ” Chapter 1, section 2.4.5.

Movement and Locality (2)eates

171

GP eine eee Spec

{re

oy Rae

C

IP

ga NP

|W

tid

eon

I

VP

ate VP

| “om Ve

ieee Thelma

will

meet

whom

Boe Ie

| ax Pp’

nO) after lunch

(2e) cannot surface as such. In English root constituent questions, two conditions must be met: (i) the interrogative constituent must be in an initial position and (ii) the auxiliary must precede the subject:

- (2)

f.

*Thelma has met whom?

g.

*Has Thelma met whom?

h.

*Whom Thelma has met?

(2f-h) are ungrammatical; they are not well-formed questions. However, while (2f) is not acceptable as an ordinary question, it can be used as an echoquestion, i.e. when a speaker is simply echoing a previous utterance and substitutes a wh-phrase to ‘echo’ a constituent he may not have heard or understood. (2f) may echo (2f’): (2)

f£.

Thelma has met George.

Similarly, (2g) may echo (2g’):

(2)

g’.

Has Thelma met George?

take place: (i) the In the English root wh-questions in (2a-d), two movements

I-to-C movement occurs, wh-phrase moves to the position in front of C, (ii) giving rise to subject-auxiliary inversion (SAI). in English. It is a (2i) represents the structure of independent wh-questions spelt out as a sentence of derived structure: it is the structure which will be

e. English, the S-structure or the Spell-Out of the sentenc

Movement and Locality

172

(2) i

cP a NP

Ee

Bee C

IP

hgig NP

ak a It feceHose

I

V

VP

VP

are

whom,

will,

Thelma

¢,

He |

after lunch

Whom occupies the clause-initial position, [Spec,CP]. It also realizes the internal argument of meet. To reconcile its peripheral S-structure position with its VPinternal thematic role, we propose that whom starts out as the object of meet and moves to the initial position. The case form of the moved constituent, whom, offers support for its VPinternal base-position. Whom is the accusative form of who.*® The accusative case of whom is assigned by the verb meet. We signal in passing that for many speakers whom in (2) may be replaced by who, especially in informal English. When whom moves leftward, it leaves an empty category in its original or base-position, which we indicate by means of t for trace. A trace encodes the previous position of a moved constituent. The auxiliary will starts out under I and moves to C; it also leaves a t. In order to keep track of the relation of traces with the respective moved Agana we co-index them. The moved element iis called the antecedent of the trace.’

1.1.1.2

Direct questions in French

The mechanisms for direct question formation which we find in English are not identical in all human languages. French root wh-questions, for example, may be derived along the same lines (3a), but they may also pattern differently from their English counterparts. In (3b) neither the wh-phrase nor the auxiliary has undergone leftward movement; this example is the word-for-word French translation of the ungrammatical (2f) in English. It is a grammatical constituent * On the notion ‘case’, see chapter 1, section 3.7.

* For another, related use of the term ‘antecedent’, we refer the reader to chapter 4, section 1.

;

Movement and Locality

173

question in French provided the sentence has a rising intonation. As discussed already” the unmoved constituent in (3b) is referred to as wh-in-situ. French also admits (3c): the wh-constituent has undergone movement, but the auxiliary remains in the medial position and does not invert with the subject. The English equivalent of (3c), (2h), is ungrammatical. (3d), the French analogue of English

(2g), is also ungrammatical."! (3)

a.

Qui as-tu rencontré? who have you met

b.

Tuas rencontré qui?

c. d.

Qui tu as rencontré? *As-tu rencontré qui?

1.1.1.3

Indirect questions in English

In (4) we illustrate the formation of embedded questions. (4)

a. b. c. d.

I *I I I

think (that) Thelma will meet Louise after lunch. wonder that Thelma will meet Louise after lunch. wonder whether Thelma will meet Louise after lunch. wonder whom Thelma will meet after lunch.

In (4a) the main verb think selects a declarative finite clause introduced by that. As indicated by the parentheses, the complementizer that is optional. The matrix V of (4b), wonder, does not select a that clause: rather, it selects an interrogative clause, either a yes/no question (4c), or a wh-question (4d). As discussed before,

C is the head of CP and the properties of the head C percolate to — or are shared - by — the maximal projection, CP. An interrogative clause is headed by a C carrying a [+wu] feature and the head of a declarative clause is a C marked [—wu]. Interrogative sentences functioning as embedded clauses are indirect questions:

those functioning as main clauses are direct questions or root questions. There

are similarities and differences between direct and indirect questions. Let us first compare direct and indirect yes/no questions. Root yes/no questions are formed by I-to-C movement, giving rise to SAI. In indirect yes/no questions there is no I-to-C movement in standard English: (4)

e.

*I wonder will Thelma meet Louise after lunch.

as in Indirect or embedded yes/no questions are introduced either by whether, (4c), or by if:

(4)

£.

