Episode 7a. Do-support (really), then subjects, agreement, and case 5.5;6.1-6.3 CAS LX 522 Syntax I

Episode 7a. Episode 7a. DoDo-support -support (really), then subjects, (really), then subjects,

agreement, and caseagreement, and case

5.5;6.1-6.35.5;6.1-6.3

CAS LX 522CAS LX 522Syntax ISyntax I

Typology of verb/aux Typology of verb/aux raisingraising

Interestingly, there Interestingly, there don’t seem to be don’t seem to be languages that raise languages that raise main verbs but not main verbs but not auxiliaries.auxiliaries. This double-binary This double-binary

distinction predicts distinction predicts there would be.there would be.

It overgenerates a It overgenerates a bit.bit.

This is a pattern This is a pattern that we would like to that we would like to explain someday, explain someday, another mystery about another mystery about Aux to file away.Aux to file away. Sorry, we won’t have Sorry, we won’t have

any satisfying any satisfying explanation for this explanation for this gap this semester.gap this semester.

T values [uInfl:] on Aux

T values [uInfl:] on v

English Strong Weak

French Strong Strong

Swedish Weak Weak

Unattested

Weak Strong

IrishIrish In Irish, the basic word order is VSO (other In Irish, the basic word order is VSO (other languages have this property too, e.g., Arabic)languages have this property too, e.g., Arabic) PhógPhóg Máire an lucharachán. Máire an lucharachán.kissed Mary the leprechaunkissed Mary the leprechaun‘Mary kissed the leprechaun.’‘Mary kissed the leprechaun.’

We distinguish SVO from SOV by supposing that We distinguish SVO from SOV by supposing that the head-complement order can vary from the head-complement order can vary from language to language (heads precede complements language to language (heads precede complements in English, heads follow complements in in English, heads follow complements in Japanese).Japanese).

We may also be able to distinguish other We may also be able to distinguish other languages (OVS, VOS) by a parameter of languages (OVS, VOS) by a parameter of specifier order.specifier order.

But But nono combination of these two parameters can combination of these two parameters can give us VSO.give us VSO.

IrishIrish But look at auxiliary verbs in Irish:But look at auxiliary verbs in Irish:

TáTá Máire ag- Máire ag-pógáilpógáil an lucharachán. an lucharachán.Is Mary ing-kiss the leprechaunIs Mary ing-kiss the leprechaun‘Mary is kissing the leprechaun.’‘Mary is kissing the leprechaun.’

We find that if an We find that if an auxiliaryauxiliary occupies occupies the verb slot at the beginning of the the verb slot at the beginning of the sentence, the main verb appears between sentence, the main verb appears between the subject and verb:the subject and verb:Aux S V OAux S V O..

What does this suggest aboutWhat does this suggest about The head-parameter setting in Irish?The head-parameter setting in Irish? How VSO order arises?How VSO order arises?

SVO to VSOSVO to VSO Irish appears to be essentially an SVO Irish appears to be essentially an SVO language, like French.language, like French.

Verbs and auxiliaries raise past the Verbs and auxiliaries raise past the subject to yield VSO.subject to yield VSO.

We can analyze the Irish pattern as being We can analyze the Irish pattern as being minimally different from our existing minimally different from our existing analysis of French— just one difference, analysis of French— just one difference, which we hypothesize is another which we hypothesize is another parametric difference between languages.parametric difference between languages.

V and Aux both raise to T (when tense V and Aux both raise to T (when tense values the [values the [uuInfl:] feature of either Infl:] feature of either one, [one, [uuInfl:] is strong) in Irish, just Infl:] is strong) in Irish, just as in French.as in French.

vv

French vs. IrishFrench vs. Irish Remember this step in the French derivation before?Remember this step in the French derivation before?

I’ve omitted negation to make it simpler.I’ve omitted negation to make it simpler. What if we stopped here?What if we stopped here?

In French it would crash (why?).In French it would crash (why?). But what if it didn’t crash in Irish?But what if it didn’t crash in Irish? What would have to be different?What would have to be different?

