The Syntax of Coordinate Structure Complexesrci.rutgers.edu/~ngw9/pdfs/slides.pdf · Peak Novelty Condition The PNC is an revision of the Extension ... Derivation With \and" TP XP

$Page 1: The Syntax of Coordinate Structure Complexesrci.rutgers.edu/~ngw9/pdfs/slides.pdf · Peak Novelty Condition The PNC is an revision of the Extension ... Derivation With \and" TP XP$
The Syntax of Coordinate Structure Complexes

Nicholas Winter

Rutgers University

WCCFL 35, April 29, 2017https://tinyurl.com/wccfl35

1 / 47

Goals

Today,

▶ Different structures, different interpretations.

▶ Coordinators have features.

▶ Intermediate Conjuncts.

Assumptions,

▶ No special syntactic category.

▶ No special syntactic processes.

▶ No silent/optional coordinators.

▶ Coordination is not strictly clausal.

▶ Ungrammatical derivations are filtered out at variousinterfaces.

2 / 47

Chomsky (2013)

Merge and Labeling Algorithm

Z

Zand W

Z W

Coordinators have no features, so we don’t have to label a node.

3 / 47

Interpretations

(1) Arpita, Rahul, and Diti went to the movies.

(2) Arpita and Rahul and Diti went to the movies.

Different interpretations?

(3) Dylan, Simon, and Garfunkel wrote hits in the sixties.

(4) Dylan and Simon and Garfunkel wrote hits in the sixties.

4 / 47

Interpretations

(1) Arpita, Rahul, and Diti went to the movies.

(2) Arpita and Rahul and Diti went to the movies.

Different interpretations?

(3) Dylan, Simon, and Garfunkel wrote hits in the sixties.

(4) Dylan and Simon and Garfunkel wrote hits in the sixties.

4 / 47

Interpretations II

(5) Dylan and Simon and Garfunkel wrote hits in the sixties.1

a. Three artists compose a supergroup.

b. Three artists work on their solo projects.

c. One artist works independently while two collaborate.

(6) Dylan, Simon and Garfunkel wrote hits in the sixties.




1Example from Winter (2006).5 / 47

Interpretations II

(5) Dylan and Simon and Garfunkel wrote hits in the sixties.1




(6) Dylan, Simon and Garfunkel wrote hits in the sixties.




1Example from Winter (2006).5 / 47

Conjunction Reduction?

From Borsley (2005),

(7) a. John and Bill went to the bank.

b. John went to the bank and Bill went to the bank.

(8) a. John and Bill went to the bank together.

b. # John went to the bank together and Bill went to thebank together.

Probably not.

6 / 47

Introduction by “both” (Borsley 2005)

Covert coordinators?

(9) both Hobbs and Rhodes...

(10) both Hobbs and Rhodes and Barnes...

a. both [Hobbs and Rhodes] and Barnes...

b. both Hobbs and [Rhodes and Barnes]...

(11) # both Hobbs, Rhodes, and Barnes...

7 / 47

Wide Scope Conjunction (Winter 2006)

(12) Here, you’re not allowed to sing aloud and dance andstamp your feet.

a. You cannot do two things (sing aloud, dance) but youcan do one (stamp your feet).

b. You cannot do three things (sing aloud, dance, stampyour feet).

(13) Here, you’re not allowed to sing aloud, dance, and stampyour feet.



8 / 47

Wide Scope Conjunction (Winter 2006)

(12) Here, you’re not allowed to sing aloud and dance andstamp your feet.



(13) Here, you’re not allowed to sing aloud, dance, and stampyour feet.



8 / 47

and the List Goes On

▶ Introduction with “each” Borsley 2005

▶ Gapping Borsley 2005

▶ “respectively” Borsley 2005

▶ Wide Scope Disjunction Winter 2006

▶ Adverbs of alternation and VP conjunction Winter 2006

▶ DP-internal conjunction Winter 2006

▶ “Left-subordinating” ‘and’ Winter 2006

Accounts exist, but rely on non-standard processes and covertmaterial. How far can we get without either?

