Theoretical Syntax Winter Answers to practice problems

Transcription

1 Linguistics 325 Sturman Theoretical Syntax Winter 2017 Answers to practice problems 1. Draw trees for the following English sentences. a. I have not been running in the mornings. 1

2 b. Joel frequently sings our national anthem at those baseball games. The ordering of AdvP with PP doesn t matter in this tree. 2

3 c. Will the cashier scan my groceries before the next meeting? ø 3

4 d. Did the man in the yellow hat s monkey steal your banana? There s an error on this tree. See the tree below for the correct structure of the NP man in the yellow hat 4

5 5

6 e. When can you mend that tear? 6

7 f. Who will Hans claim that Greta kissed? 7

8 2. Based on the following data (and not any knowledge you have about German), decide whether German has V to T movement? Explain your answer. a. Sprechen Sie Deutsch? speak you German 'Do you speak German? b. Hat er nach Hause gegangen? has he to home gone? 'Has he gone home?' c. Er sitzt nicht auf diesem Tisch. he sits not on this table 'He does not sit on this table.' d. Sie soll nicht auf diesem Tisch sitzen. She must not on this table sit 'She must not sit on this table.' Based on these data, I conclude that German does have V to T movement. This fact is clear from sentences (c) and (d). In sentence (c), the verb sitzt 'sit' precedes the negative nicht 'not.' Using the structure we discussed in class for English and French, NegP is merged between TP and VP. Therefore, if a verb precedes Neg, as in c, the verb must have moved from the VP to left adjoin to T. In (d), we see that the auxiliary verb comes before the negative. Therefore, German must have V to T movement for both main and auxiliary verbs. My conclusions regarding verbs movement are also supported by sentences (a) and (b). In these sentences, which are both yes/no questions, the main verb in (a) and the auxiliary verb in (b) precede the subject. Therefore these verbs must have moved to T. In class, we said that if a verb moves to C, it must first move to T. Therefore, these verbs have moved to T and then to 2 in (a) and (b). 3. Explain how case checking and theta role assignment work in the following sentences. a. John appeared to leave. b. *It appeared John to leave. c. It appears that John will leave. d. *John appears that will leave. In all of these sentences, John is not merged in the main clause because it does not receive a theta role from the main verb appear. Rather, John gets an agent theta role from leave. So John is merged as the specifier of the embedded TP. Appear assigns the proposition theta role to the CP. 8

9 In each sentence the main T head in the main clause has nominative case to check. But the T head to in (a) & (b) is [-T] and does not have nominative case. But will in (c) and (d) is and is therefore [+nom]. In (a), John can t have its case checked in spec TP of the embedded clause. Therefore, it raises to spec TP of the main clause to check case, as illustrated below: a. [ TP John t appear+ed [ TP t John to [ VP leave]]. [-T] [+nom] [+nom] In (b), John remains in spec TP of the embedded clause, where its case can t be checked. But the [+nom] feature of it is checked in the main clause. Since the [+nom] feature of John is not checked, the sentence is ungrammatical. b. *[ TP It t appear+ed [ TP John to [ VP leave]. [-T] [+nom] [+nom] [+nom] [-nom] In (c), the embedded TP is, so it checks the nominative case of John. Nominative case of the main T head is checked by the insertion of the dummy pronoun it, which is also [+nom]. c. [ TP It t appear+s that [ TP John will [ VP leave]. [+nom] [+nom] [+nom] [+nom] In (d), the lower TP is, so it checks the nominative case of John. Following this, John moves to spec TP of the main clause. However, since John has already checked its case, it cannot check the case of T of the main clause. As a result, nominative case of the main T head is not checked, and the sentence is not grammatical. d. *[ TP John t appear+s that [ TP t John will [ VP leave]]. [+nom] [+nom] [+nom] 4. Explain the grammaticality or ungrammaticality of these sentences using binding theory. Be sure to state which binding principle applies and to define that principle. a. *[The muppets] i took those pictures of them i. Principle B states that a pronoun must not be bound in its domain. In this sentence, them is bound by the muppets because this DP is the antecedent (coindexed and the muppets is first) and the muppets c-commands the pronoun. And they are in the same TP so principle B is violated. b. *[The girl] i told Linus that he kissed Lucy i. 9

10 Principle C states that an R-expression must not be bound. But Lucy is bound because it has a c-commanding antecedent, which is the girl. Therefore the sentence is ungrammatical. c. *Derek i s sister hit himself i. Principle A states that an anaphor must be bound in its domain. In this sentence himself is not bound. It has an antecedent, which is Derek. But the antecedent doesn t c-command the anaphor. Therefore the sentence is ungrammatical. 10