NPMarco

<V>

VP<v>

vvPP

NPZinédine

v[uInfl:pres*]

v

Vdéteste

T

T

TT [tense:pres, T, uN*, …]

Parametric differencesParametric differences We could analyze Irish as being just like French We could analyze Irish as being just like French except without the strong [except without the strong [uuN*N*] feature on T.] feature on T. Without that feature, the subject doesn’t need to move Without that feature, the subject doesn’t need to move to SpecTP. The order would be VSO, or AuxSVO.to SpecTP. The order would be VSO, or AuxSVO.

So, languages can vary in, at least:So, languages can vary in, at least: Head-complement orderHead-complement order (Head-specifier order)(Head-specifier order) Whether [Whether [uuInfl:] on Aux is strong or weak when valued by Infl:] on Aux is strong or weak when valued by TT

Whether [Whether [uuInfl:] on Infl:] on vv is strong or weak when valued by T is strong or weak when valued by T Whether T has a [Whether T has a [uuN*] feature or notN*] feature or not

Later, when we look at German, we’ll suggest a different Later, when we look at German, we’ll suggest a different analysis of Irish, but this will work for now.analysis of Irish, but this will work for now.

dodo-support-support In French, verbs move to In French, verbs move to TT..In English, they In English, they dodon’t move to n’t move to TT.. That’s because in French, when [tense:past] That’s because in French, when [tense:past] values [values [uuInfl:Infl:] on ] on vv, it is strong, and in , it is strong, and in English, it is weak.English, it is weak.

What this What this doesdoesn’tn’t explain is why explain is why dodo appears appears sometimes in English, seemingly doing sometimes in English, seemingly doing nothing but carrying the tense (and subject nothing but carrying the tense (and subject agreement).agreement).

The environments are complicated:The environments are complicated: Tom Tom diddid not not commitcommit the crime. the crime. Tom did not Tom did not commitcommit the crime, but someone the crime, but someone diddid.. Zoe and Danny vowed to Zoe and Danny vowed to proveprove Tom innocent, Tom innocent,and prove Tom innocent they and prove Tom innocent they diddid..

Tom (has) never Tom (has) never committedcommitted that crime. that crime.

dodo-support-support The environments are complicated:The environments are complicated:

Tom Tom diddid not not commitcommit the crime. the crime. Tom did not Tom did not commitcommit the crime, but someone the crime, but someone diddid.. Zoe and Danny vowed to Zoe and Danny vowed to proveprove Tom innocent, Tom innocent,and prove Tom innocent they and prove Tom innocent they diddid..

Tom (has) never Tom (has) never committedcommitted that crime. that crime. When When notnot separates T and separates T and vv, , dodo appears in T to appears in T to carry the tense morphology.carry the tense morphology.

When T is stranded due to VP ellipsis or VP When T is stranded due to VP ellipsis or VP fronting, fronting, dodo appears in T to carry the tense appears in T to carry the tense morphology.morphology.

When When nevernever (or any adverb) separates T and (or any adverb) separates T and vv, , tense morphology appears on the verb (tense morphology appears on the verb (vv).).

So, So, dodo appears when T is separated from the appears when T is separated from the verb, but adverbs like verb, but adverbs like nevernever aren’t “visible”, aren’t “visible”, they aren’t in the way.they aren’t in the way.

Technical difficultiesTechnical difficulties How do we generally know to pronounce V+How do we generally know to pronounce V+vv as a past tense verb?as a past tense verb? T values the [T values the [uuInfl:] feature of Infl:] feature of v. v. The The presumption is that presumption is that eat+veat+v[[uuInfl:past] sounds Infl:past] sounds like “ate.” And T doesn’t sound like anything.like “ate.” And T doesn’t sound like anything.

But this happens whether or not But this happens whether or not v v is right is right next to T. next to T. vv still has a [ still has a [uuInfl:] feature that Infl:] feature that has to be checked.has to be checked.

So, the questions are, how do we:So, the questions are, how do we: Keep from pronouncing the verb based on Keep from pronouncing the verb based on vv’s [’s [uuInfl:] Infl:] feature if T feature if T isn’tisn’t right next to it? right next to it?

Keep from pronouncing Keep from pronouncing do do at T if at T if vv isis right next to right next to it?it?

We need to connect T and We need to connect T and vv somehow. somehow.