Pretty far!

9 / 47

and the List Goes On

▶ Introduction with “each” Borsley 2005

▶ Gapping Borsley 2005

▶ “respectively” Borsley 2005

▶ Wide Scope Disjunction Winter 2006

▶ Adverbs of alternation and VP conjunction Winter 2006

▶ DP-internal conjunction Winter 2006

▶ “Left-subordinating” ‘and’ Winter 2006

Accounts exist, but rely on non-standard processes and covertmaterial. How far can we get without either? Pretty far!

9 / 47

Coordinate Simplex

A Coordinate Simplex has one coordinator and two conjuncts.

(14) DP

DP

Sue

and DP

John

10 / 47

Repeated Coordinate Complexes

A Repeated Coordinate Complex (RCC) has n − 1 coordinators forn conjuncts when n > 2.

(15) DP

DP

Billand

DP

Sue

and DP

John

11 / 47

Multiple Coordinate Complexes

A Multiple Coordinate Complex (MCC) has one coordinator for nconjuncts, when n > 2.

(16) DP

DP

BillDP

Sue

and DP

John

12 / 47

My Proposal

Two syntactic structures for two interpretations, derived from acommon origin.

(17) Simplex

Repeated Complex Multiple Complex

▶ Repeated Complexes are composed of nested Simplexes.

▶ Multiple Complexes are composed of repeated applications ofPenultimate Merge.

13 / 47

The PNC and Penultimate Merge (Safir 2010)

Peak Novelty Condition The PNC is an revision of the ExtensionCondition.

▶ After every instance of Merge, Mi , the undominated node Uof the resulting structure immediately dominates a node thatU did not immediately dominate before Mi .

Penultimate Merge

▶ Merge applied just below the undominated node.

‘novel’ additions to the undominated node satisfy the PNC.

14 / 47

The PNC and Penultimate Merge

(18)U

X Y

After X and Y are merged, the undominated node U dominatesnodes (X, Y) that U did not immediately dominate before Merge.The PNC is satisfied.

15 / 47


(19)U

W Z

X Y

After X is merged with Y, U, the undominated node, dominates anode (Z) that U did not immediately dominate before Merge. ThePNC is satisfied.

16 / 47


(20)U

W Z

X Y

S T

After S is merged with T (to form Y), U, the undominated node,does not dominate a node that U did not immediately dominatebefore Merge.The PNC is not satisfied.

17 / 47

Tucking In

The PNC licenses operations like Tucking In.

▶ In Bulgarian, all WH elements obligatorily move.

▶ The C-Command relation between WH items is preservedprocesses like Agree by “tucking in” the lower WH item.

18 / 47

Multiple Coordinate Complexes

▶ I propose Penultimate Merge inserts Intermediate Conjunctswithout positing unpronounced coordinators.

▶ Penultimate Merge ensures the conjunct is not a target for theLabeling Algorithm or processes like Agree.

(21)

External

Intermediate

Coordinator Internal

▶ I adopt terminology from Zhang (2010), describing thecoordinates in a Coordinate Simplex as External and InternalConjuncts.

19 / 47

A (Simple) MCC Derivation

Start with a Coordinate Simplex.

(22) DP

DP

Dylan

and DP

Garfunkel

20 / 47

A (Simple) MCC Derivation

Penultimate Merge applies. A novel node satisfies the PNC.

(23) DP

DP

DylanDP

Simon

and DP

Garfunkel

No covert material is postulated.

21 / 47

Why Penultimate Merge?

Other Merge operations don’t make correct predictions.

(24)

DP

the president DP

DP

Bill

DP

the president

and

DP

John

DP

the president

▶ Unattested word order.

▶ Appositives.

22 / 47

Getting Our Bearings

So far,

▶ Two structures for two interpretations.

