Classic X-Theory. ELC 231: Introduction to Language and Linguistics. 1 Head Level: X. 2 Bar-Level: X or X. 3 Phrase-Level: XP

Transcription

1 . XP Classic X-Theory specifier X 1 Head Level: X X modifier 2 Bar-Level: X or X X complement 3 Phrase-Level: XP ELC 231: Introduction to Language and Linguistics Week 12: Classic X -Theory. Dr. Meagan Louie M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 1 / 70

2 Core Subdomains 1 Introduction 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers Linguistics: The study of Language Phonetics Phonology Morphology Syntax Semantics Pragmatics M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 2 / 70

3 Core Subdomains: Syntax 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers Linguistics: The study of Language Phonetics Phonology Morphology Syntax Semantics Pragmatics M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 3 / 70

4 Review: Last Week s Content 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers Last Week: 1 Recursion 2 The Theta-Criterion 1:1 correlation between theta-roles and arguments 3 The Verb Argument/Modifier Distinction - Syntactic Diagnostics - Semantic Diagnostics Syntactic Representation (Sister to V, or Sister to V ) M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 4 / 70

5 Review: Last Week s Content 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers Last Week: 1 Recursion 2 The Theta-Criterion 1:1 correlation between theta-roles and arguments 3 The Verb Argument/Modifier Distinction - Syntactic Diagnostics - Semantic Diagnostics Syntactic Representation (Sister to V, or Sister to V ) M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 5 / 70

6 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers Chomsky s Design Feature of Human Language Hauser et al. (2002).Q: What properties does human language have? i.e., what counts as a human language? RECURSION N - the property of being recursive recursive adj - describes a rule or procedure that can be applied repeatedly M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 6 / 70

7 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers Chomsky s Design Feature of Human Language Hauser et al. (2002) V V PP V V PP V PP through 5 cm of snow V PP in a deep depression V PP on Monday V PP in Budapest V PP along the river V in her shoes walk M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 7 / 70

8 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers Chomsky s Design Feature of Human Language Hauser et al. (2002).Q: What properties does human language have? i.e., what counts as a human language? RECURSION entails that in every language (i) You can make an infinitely long sentence (ii) There are infinitely many sentences This is why language must be a system of generative rules M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 8 / 70

9 Review: Last Week s Content 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers Last Week: 1 Recursion 2 The Theta-Criterion 1:1 correlation between theta-roles and arguments 3 The Verb Argument/Modifier Distinction - Syntactic Diagnostics - Semantic Diagnostics Syntactic Representation (Sister to V, or Sister to V ) M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 9 / 70

10 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers Chomsky s Design Feature of Human Language Hauser et al. (2002) Q: How are selectional restrictions enforced? Chomsky 1981: The Theta-Criterion (i) Each phrase/argument is assigned to one and only one theta role (ii) Each theta-role is assigned to one and only one phrase/argument.. (Carnie (2012):234) M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 10 / 70

11 The Theta-Criterion 1 Introduction 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 11 / 70

12 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers The Theta-Criterion Chomsky 1981 The Theta-Criterion checks the trees generated by PSRs; if there are arguments/phrases without theta-roles OR if there are theta-roles not assigned to an argument/phrase S (1) a. Hermione read a book b. *Ron slept a book c. *Harry doubts NP Ron V VP NP sleep V 1. NP slept Experiencer θ Experiencer the Theta-Criterion filters out the tree a book M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 12 / 70

13 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers The Theta-Criterion Chomsky 1981 The Theta-Criterion checks the trees generated by PSRs; if there are arguments/phrases without theta-roles OR if there are theta-roles not assigned to an argument/phrase (2) a. Hermione read a book b. *Ron slept a book c. *Harry doubts doubt V 1. NP Experiencer 2 {S, NP} Content the Theta-Criterion filters out the tree NP Harry S θ Agent VP V doubt θ Content??? M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 13 / 70

14 Review: Last Week s Content 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers But not all phrases without theta-roles are disallowed The theta-criterion applies to arguments modifiers/adjuncts can apply freely M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 14 / 70