Technical difficultiesTechnical difficulties The connection between T and The connection between T and vv is that is that (when there are no auxiliaries), T (when there are no auxiliaries), T values the [values the [uuInfl:] feature of Infl:] feature of vv..

This sets up a relationship between This sets up a relationship between the two heads.the two heads. Adger calls this relationship a Adger calls this relationship a chainchain..

We want to ensure that tense features We want to ensure that tense features are pronounced in exactly one place in are pronounced in exactly one place in this chain.this chain. If the ends of the chain are not close If the ends of the chain are not close enough together, tense is pronounced on T enough together, tense is pronounced on T (as (as dodo). If they ). If they areare close enough close enough together, tense is pronounced on together, tense is pronounced on vv+V.+V.

Technical difficultiesTechnical difficulties Let’s be creative: Suppose that the tense Let’s be creative: Suppose that the tense features on features on vv (the value of the [ (the value of the [uuInfl:] Infl:] feature) “refer back” to the tense features on feature) “refer back” to the tense features on T.T. Agree can see relatively far (so T can value the Agree can see relatively far (so T can value the [[uuInfl:] feature of Infl:] feature of vv, even if it has to look past , even if it has to look past negation).negation).

But “referring back” is more limited, basically But “referring back” is more limited, basically only available to features that are sisters. only available to features that are sisters. Negation will get in the way for this.Negation will get in the way for this.

So if you try to pronounce tense on So if you try to pronounce tense on v v but T is too but T is too far away, the back-reference fails, and far away, the back-reference fails, and v v is is pronounced as a bare verb. But the tense features pronounced as a bare verb. But the tense features have to be pronounced somewhere, so they’re have to be pronounced somewhere, so they’re pronounced on T (as pronounced on T (as dodo).).

PTRPTR Adger’s proposal:Adger’s proposal:

Pronouncing Tense Rule (PTR)Pronouncing Tense Rule (PTR)In a chain (T[tense], In a chain (T[tense], vv[[uuInfl:tense]), pronounce Infl:tense]), pronounce the tense features on the tense features on vv only if only if vv is the head of is the head of T’s sisterT’s sister

NegP, if there, will be the sister of T NegP, if there, will be the sister of T (HoP), but Neg has no [(HoP), but Neg has no [uuInfl:Infl:] feature. ] feature. dodo will be inserted.will be inserted.

Adverbs adjoin to Adverbs adjoin to vvP, resulting in a P, resulting in a vvP. P. vv has an [has an [uuInfl:Infl:] valued by T and adverbs ] valued by T and adverbs don’t get in the way of don’t get in the way of vvP being the sister P being the sister of T. Tense is pronounced on the verb (of T. Tense is pronounced on the verb (vv).).

If If vvP is gone altogether, P is gone altogether, dodo is inserted. is inserted.

vv

Pat did not call ChrisPat did not call Chris So, here, T and So, here, T and vv form a chain because form a chain because [tense:past] valued [[tense:past] valued [uuInfl:past]. But Infl:past]. But vv is is not the head of T’s sister.not the head of T’s sister.

T[tense:past, …]

NPChris

<V>vagent[uInfl:past,…]

VPv

Vcall

vvPP

<Pat>

Negnot

NegPNegP

TTNPPat

TP

vv

Pat did not call ChrisPat did not call Chris DoDo-support comes to the rescue. What this means is just that -support comes to the rescue. What this means is just that

T is T is pronouncedpronounced as as dodo with the tense specifications on T. with the tense specifications on T. According to PTR, we don’t pronounce them on According to PTR, we don’t pronounce them on vv. . The tree The tree doesn’t changedoesn’t change..

T[tense:past, …]

did

NPChris


VPv

Vcall

vvPP

<Pat>

Negnot

NegPNegP

TTNPPat

TP

vv

Pat never called ChrisPat never called Chris If there is an adverb like If there is an adverb like nevernever, PTR still allows , PTR still allows

tense to be pronounced on tense to be pronounced on vv (so T doesn’t have any (so T doesn’t have any pronunciation of its own at all).pronunciation of its own at all).