▶ Derived via standard syntactic processes.

▶ No special syntactic structures for coordination.

How do Intermediate Conjuncts interact with processes like the LAor Agree?

▶ They don’t! (This is good!)

23 / 47

External and Internal Conjuncts (Zhang (2010))

▶ Zhang (2010) describes a privileged relation between acoordinate structure’s External Conjunct and its coordinator.

▶ I interpret this relation as a Spec-Head agreement relation, bywhich a coordinator may be valued for categorical features.

▶ Via Penultimate Merge, the Spec-Head relation can bepreserved while introducing Intermediate Conjuncts within aMultiple Coordinate Complex.

24 / 47

Intrinsic vs. Inheriting Coordinators (Zhang (2010))

“gen” may only coordinate nouns in Mandarin Chinese.

(25) DaiDai

JiaoshouProfessor

xihuanlike

hedrink

pijiubeer

(gen/*you)and/and

lu-cha.2

green-tea.

“Prof. Dai likes to drink beer and green -tea.”

“gen” is an Intrinsic Coordinator, in that it enters a derivationalready specified for features. It stands in contrast to a coordinatorlike “and” in English, an Inheriting Coordinator.

2Zhang (2010)25 / 47

Feature Inheritance

▶ Intrinsic Coordinators are already specified for features, andmust conjoin specific conjuncts.

▶ Inheriting Coordinators enter a derivation unspecified forfeatures, and inherit features from their External Conjunct.

▶ These heads project their features like any other head.▶ No ConjP!

26 / 47

Derivation With “and”

TP

XP

DP

John+nominal

and+??

DP

Mary+nominal

VP

saw a movie

27 / 47


TP

XP

DP

John+nominal

and+nominal

DP

Mary+nominal

VP

saw a movie

28 / 47


TP

DP

DP

John+nominal

and+nominal

DP

Mary+nominal

VP

saw a movie

29 / 47

Derivation With “gen”

XP

DP

beer+nominal

and+nominal

green-tea+nominal

30 / 47


XP

DP

beer+nominal

and+nominal

green-tea+nominal

31 / 47


DP

DP

beer+nominal

and+nominal

green-tea+nominal

32 / 47

Derivation

Step “and” “gen”

1 Simplex is built Simplex is built2 Inherit from Spec Check Conjuncts3 Intermediate Conjuncts Intermediate Conjuncts4 Project Features Project Features

33 / 47

Matched vs. Mismatched Coordination

▶ Matched Coordinators may only coordinate conjuncts of thesame type (‘gen’ and nominals).

▶ Mismatched Coordinators can coordinate conjuncts ofdiffering type (‘and’ and differing categories).

A quick typology of coordination at the level of Simplexes,

▶ Mandarin Chinese “gen” – Intrinsic, only Matched.

▶ English “and” – Inheriting, Matched or Mismatched.

34 / 47

Labeling

Heads project their categorical features. Penultimate Mergeassures Intermediate Conjuncts will not be a target for the LA.

(26) You can depend on . . . 3

a. John, her assistant, and that they will arrive on time.

b. John, that they will arrive on time, and her assistant.

c. her assistant, John, and that they will arrive time.

d. her assistant, that they will arrive on time, and John.

e. * that they will arrive on time, John, and her assistant.

f. * that they will arrive on time, her assistant, and John.

3Examples inspired by Gazdar et al (1985), via al-Khalaf (2015)35 / 47

A Choice Between Two Specifiers

PP

P

on

DP(*CP)+nominal

complementizer

DP

John+nominal

CP

that they will arrive on time+complementizer

and+nominal

+complementizer

DP

his assistant+nominal

Why bother with the coordinator? Coordinators have features!

36 / 47


PP

P

on

DP(*CP)+nominal

complementizer

DP

John+nominal

CP


and+nominal

+complementizer

DP


Why bother with the coordinator?

Coordinators have features!