I wonder if Thelma will meet Louise after lunch.

overt maniAs a first approximation, we assume that whether and if are the spell out a C marked festations of the interrogative complementizer, that is, they

[+wH]. We will modify this view below.'* 1, section 2.1.4.2.

10 Chapter and interpretation of unmoved wh11 We return to a more detailed discussion of the syntax 3.2. constituents in chapter 5, section 1 Section 1.1.2.

174

Movement and Locality

(4d) contains an embedded or indirect wh-question. Once again, direct and

indirect wh-questions differ in that the former, though not the latter, are formed by I-to-C movement giving rise to SAI. On the other hand, in both root and embedded wh-questions a wh-phrase cannot remain in its sentence-internal base-position, but must move to the clause-initial [Spec,CP]. Observe that in embedded questions

the fronted wh-constituent is incompatible with an overt complementizer. We assume that the complementizer position in embedded wh-questions is non-overt. (4)

g.

*I wonder

[whom that Thelma will invite after lunch]. [whether that Thelma will invite Louise after lunch]. [if that Thelma will invite Louise after lunch].

Apparently there is a constraint on the spelling out of elements carrying the [+wH] feature. If a wh-phrase occupies the specifier of an embedded interrogative clause, then the head of that clause, C, which we assume carries the feature [+wH], is not spelt out. The S-structure of (4d) is as follows:

Josh

I

pres wonder whom;

Thelma

will

er of meet

¢

after lunch

'° We adopt the adjunction analysis for VP-modifiers; cf. chapter 1, section 2.4.5.

Movement and Locality

175

In the examples above, wh-movement applies to a finite embedded clause. Wh-movement may also extract a constituent from a non-finite clause: (4)

i.

I wonder whom to meet.

In ty the non-finite IP is headed by the infinitival marker to; the subject is nonovert’ and is controlled by the matrix subject I; the object of meet is the whconstituent whom, which has been preposed. The structure of (41) is as follows: (4)

j.

1.1.1.4

[wp I; [vp wonder [cp whom; [jp ec, to [yp meet t))]II.

Indirect questions in French

Whereas direct wh-questions in French need not be characterized by leftward movement of the wh-constituent, as we have seen,'* indirect wh-questions in French have the same derivation as their English counterparts, as illustrated by the following data: (5)

a.

b.

1.1.2

Je me demande qui tu as rencontré hier. I myself ask whom you have met yesterday ‘I wonder whom you met yesterday.’

*Je me demande tu as rencontré qui hier.

The status of whether and if

-Let us return to the status of whether and if. As a first approximation, we proposed that they are both the interrogative equivalents of the complementizer that. But there are important differences between the two. As discussed in chapter 1, the choice of complementizer varies along two dimensions: (i) finiteness, and (ii) illocutionary force. Finite declaratives are introduced by that, finite interrogatives by if, and non-finite clauses by for. Whether has a special status in that it introduces both finite and non-finite interrogatives.

(6)

a. a’.

I wonder [cp whether [jp I should go]]. I, wonder [cp whether [jp [ec] to go]].

whether Whether does not select a type of embedded clause. In this respect, on the impact an resembles preposed wh-constituents which also don’t have finiteness of the clause which they introduce: (6)

b. b’. c. c’.

I wonder I, wonder [wonder I, wonder

[cp whom [.p whom [cp where [cp where

'4 Chapter 1, section 1.3. 'S Section 1.1.1.2.

[p I should invite]]. [jp [ec] to invite]]. [pp I should go]]. [jp [ec] to gol].

176

Movement and Locality

Like wh-phrases such as whom and when, whether can introduce an infinitival clause with a non-overt subject. If, on the other hand, only selects finite clauses. Hence it cannot introduce an infinitival clause with a non-overt subject: (6)

d. d.’

I wonder [¢ if [p I should go]]. *I wonder [q if [p [ec] to go]].

We can exploit the parallelism in (6a—c) by assuming that whether occupies the same position as whom and when, i.e. [Spec,CP]. Based on the parallelism between (6d’) and (6e) we might argue that, like that, if is a complementizer and occupies the position under C. (6)

e.

*I expected [cp that [jp [ec] will go]].

The fact that whether, unlike if and that, does not impose selectional restrictions on the finiteness of the complement IP can be related to the fact that, unlike the complementizers mentioned, whether is not the head of CP but is a wh-phrase in the specifier of CP. Like other wh-phrases in [Spec,CP] it is compatible with

both finite and non-finite clauses.

1.1.3

Movement and locality

Interrogative sentences are formed by moving an interrogative wh-phrase, leftward to [Spec,CP]: in root questions, the relevant moved to the matrix [Spec,CP]; in embedded questions, it is embedded [Spec,CP]. The wh-constituent can move beyond the the clause in which it originates: (7)

a. b. c. d.

ITasked Iasked I asked I asked

[( whom [