T[tense:past, …]

NPChris


VPv

Vcall

vvPP

<Pat>

AdvPnever

vvPP

TTNPPat

TP

Historical interludeHistorical interlude Back in the old days, people Back in the old days, people hypothesized that hypothesized that Pat will Pat will charm snakes charm snakes had a structure had a structure like this.like this. The subject NP The subject NP PatPat was in the was in the specifier of “IP” (what we call specifier of “IP” (what we call “TP”), and the VP contained “TP”), and the VP contained only the verb only the verb charm charm and the and the object NP object NP snakessnakes..

PatPat got an Agent got an Agent -role by -role by being in SpecIP, even though being in SpecIP, even though the fact that there is an the fact that there is an Agent Agent -role to be had is -role to be had is determined by the verb down determined by the verb down in the VP.in the VP.

VPIwill

I

IP

NPPat

Vcharm

NPsnakes

Historical interludeHistorical interlude Nevertheless, this predicts the Nevertheless, this predicts the normal word order pretty well, and normal word order pretty well, and so it was hypothesized that the so it was hypothesized that the verb simply assigned one of its verb simply assigned one of its --roles directly to SpecIP.roles directly to SpecIP. No big deal, syntax works in strange and No big deal, syntax works in strange and mysterious ways.mysterious ways.

At a certain point, someone started At a certain point, someone started thinking about sentences like thinking about sentences like these:these: All the students will take the exam.All the students will take the exam. The students will all take the exam.The students will all take the exam.

It’s fairly clear here that It’s fairly clear here that all the all the studentsstudents is an NP, that it forms a is an NP, that it forms a coherent unit, a coherent concept. coherent unit, a coherent concept. AllAll really belongs with really belongs with the the studentsstudents..

VPIwill

I

IP

NPPat

NPsnakes

Vcharm

Historical interludeHistorical interlude All the students will take the All the students will take the exam.exam.

The students will all take the The students will all take the exam.exam.

Back in the even older days, the Back in the even older days, the hypothesis was that there was a hypothesis was that there was a special rule that turned the special rule that turned the first sentence into the second.first sentence into the second.

The The Quantifier FloatQuantifier Float rule would rule would move move allall over to the right, next over to the right, next to the VP.to the VP.

allall NP … VP NP … VP NP … NP … allall + VP + VP

VPIwill

I

IP

NPPat

NPsnakes

Vcharm

Historical interludeHistorical interlude Not all quantifiers are subject to Not all quantifiers are subject to

Quantifier Float:Quantifier Float: Quantifiers:Quantifiers: every, some, all, most, every, some, all, most,

several, many, both, four, …several, many, both, four, …

Every student will take the exam.Every student will take the exam.*Student will every take the exam.*Student will every take the exam.

Several students will take the exam.Several students will take the exam.*Students will several take the exam.*Students will several take the exam.

It works for It works for bothboth and and allall::The students will both take the exam.The students will both take the exam.The students will all take the exam.The students will all take the exam.

What’s a difference between What’s a difference between everyevery, , somesome, , severalseveral, , manymany and and bothboth, , allall??

VPIwill

I

IP

NPPat

NPsnakes

Vcharm

Historical interludeHistorical interlude Upon further reflection, some Upon further reflection, some enterprising syntacticians hit upon enterprising syntacticians hit upon the idea that rather than floating the idea that rather than floating allall to its position next to VP, to its position next to VP, allall might instead have been “left might instead have been “left behind” by a subject that had behind” by a subject that had moved.moved.

will [all [the students]] take the exam.will [all [the students]] take the exam.

[all [the students]][all [the students]]ii will will ttii take the take the exam.exam.

[the students][the students]ii will [all will [all ttii] take the ] take the exam.exam.

And why would all the students have And why would all the students have been down there? Well, that would been down there? Well, that would simplify assignment of simplify assignment of -roles.-roles.

VPIwill

I

IP

NPPat

NPsnakes

Vcharm

The VP-Internal Subject The VP-Internal Subject HypothesisHypothesis

The verb (head of VP) The verb (head of VP) can assign can assign -roles to -roles to other things within other things within the VP, which is a the VP, which is a natural explanation natural explanation for how the choice of for how the choice of verb controls whether verb controls whether an Agent an Agent -role is -role is assigned or not.assigned or not.

This idea became This idea became known as the known as the VP-VP-Internal Subject Internal Subject HypothesisHypothesis..