15 Review: Last Week s Content 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers Last Week: 1 Recursion 2 The Theta-Criterion 1:1 correlation between theta-roles and arguments 3 The Verb Argument/Modifier Distinction - Syntactic Diagnostics - Semantic Diagnostics Syntactic Representation (Sister to V, or Sister to V ) M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 15 / 70

16 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers Evidence for the Argument/Modifier Distinction Diagnostic: Summary Table Diagnostic Tests Arguments Modifiers/Adjuncts Recursive? Interpretation? Thematic Role Intersection Obligatory? Sometimes Never Strict Linear Position near LI? Ellides with do so Pro-form? Always Sometimes M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 16 / 70

17 The Verb Argument/Modifier Distinction Complement VS Modifier Syntax 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers VP V V V YP COMPLEMENT θ ROLE XP ADJUNCT ADJUNCTS/MODIFIERS Sister to V Daughter of V PSR: V V {PP, AdvP} COMPLEMENT ARGUMENTS Sister to V Daughter of V PSR: V V ({NP, PP, S}) M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 17 / 70

18 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers The Argument/Modifier Distinction Across Categories Last Week: The complement/modifier distinction in the verbal domain (i.e., where the lexical item = V) This Week: The complement/modifier distinction in the nominal and adjectival domain (i.e., where the lexical item = N, Adj) M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 18 / 70

19 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers The Argument/Modifier Distinction Across Categories We already know that nouns, like verbs, can be modified by adjuncts (3) a. The book [on the table] PP-location b. The girl [from Tennessee] PP-source c. The author [with a beard] PP-? M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 19 / 70

20 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers The Argument/Modifier Distinction Across Categories Claim: Nouns, like verbs, can select for complements (4) a..[the toddlers] AGENT destroyed V [the cake] THEME. b. The destruction N [of the cake] THEME [by the toddlers] AGENT... M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 20 / 70

21 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers The Argument/Modifier Distinction Across Categories Claim: Nouns, like verbs, can select for complements (5) a. She teaches V [history] NP b. The teacher N [of history] PP... M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 21 / 70

22 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers The Argument/Modifier Distinction Across Categories Claim: Nouns, like verbs, can select for complements (6) a. She believes V [that Tupac is alive] S b. The belief N [that Tupac is alive] S... M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 22 / 70

23 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers The Argument/Modifier Distinction Across Categories Observation: Nominal XP-modifiers behave differently from XP-complements (7) Linear Order Restrictions a. The teacher [of history] PP [on the bridge] PP... b. *The teacher [on the bridge] PP [of history] PP... Nominal complements must be closer to the noun than nominal modifiers M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 23 / 70

24 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers The Argument/Modifier Distinction Across Categories (8) Recursion a. *The teacher [of music] PP [of history] PP... b. The teacher [on the bridge] PP [with a beard] PP [from Germany] PP... Adding nominal modifiers are recursive, but adding complements is not M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 24 / 70

25 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers The Argument/Modifier Distinction Across Categories (9) Thematic Interpretation of Nominal Complements a. The destruction [of the cake] PP-theme b.???the pencil [of the cake] PP-??? (10) Intersection Interpretation of Nominal Adjuncts a. The teacher [on the bridge] PP-location b. The pencil [on the bridge] PP-location The interpretation of nominal complements is strictly tied to the particular lexical noun; this is not the case for nominal complements M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 25 / 70

26 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers Evidence for the Nominal Argument/Modifier Distinction Diagnostic: Summary Table Diagnostic Tests Arguments Modifiers/Adjuncts Recursive? Interpretation? Thematic Role Intersection Strict Linear Position near LI? Ellides with one Pro-form? Always Sometimes M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 26 / 70

27 The Noun Argument/Modifier Distinction Complement VS Modifier Syntax 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers NP N N N YP COMPLEMENT θ ROLE XP ADJUNCT ADJUNCTS/MODIFIERS Sister to N Daughter of N PSR: N N {PP, AdjP} COMPLEMENT ARGUMENTS Sister to N Daughter of N PSR: N N ({NP, PP, S}) M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 27 / 70

