1 / 11

3.3 Null Auxiliaries

3.3-10. 3.3 Null Auxiliaries. Elliptical, gapping, null spellout, silent AUX. (15) He could have helped her, or [she have helped him]. TP PRN T´ she T AUXP could AUX VP

drago
Télécharger la présentation

3.3 Null Auxiliaries

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 3.3-10 3.3 Null Auxiliaries Elliptical, gapping, null spellout, silent AUX

  2. (15) He could have helped her, or [she have helped him] • TP PRN T´ she T AUXP could AUX VP have V PRN helped him (18) Have-cliticisation blocked: *He could have … or she’ve helped him.

  3. (19) Have-cliticisation Have can encliticise onto a word W ending in a vowel or diphthong provided that • W c-commands have and • W is immediately adjacent to have

  4. 3.4 Null T (21) All finite clauses are TPs headed by an (overt or null) T constituent (23) TP (25) TP PRN T´ PRN T´ He T VP He T VP ? V N Do+Af3SgPr V N enjoys syntax does enjoy syntax enjoyed Af3SgPr enjoys syntax Affix Hopping (Af: Tense Affix) Chomsky (1995): All heads in a syntactic structure are required to play a role in determining the meaning of the overall structure. Cf. perfecthave (AUX) vs. causative/experiencedhave (V) (31) a. They’ve seen a ghost (perfect have) b.*They’ve their car serviced regularly (causative have) c.*They’ve students walk out on them sometimes (experienced have)

  5. Null T in infinitive clauses (33) a. I have never known [Tomcriticiseanyone] him => Tomhas never been known [to criticise anyone] b. A reporter saw [Senator Sleaze leave Benny’s Bunny Bar] => Hewas seen [to leave B’s B B] (35) ECM verbs TP a. I expect [him to win] N T´ b. I judged [him to be lying] Tom T VP c. They reported [him to be missing] toV PRN d. I believe [him to be innocent] criticise anyone

  6. 3.6 Null C in finite clauses (44) We didn’t know [he had resigned] or [that he had been accused of corruption] (49) A: What were you going to ask me? B: a. Ifyou feel like a Coke b. Doyou feel like a Coke? c.*If do you feel like a Coke? (50) [I am feeling thirsty], but [shouldI save my last Coke till later]? (52) Case Condition A pronoun or noun expression is assigned case by the closest case- assigning head which c-commands it A finite C constituent (whether overt or null) assigns nominative case to the subject of its clause under c-command

  7. 3.7 Null C in infinite clauses (55) I want [Mary to come to Japan] and [for her to see my parents] (57) obl. for-deletion when immediately followswant a. *More than anything, she wanted for him to apologise b. More than anything, she wanted him to apologise c. She wantedmore than anythingfor him to apologise d. *She wantedmore than anythinghim to apologise (58) a. What she wanted was for him to apologise b.*What she wanted was him to apologise

  8. 3.8 Defective clauses ECMverbs (67) *We didn’t intend [you to hurt him] or [forhim to hurt you] (70) a. He is believed to hurt you b. You weren’t intended to hurt him (72) Impenetrability Condition A constituent in the domain of (i.e. c-commanded by) a complementiser is impenetrable to (and so cannot be attracted by) a higher head c-commanding the complementiser (73)*[CP [C Ø] [TPYou [Tweren’t] intended [CP [Cfor] [TP you [Tto] hurt anyone]]]] x (PIC)

  9. 3.9 Null determiners and quantifiers (81) a. DP b. DP c. DP D N D N D N we linguists you linguists Ø linguists (82) a. Eggs and many dairy products cause cholesterol b. I’d like toast and some coffee please QP Q N Ø eggs toast

  10. Longobardi (2005)‘Toward a Unified Grammar of Reference’ • Italian bare arguments are in fact DPswith a null D • DP D NP ∂ potatoes ∂ : phonologically null N-to-D raising: obligatory for PNs (proper nouns), impossible for BNs (bare nouns)

  11. Determinerless arguments (1) PNs(proper names): (2) BNs(bare nouns): to denote a definite, specific entity mass or plural head nouns (Kripke 1980) Ho incontrato Maria/te a. Bevo sempre vino 'I met Maria/you.' 'I always drink wine.‘ b. Ho mangiato patate 'I ate potatoes.'

More Related