V

I

I

IP

NPPat

will

ti

VP

NPsnakes

Vcharm


For us, we’ve supposed For us, we’ve supposed from the beginning that from the beginning that assignment of assignment of -roles is -roles is necessarily local. This necessarily local. This may not seem like a very may not seem like a very surprising hypothesis.surprising hypothesis.

But it was at the time a But it was at the time a rather unintuitive idea, rather unintuitive idea, and so various people and so various people set out to see if some set out to see if some of the predictions this of the predictions this makes are borne out in makes are borne out in the grammatical data.the grammatical data.

V

I

I

IP

NPPat

will

ti

VP

NPsnakes

Vcharm


It turns out that as It turns out that as people looked, there people looked, there were reasons to believe were reasons to believe this.this. The new analysis of The new analysis of Quantifier Float no longer Quantifier Float no longer relies on an idiosyncratic relies on an idiosyncratic rule of English, but more rule of English, but more general principles.general principles.

The assignment of The assignment of -roles -roles can now be more directly can now be more directly related to the properties related to the properties of the verb.of the verb.

And we can make sense of And we can make sense of therethere constructions in a constructions in a more straightforward way.more straightforward way.

V

I

I

IP

NPPat

will

ti

VP

NPsnakes

Vcharm

Back to the presentBack to the present The basic components of the quantifier The basic components of the quantifier “stranding” phenomenon are:“stranding” phenomenon are:

All the studentsAll the students is a constituent. is a constituent. The The studentsstudents is an NP inside is an NP inside all the all the studentsstudents.. [all [[all [NPNP the students]] the students]]

Either Either all the studentsall the students or just or just the the studentsstudents can move to SpecTP, to satisfy can move to SpecTP, to satisfy the [the [uuN*] feature of T.N*] feature of T.

So So all the studentsall the students and and the studentsthe students are are both NPs.both NPs. [[NPNP all [ all [NPNP the students]] the students]]

So So allall is essentially a noun, but one is essentially a noun, but one that takes an NP complement that takes an NP complement ((allall: [N, : [N, uuN*, …])N*, …]).. We’re assuming here that We’re assuming here that allall is not an adjunct, is not an adjunct, but in fact a head, taking the NP as a but in fact a head, taking the NP as a complement. Why?complement. Why?

all

NP

NP

thestudents

Quantifier Quantifier stranding is stranding is still often still often referred to referred to

as as “quantifier “quantifier float” to float” to this day, this day,

even though even though the name no the name no

longer longer reflects the reflects the analysis.analysis.

vv

All the students will take All the students will take the examthe exam

We start by building our We start by building our vvP.P. Merge the NP Merge the NP the examthe exam and the V and the V taketake (checks [ (checks [uuN*] N*] on V)on V)

Merge Merge vv and VP (HoP) and VP (HoP) Move V to Move V to v v (checks [(checks [uuV*] on V*] on vv)) Merge the N Merge the N all all and the NP and the NP the studentsthe students (checks (checks [[uuN*] on N*] on allall))

<V>vagent[uInfl:, …]

VPv

Vtake

vvPP

all

NP

NP

thestudents

NP

the exam

vv


We Merge the M We Merge the M willwill with with vvP (HoP)P (HoP) This values [This values [uuInfl:] on Infl:] on vv as [ as [uuInflInfl:M].:M].

<V>vagent[uInfl:M, …]

VPv

Vtake

vvPP

all

NP

NP

thestudents

NP

the exam

MM

Mwill

[uInfl:, …]

vv


We Merge the T We Merge the T willwill with MP (HoP)with MP (HoP) This values [This values [uuInfl:] on M as [Infl:] on M as [uuInflInfl::pres*pres*] ] (strong).(strong).


VPv

Vtake

vvPP

all

NP

NP

thestudents

NP

the exam

MPMP

Mwill

[uInfl:pres*, …]

TT

T[tense:pres,

uN*,…]

vv


We move M up to TWe move M up to T This checks the strong [This checks the strong [uuInflInfl::pres*pres*] on M.] on M.


VPv

Vtake

vvPP

all

NP

NP

thestudents

NP

the exam

MPMP

Mwill

[uInfl:pres*, …]

TT

T[tense:pres,uN*,…]

<M>

T


Now, there are two Now, there are two possibilities:possibilities: Move the NP Move the NP all the all the studentsstudents..