28 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers The Argument/Modifier Distinction Across Categories Observation: Adjectives also have complements (11) a. Mary is fond Adj [of pasta] PP b. *Mary is fond. Obligatoriness Test (12) a. I am addicted Adj [to ice-cream] PP b. *I am addicted. Obligatoriness Test (13) My grandma was happy [that she finally had a grandson] S M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 28 / 70

29 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers The Argument/Modifier Distinction Across Categories Observation: Adjectives can also be modified (although most adjective modifiers precede the adjective) (14) Mary is fond Adj [of pasta] PP [without exception] PP 1 (15) I am extremely addicted Adj [to ice-cream] PP (16) My grandma was completely happy [that she finally had a grandson] S 1 This adjectival modifier test taken from Carnie 2012 M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 29 / 70

30 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers The Argument/Modifier Distinction Across Categories (17) Linear Order Restrictions a. Mary is fond Adj [of pasta] PP [without exception] PP b.???mary is fond Adj [without exception] PP [of pasta] PP (18) Thematic Interpretation a. Mary is fond Adj [of pasta] PP b. *?Mary is strange Adj [of pasta] PP (19) Degree-Modifier Interpretation a. Mary is strange Adj [without exception] PP b. Mary is mean Adj [without exception] PP M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 30 / 70

31 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers Evidence for the Adjectival Argument/Modifier Distinction Diagnostic: Summary Table Diagnostic Tests Arguments Modifiers/Adjuncts Recursive? Interpretation? Thematic Role Degree-Modification Obligatory? Sometimes Never Strict Linear Position near LI? Ellides with so Pro-form? Always Sometimes M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 31 / 70

32 The Noun Argument/Modifier Distinction Complement VS Modifier Syntax 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers AdjP AdvP Adj ADJUNCT Adj Adj YP COMPLEMENT θ ROLE ADJUNCTS/MODIFIERS Sister to Adj Daughter of Adj PSR: Adj Adj {PP, AdvP} COMPLEMENT ARGUMENTS Sister to Adj Daughter of Adj PSR: Adj Adj ({NP, PP, S}) M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 32 / 70

33 Interim Summary: Types of PSRs 1.1 Review: The Complement/Modifier Distinction 1.2 Nominal Complements and Modifiers 1.3 Adjectival Complements and Modifiers We have three complement rules: V V ({NP, PP, S}) N N ({NP, PP, S}) Adj Adj ({NP, PP, S}) which look suspiciously similar to each other And we have three recursive adjunct rules V V {PP/AdvP} N N {PP/AdjP} Adj Adj {PP/AdvP} which look (and are interpreted) suspiciously similar to each other M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 33 / 70

34 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs X -Theory and Category-Neutral PSRs Wouldn t it be more theoretically elegant to say that we only have two rules? Modifier/Adjunct Rule: X X YP Complement Rule: X X ({YP, ZP, WP}) Chomsky 1970 thought so Where {X, Y, Z, W,...} are variables for lexical categories M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 34 / 70

35 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs Problems with Classic PSRs The PSRs of Chomsky 1957 were (i) category-specific, and (ii) unconstrained By unconstrained, we mean that there are no rules about what goes on the right or left of the rewrite Chomsky 1957 eg., I could propose S Det P Adv, even though no language has a PSR like that M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 35 / 70

36 Problems with Classic PSRs 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs Unconstrained and category-specific PSRs, as a theory of syntax cross-linguistically, raise questions we can t answer: 1 Within a language, different lexical phrases have parallel structures. Why? 2 Different languages have different lexical categories......but parallel structures. Why? 3 Particular word-orders are more common than others.. Why? 4 Some word-orders never occur (i.e., Det P Adv).. Why? M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 36 / 70

37 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs Problems with Classic PSRs Word Order Patterns Cross-Linguistically: Basic Word-Order SOV 565 SVO 488 VSO 95 VOS 25 OVS 11 OSV 4 No. Languages N/A 189 Table from Dryer 2013 M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 37 / 70

38 Problems with Classic PSRs 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs If PSRs are unconstrained, why are there so many recurring syntactic patterns, within and across languages? 1 Within a language, different lexical phrases have parallel structures. 2 Different languages have different lexical categories......but parallel structures. 3 Particular word-orders are more common than others. 4 Some word-orders never occur (i.e., Det P Adv). M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 38 / 70

