1 / 27

Syntax

Syntax. Lecture 3: The Subject. The Basic Structure of the Clause. Recall that our theory of structure says that all structures follow this pattern:. It therefore must be the case that clauses have this structure too they must have a: Head Complement Specifier. The Contents of the Clause.

shauna
Télécharger la présentation

Syntax

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. Syntax Lecture 3: The Subject

  2. The Basic Structure of the Clause • Recall that our theory of structure says that all structures follow this pattern: • It therefore must be the case that clauses have this structure too • they must have a: • Head • Complement • Specifier

  3. The Contents of the Clause • Generally it is accepted that clauses contain three obligatory elements: • A subject • A predicate (= VP) • A category (referred to as ‘Inflection’) which is made up of one of the following: • A modal auxiliary (will, could, shall, must, etc.) • The marker of the infinitive (to) • A marker of tense (tense inflection on verbal element)

  4. The Contents of the Clause • For example: • [the bomb] [may] [destroy the building] • (they want) [the bomb] [to] [destroy the building] • [the bomb] [destroyed the building]

  5. The Contents of the Clause • Each of these elements are obligatory • * may destroy the building (no subject) • * the bomb may (no predicate) • * the bomb destroy the building (no inflection)

  6. The Head of the Clause • Given that the subject and the predicate are phrases, the only possible head of the clause is the inflection as: • It is a word • It comes in the middle of the clause • The inflection determines the ‘type’ of the clause • Finite if it contains a modal or a tense • Infinitive if it contains ‘to’

  7. How the clause fits X-bar theory • Heads determine the nature of the phrase, therefore the clause is an inflectional phrase • As the VP follows the inflection, it seems to be in the complement position • As the subject precedes the inflection, it seems to be in the specifier position

  8. Example

  9. Properties of the subject • The subject is in specifier of IP • This accounts for why it is the first element of the clause (specifiers precede X1 in English) • The subject is usually an argument of the verb • The ice will melt • He will read the paper • But it is the only argument that is not inside the VP • Why is the subject special in this way?

  10. Properties of the subject • For some verbs, the subject is not an argument: • It would seem that the ice melted • It could turn out that he will read the paper • This suggests that the subject position is empty semantically, but filled for syntactic reasons • The must be a syntactic subject (specifier of IP must be filled)= Extended Projection Principle

  11. Properties of the subject • Sometimes we find subjects inside VP: • The heat made [the ice melt] • ‘the ice melt’ is like an IP (clause) • The heat caused [the ice to melt] • ‘the ice melt’ is not an IP (clause) because it doesn’t contain an I: • * the heat made [the ice to melt] • * the heat made [the ice will melt] • * the heat made [the ice melted/melts] • The only other thing it could be is a VP – containing a subject

  12. Questions arising • Why is the subject special? • All other arguments are inside VP • Why is the subject position an argument position in some cases but not others? • If there is a subject position inside the VP, why do we never have two subjects?: • * John will Mary read the paper

  13. The Passive • In passives, the subject position is filled by what is interpreted as object: • The paper will be read (by everyone) • This raises problems as object usually can’t occupy this position – they usually have to occupy the object position: • Everyone will read the paper • * the paper will read (by everyone)

  14. The Passive • A more uniform analysis would be to assume that object always occupy object positions • But in passives they move to the subject position because this position is underlyingly empty • The subject position must be filled (EPP)

  15. The Passive • This accounts for why the object position must be empty in the passive: • * the paper was read the book (by everyone) • That the subject position is underlyingly empty is supported by: • Everyone thought [that the ice had melted] • The ice was thought [to have melted] • It was thought [that the ice had melted]

  16. Consequences for Grammatical Theory • If elements move from one position to another, there are two ways to describe a structure • Before the movement takes place (D-structure) • After the movement takes place (S-structure)

  17. Consequences for the Subject Position • There appear to be three ways to fill a subject position: • Fill it with an argument • Fill it with a meaningless element (it) • Move the object into it • This is a bit complicated – it would be better if the subject position could be treated more simply

  18. Collapsing meaningless subjects and moved objects • Given the two structural descriptions of a sentence (D- and S-structure), it is possible to view meaningless subjects and moved objects in a similar way • Suppose that at D-structure in both cases the subject position is empty • – may seem [that the ice melted] • – was read the paper (by everyone)

  19. Collapsing meaningless subjects and moved objects • At S-structure the subject must be filled, so: • The object moves in the passive • was read • ‘it’ is inserted when there is no object • may seem [that the ice melted] the paper – it –

  20. Unifying all subjects • There are two remaining problems: • Some subjects are filled without movement or insertion = arguments • Some subject arguments appear inside VP • But, if we suppose that all subject arguments start off inside the VP, we end up with a remarkably uniform theory: • The underlying subject position is always empty • It gets filled by things moving to it or being inserted • All arguments of a verb originate within the VP

  21. Example • Subject position is vacant (waiting for something) • Verb has all its arguments near by • So verbs can’t have arguments just anywhere • John said Bill saw Mary

  22. Example • Argument moves to vacant subject position

  23. Example • In passives there is no subject argument at D-structure • The subject position is still vacant and needs to be filled

  24. Example • Therefore a different argument has to move – i.e. the object.

  25. Example • With verbs like seem, there is no subject or object argument at D-structure

  26. Example • So at S-structure a grammatical subject is inserted

  27. Summary • All arguments of the verb start off inside the VP • The specifier of the IP must be filled • If there is an argument inside the VP (subject or object) that can move, it will move to the specifier of IP • If there is no argument, a meaningless subject (it) will be inserted

More Related