Move the NP Move the NP the studentsthe students..

Is Is all the studentsall the students closer to T than closer to T than the the

students students is?is?

Not if we define Not if we define “closer” as we did, in “closer” as we did, in terms of c-command.terms of c-command.

Where X c-commands Y Where X c-commands Y and Z, Y is closer to and Z, Y is closer to X than Z is if Y c-X than Z is if Y c-

commands Z.commands Z.

vv


VPv

Vtake

vvPP

all

NP

NP

thestudents

NP

the exam

MPMP

Mwill

[uInfl:pres*, …]

TT


<M>

T


Now, there are two Now, there are two possibilities:possibilities: Move the NP Move the NP all the studentsall the students.. Move the NP Move the NP the studentsthe students..

vv


VPv

Vtake

vvPP

all

NP

NP

thestudents

NP

the exam

MPMP

Mwill

[uInfl:pres*, …]

TT


<M>

T

TPTP

<NP>

The students will all take The students will all take the examthe exam

Now, there are two Now, there are two possibilities:possibilities: Move the NP Move the NP all the studentsall the students.. Move the NP Move the NP the studentsthe students..

vv


VPv

Vtake

vvPP

all

NP

<NP>

NP

the exam

MPMP

Mwill

[uInfl:pres*, …]

TT

T[tense:pres, uN*,…]

<M>

T

TPTP

NP

thestudents

Expletive constructionsExpletive constructions

An An expletiveexpletive is an element that can be in is an element that can be in subject position without having received subject position without having received a a -role from anywhere.-role from anywhere. ItIt had been raining.had been raining. ThereThere were fans rioting on Comm Ave.were fans rioting on Comm Ave.

We’ve seen We’ve seen itit before. But there is also before. But there is also therethere, which we’ll concentrate on now. , which we’ll concentrate on now. Neither means anything, neither gets a Neither means anything, neither gets a --role, both appear to satisfy the [role, both appear to satisfy the [uuN*] N*] feature of T.feature of T. Both can be used in other ways: Both can be used in other ways: I saw it over I saw it over therethere..

Expletive constructionsExpletive constructions There were fans rioting on Comm Ave.There were fans rioting on Comm Ave. Fans were rioting on Comm Ave.Fans were rioting on Comm Ave.

<V>

v

vP

<fans>

T

TP

fans

v+Vriot

ProgP

<be>

T

Tbe

<V>

v

vP

fans

T

TP

there

v+Vriot

ProgP

<be>

T

Tbe

CaseCase

Recall that pronouns in English show Recall that pronouns in English show distinctions in case:distinctions in case: Subject pronouns are in Subject pronouns are in nominativenominative case case Object pronouns are in Object pronouns are in accusativeaccusative case case

I saw her. She saw me. They saw him.I saw her. She saw me. They saw him.

How can we ensure the correlation?How can we ensure the correlation?

Nom caseNom case

Nominative subjects generally appear in Nominative subjects generally appear in the specifier of a the specifier of a finitefinite T. T. Finite T is pretty much any kind of T except Finite T is pretty much any kind of T except the infinitive.the infinitive.

We can treat case like we treated tense We can treat case like we treated tense inflection:inflection: Suppose T also has a [Suppose T also has a [uucase:nomcase:nom] feature.] feature. Suppose nominative NPs have a [Suppose nominative NPs have a [uucase:case:] ] feature.feature.

Suppose the [Suppose the [uucase:nomcase:nom] on T can value ] on T can value [[uucase:case:] on the NP, checking ] on the NP, checking bothboth..

So T needs a nom NP, and a nom NP needs T.So T needs a nom NP, and a nom NP needs T.

Acc caseAcc case

Subjects check nominative case with Subjects check nominative case with T. Objects have accusative case, T. Objects have accusative case, which we can treat in the same kind which we can treat in the same kind of way.of way. Suppose Suppose vv has [ has [uucase:acccase:acc].]. Suppose accusative NPs have [Suppose accusative NPs have [uucase:case:]] Suppose the [Suppose the [ucucase:accase:acc] on ] on vv can value the can value the [[uucase:case:] feature on the NP, checking both.] feature on the NP, checking both.