39 Problems with Classic PSRs 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs When there are recurring patterns in nature, we don t consider these coincidences... Why do all humans have similar physical properties? We all have the same genes! Just different gene sequences! Why do most rainbows have the same sequence of colours? The rules of wavelength and light refraction are constant! We propose rules/mechanisms to derive the patterns M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 39 / 70

40 Problems with Classic PSRs 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs When we see recurring patterns in language, we don t want to model them as coincidences... 1 Within a language, different lexical phrases have parallel structures. 2 Different languages have different lexical categories......but parallel structures. 3 Particular word-orders are more common than others. 4 Some word-orders never occur (i.e., Det P Adv)....We want to propose rules/mechanisms to derive these patterns! M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 40 / 70

41 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs Problems with Chomsky 1957 Syntactic Structures The PSRs of Chomsky 1957 aimed to account for patterns in English word-order But there are additional patterns that Chomsky 1957 can t account for: Chomsky 1957 Parallels among PSRs cross-linguistically Parallels PSRs for diff. lexical categories Parallels between X and Y in a X Y M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 41 / 70

42 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs X -Theory and Category-Neutral PSRs The PSRs of Chomsky 1957 were (i) category-specific, and (ii) unconstrained X -Theory a is a theory of PSRs that is category-neutral constrained X -Theory aims to account for the previously-mentioned patterns Chomsky 1970 a Read as X-Bar Theory M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 42 / 70

43 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs X -Theory and Category-Neutral PSRs X -Theory a is a theory of PSRs that is category-neutral constrained There are three levels of structure, (+ three ways to relate to those levels of structure), and four category-neutral PSRs a Read as X-Bar Theory Chomsky 1970 M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 43 / 70

44 X -Theory and Category-Neutral PSRs 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs Three Levels of Structure. specifier XP X X modifier 1 Head Level: X (N, Adj, V, P, Det,...) 2 Bar-Level: X or X (N, Adj, V, P,...) X complement 3 Phrase-/Maximal Level: XP (NP, AdjP, VP, PP,...) M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 44 / 70

45 X -Theory and Category-Neutral PSRs 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs We can define three types of syntactic positions in terms of these levels of phrase structure: XP 1 complement: sister to a head/x 0 specifier X X modifier 2 modifier/adjunct: sister, daughter to a bar-level/x X complement 3 specifier: sister to a bar-level, daughter to a phrase-level/xp M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 45 / 70

46 X -Theory and Category-Neutral PSRs 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs Wait...what s a specifier? For now we ll treat determiners {the, a, some,...} as the specifiers of NPs degree specifiers {more/-er, most/-est} as the specifiers of AdjPs verbal auxiliaries {might, will, could,...} as the specifiers of VPs M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 46 / 70

47 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs X -Theory and Category-Neutral PSRs - Head-Initial Four Category-Neutral Phrase Structure Rules (Head-Initial) specifier XP X X X complement modifier 1 The Complement PSR X X YP* COMPLEMENT 2 The Modifier/Adjunct PSR X X YP MODIFIER 3 The Specifier PSR XP (Y n SPECIFIER) X 4 The Conjunction PSR X n X n conj X n M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 47 / 70

48 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs X -Theory and Category-Neutral PSRs - Head-Final Four Category-Neutral Phrase Structure Rules (Head-Final) specifier XP X X X complement modifier 1 The Complement PSR X YP* COMPLEMENT X 2 The Modifier/Adjunct PSR X YP MODIFIER X 3 The Specifier PSR XP X (Y n SPECIFIER) 4 The Conjunction PSR X n X n conj X n M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 48 / 70

49 X -Theory and Category-Neutral PSRs 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs The Conjunction PSR The superscript n is a variable over structure levels - X n = {XP, X, X} X n X n conj X n XP XP XP conj XP, X X conj X X X conj X XP X... conj XP X... M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 49 / 70

50 X -Theory and Category-Neutral PSRs 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs The Conjunction PSR The superscript n is a variable over structure levels - X n = {XP, X, X} X n X n conj X n X XP XP conj XP, X X conj X X X conj X X X... conj X X... M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 50 / 70

51 X -Theory and Category-Neutral PSRs 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs The Conjunction PSR The superscript n is a variable over structure levels - X n = {XP, X, X} X n X n conj X n XP XP conj XP, X X conj X X X conj X X X conj X M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 51 / 70

52 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs X -Theory and Category-Neutral PSRs X -Theory is a theory of PSRs that is category-neutral constrained Any and all PSRs (in any language) are constrained to be a version of one of these four category-neutral rules Chomsky 1970 M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 52 / 70

53 Problems with Classic PSRs 2.1 Motivation for X -Theory 2.2 X -Theoretic Levels of Structure 2.3 X -Theoretic Grammatical Roles 2.4 X -Theoretic Category Neutral PSRs PSRs are constrained. That s why there are recurring syntactic patterns. 1 Within a language, different lexical phrases have parallel structures. 2 Different languages have different lexical categories......but parallel structures. 3 Particular word-orders are more common than others. 4 Some word-orders never occur (i.e., Det P Adv). M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 53 / 70

54 Practice Drawing Trees with X -Theory PSRs 1 S NP VP 2 XP (Y n SPEC) X 3 X X YP MOD 4 X X (YP CMPL *) 5 X n X n conj X n 1 The small boy has been an orphan 2 He has a scar on his forehead 3 He lives in the cupboard under the stairs. 4 The giant rescued the boy from his horrible relatives. 5 The boy will go to a new school. M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 54 / 70

55 The small boy has been an orphan N orphan M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 55 / 70

56 Complement Rule: X X (YP ) N N orphan M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 56 / 70

57 Specifier Rule: XP Y n spec X NP D N an N orphan M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 57 / 70

58 Complement Rule: X X (YP ) V V NP been D N an N orphan M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 58 / 70

59 Specifier Rule: XP Y n spec X VP aux V has V NP been D N an N orphan M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 59 / 70

60 The small boy has been an orphan N VP boy aux V has V NP been D N an N orphan M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 60 / 70

61 Complement Rule: X X (YP ) N VP N aux V boy has V NP been D N an N orphan M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 61 / 70

62 The small boy has been an orphan Adj N VP small N aux V boy has V NP been D N an N orphan M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 62 / 70

63 Complement Rule: X X (YP ) Adj N VP Adj N aux V small boy has V NP been D N an N orphan M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 63 / 70

64 Specifier Rule: XP Y n spec X AdjP N VP Adj N aux V Adj boy has V NP small been D N an N orphan M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 64 / 70

65 Modifier Rule: X YP MOD X N VP AdjP N aux V Adj boy has V NP Adj been D N small an N orphan M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 65 / 70

66 Specifier Rule: XP Y n spec X NP VP D N aux V the AdjP N has V NP Adj N been D N Adj boy an N small orphan M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 66 / 70

67 Sentence Rule: S NP VP S NP VP D N aux V the AdjP N has V NP Adj N been D N Adj boy an N small orphan M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 67 / 70

68 Practice Drawing Trees with X -Theory PSRs 1 S NP VP 2 XP (Y n SPEC) X 3 X X YP MOD 4 X X (YP CMPL *) 5 X n X n conj X n 1 The small boy has been an orphan 2 He has a scar on his forehead 3 He lives in the cupboard under the stairs. 4 The giant rescued the boy from his horrible relatives. 5 The boy will go to a new school. M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 68 / 70

69 Next Time: More on Complementary Distribution 1 Instagram Homework: Design Feature (your choice) OR try to draw an X -Theoretic tree structure for a found sentence M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 69 / 70

70 I Carnie, Andrew Syntax: A Generative Introduction, Third Edition. John Wiley & Sons. Chomsky, Noam Syntactic structures. Walter de Gruyter. Chomsky, Noam Remarks on nominalization. In Studies on semantics in generative grammar, The Hague: Mouton. Chomsky, Noam Lectures on government and binding. Dryer, Matthew S Order of subject, object and verb. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Hauser, Marc D, Noam Chomsky & W Tecumseh Fitch The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? science 298(5598) M. Louie ELC 231: Language and Linguistics 70 / 70