Nominative case is a relation between Nominative case is a relation between (finite) T and an NP, accusative case (finite) T and an NP, accusative case is a relation between is a relation between vv and an NP. and an NP.

Notes on caseNotes on case Nominative case is associated with Nominative case is associated with finite finite T. T. SheShe will charm snakes.will charm snakes. I wantI want herher to charm snakes.to charm snakes. I expectI expect herher to charm snakes.to charm snakes.

Non-finite T is not associated with nominative Non-finite T is not associated with nominative case. It’s not actually associated with accusative case. It’s not actually associated with accusative case either, but we’ll come back to that later.case either, but we’ll come back to that later.

Because NPs have an Because NPs have an unvalued unvalued [[uucase:case:] ] feature, we can suppose that pronouns feature, we can suppose that pronouns always enter the numeration the same always enter the numeration the same way, and are valued based on where they way, and are valued based on where they are Merged.are Merged. pronoun [N, pronoun [N, uucase:, …]case:, …]

Notes on caseNotes on case Although in English we only see the Although in English we only see the morphological effect of case on pronouns, morphological effect of case on pronouns, we assume that we assume that all NPs have an unvalued all NPs have an unvalued [[uucase:case:] feature] feature.. Plenty of languages other than English show case Plenty of languages other than English show case on all NPs, not just on pronouns. Case is on all NPs, not just on pronouns. Case is something that goes with being an NP. It’s just something that goes with being an NP. It’s just something you often don’t hear in English.something you often don’t hear in English.

Notational shortcuts:Notational shortcuts: [[nomnom] is used for [] is used for [uucase:nomcase:nom] (on T, or NP when ] (on T, or NP when checked)checked)

[[accacc] is used for [] is used for [uucase:acccase:acc] (on ] (on vv, or NP when , or NP when checked)checked)

[[casecase] is used for [] is used for [uucase:case:] (on an NP)] (on an NP)

Subject-verb agreementSubject-verb agreement Recall that in English, the Recall that in English, the --features of the subject have an features of the subject have an effect on the morphology of the verb:effect on the morphology of the verb: Fans were rioting on Comm Ave.Fans were rioting on Comm Ave. A fan was rioting on Comm Ave.A fan was rioting on Comm Ave.

While we’re here, we might as well While we’re here, we might as well account for this too. It is also an account for this too. It is also an agreement relation, between the agreement relation, between the subject and, eventually, the verb (or subject and, eventually, the verb (or auxiliary, if there is one).auxiliary, if there is one).

Subject-verb agreementSubject-verb agreement The verb gets its tense inflection The verb gets its tense inflection specified by T when, e.g., the [tense:pres] specified by T when, e.g., the [tense:pres] feature of T values the [feature of T values the [uuInfl:Infl:] feature of ] feature of vv..

Since the subject already agrees with T Since the subject already agrees with T (the [(the [nomnom] feature of T checks the [] feature of T checks the [casecase] ] feature of the subject), we’ll incorporate feature of the subject), we’ll incorporate subject agreement into this process.subject agreement into this process.

Notice that we still want this agreement to Notice that we still want this agreement to be mediated by T (sometimes it values, be mediated by T (sometimes it values, e.g., Perf):e.g., Perf): TheyThey havehave been reading novels.been reading novels. SheShe hashas been reading novels.been reading novels.

Subject-verb agreementSubject-verb agreement Suppose then that T has a [Suppose then that T has a [uu::] feature as ] feature as well.well.

The subject has (interpretable) The subject has (interpretable) -features -features that value the [that value the [uu::] feature of T.] feature of T. Fans were rioting on Comm Ave.Fans were rioting on Comm Ave. T [T, T [T, uuN*N*, , uu::, , nomnom]] fans [N, fans [N, :pl, :pl, casecase]]

So, once T is in the structure, c-So, once T is in the structure, c-commanding commanding fansfans in Spec in SpecvvP, we get:P, we get: T [T, T [T, uuN*N*, , uu:pl, :pl, nomnom]] fans [N, fans [N, :pl, :pl, nomnom]]

Subject-verb agreementSubject-verb agreement Finally, we suppose that the (checked) Finally, we suppose that the (checked) [[uu:pl] feature of T, also values a :pl] feature of T, also values a [[uuInfl:Infl:] feature on a lower ] feature on a lower vv (or Perf, or (or Perf, or Prog).Prog).

The rules of pronunciation will tell us The rules of pronunciation will tell us that a that a vv with the verb with the verb riotriot adjoined to it adjoined to it sounds like:sounds like: ““riotsriots” if ” if vv has the feature [ has the feature [uuInflInfl:pres,sg]:pres,sg] ““riotriot” if ” if vv has the feature [ has the feature [uuInflInfl:pres,pl].:pres,pl].

Notice that T values a [Notice that T values a [uuInfl:Infl:] feature all ] feature all at once, with any relevant feature(s) it at once, with any relevant feature(s) it has (so, tense and has (so, tense and -features both).-features both).

She likes themShe likes them So, let’s walk through it.So, let’s walk through it. We start by merging We start by merging likelike and the and the 3pl pronoun.3pl pronoun.

NPpronoun[N, :3pl, case]

VP

Vlikes[V]

She likes themShe likes them vv [ [vv, , uuN*N*, , uuInfl:Infl:, , uuV*V*, , accacc]] We Merge We Merge vv with VP (HoP). with VP (HoP). The [The [accacc] on ] on vv matches, values, and matches, values, and checks the [checks the [casecase] on the pronoun, ] on the pronoun, checking itself as well.checking itself as well.

Agree is lazy, we can do this without any further Agree is lazy, we can do this without any further Merging or Moving.Merging or Moving.

NPpronoun[N, :3pl, acc]

VP

Vlikes[V]

vv

v[v, uN*,uInfl:, uV*, acc]

She likes themShe likes them The V moves up to adjoin to The V moves up to adjoin to vv to to check the [check the [uuV*V*] feature of ] feature of vv..


VP

<V>

vv

v


Vlikes[V]

She likes themShe likes them The V moves up to adjoin to The V moves up to adjoin to vv to to check the [check the [uuV*V*] feature of ] feature of vv..

The 3sg feminine pronoun is The 3sg feminine pronoun is Merged to check the [Merged to check the [uuN*N*] feature ] feature of of vv..


VP

<V>

vv

v


Vlikes[V]

vvPP

NPpronoun

[N, :3fsg, case]

She likes themShe likes them The T is Merged with The T is Merged with vvP (HoP).P (HoP). The [nom] feature of T matches, values, and checks the [case] feature of the pronoun, checking itself in the process.


VP

<V>

vv

v


Vlikes[V]

vvPP

NPpronoun

[N, :3fsg, nom]

TT

T[T, tense:pres, u:, uN*, nom]

She likes themShe likes them The [:3fsg] feature of NP values and checks the [u:] feature of T.


VP

<V>

vv

v


Vlikes[V]

vvPP

NPpronoun

[N, :3fsg, nom]

TT

T[T, tense:pres,

u:3fsg, uN*, nom]

She likes themShe likes them The [u:3fsg] and [tense:pres] features of T value and check the [uInfl:] feature of v.

From now on: (Finite) T can only value a lower [uInfl:] feature once T itself has a value for []. Both [tense] and [] value the lower [uInfl:] feature. First step is always to check the [u:] feature on T, after which T will check the lower [uInfl:] feature.


VP

<V>

vv

v

v[v, uN*,uInfl:pres3fsg, uV*, acc]

Vlikes[V]

vvPP

NPpronoun

[N, :3fsg, nom]

TT

T[T, tense:pres,

u:3fsg, uN*, nom]

She likes themShe likes them Finally, the NP is moved up and Merged with T in order to check the EPP feature (the [uN*] feature) of T.


VP

<V>

vv

v

vvPP

<NP>

TT

T[T, tense:pres,

u:3fsg, uN*, nom]

NPpronoun

[N, :3fsg, nom]

TPTP


Vlikes[V]

She likes themShe likes them All uninterpretable features are checked, the pronunciation rules give us she likes them.


VP

<V>

vv

v

vvPP

<NP>

TT

T[T, tense:pres,

u:3fsg, uN*, nom]

NPpronoun

[N, :3fsg, nom]

TPTP


Vlikes[V]

Documents

Episode 7a. Do-support (really), then subjects, agreement, and case 5.5;6.1-6.3 CAS LX 522 Syntax I