36 / 47


PP

P

on

DP(*CP)+nominal

complementizer

DP

John+nominal

CP


and+nominal

+complementizer

DP


Why bother with the coordinator? Coordinators have features! 36 / 47

Another Prediction

Additional evidence for this comes from the grammaticality of thefollowing coordinate structure,

(27) DP

DPVP

gen DP

(28) DaiDai

JiaoshouProfessor

xihuanlike

pijiu,beer

qugo.to

xuexiao,school

genand

lucha.green.tea.

“Prof. Dai likes beer, going to school, and green tea.”

If “gen” checked the Intermediate Conjunct, we’d expect this to beungrammatical!

37 / 47

Another Proposal

Intermediate Conjuncts are present in the syntax, but are nevertargets for the LA or Agree.

▶ “Intermediate Conjunct Agreement” is unattested.

My analysis captures the relative structural unimportance ofIntermediate Conjuncts without positing covert/unpronouncedmaterial.

▶ The result is a conceptually simpler account of CoordinateComplexes.

38 / 47

Conclusion

Adopting a Penultimate approach gets,▶ Different structures for different interpretations.

▶ RCCs gets pair readings, MCCs do not.

▶ Doesn’t rely on unpronounced/covert material.▶ Penultimate Merge introduces Intermediate Conjuncts without

additional coordinators.

▶ Accounts for some Labeling/Agreement observations.▶ Coordinator labels projection by way of External Conjunct.▶ Intermediate Conjuncts will never be targets for Agree.

My proposal,

▶ Provides a simple, conceptually motivated account ofCoordinate Complexes.

▶ Relies on existing syntactic processes.

39 / 47

Thanks!

Thank you!

Special thanks go to,

▶ Ken Safir

▶ Mark Baker

▶ Jose Camacho

▶ The graduate community at Rutgers.

▶ Anonymous WFFCL reviewers.

40 / 47

References

▶ al Khalaf, E. (2015). Coordination and Linear Order. Ph. D. thesis,University of Delaware.

▶ Borsley, R. D. (2005). Against Conjp. Lingua 115(4), 461482.

▶ Linares, C. (2012). The Dependency Axiom and the Relation betweenAgreement and Movement. Ph. D. thesis, Rutgers University.

▶ Safir, K. (2010). Viable syntax: Rethinking minimalist architecture.Biolinguistics 4(1).

▶ Safir, K. (2015, December). The a/a-distinction as an epiphenomenon.Handout.

▶ Winter, Y. (2001). Flexibility Principles in Boolean Semantics:coordination, plurality and scope in natural language. Cambridge,Massachusetts: MIT Press.

▶ Winter, Y. (2006). Multiple coordination: Meaning composition vs. thesyntax-semantics interface. Unpublished manuscript.

▶ Zhang, N. N. (2010). Coordination in Syntax. Cambridge UniversityPress.

41 / 47

Appendix: Semantics

Traditional semantic accounts of coordination describe coordinatesas coordinating two things.

▶ Where τ is any type, ⟨τ⟨τ, τ⟩⟩.Winter (2001) makes a distinction between Union and SetFormation.

(29) (Dylan and Simon and Garfunkel) wrote hits in the sixties.

a. ({d ′} ∪ {s ′}) ∪ {g ′} = {d ′, s ′} ∪ {g ′} = {d ′, s ′, g ′}b. {d ′} ∪ ({s ′} ∪ {g ′}) = {d ′} ∪ {s ′, g ′} = {d ′, s ′, g ′}

(30) Dylan and (Simon and Garfunkel) wrote hits in the sixties.

a. d ′sf (s ′sfg ′) = d ′sf {s ′, g ′} = {d ′, {s ′, g ′}}

A semantic analysis would begin with this observation, and mightattribute a ‘flexible’ quality to coordinators like ‘and’ in naturallanguage.

42 / 47

Appendix: Closest Conjunct Agreement

Closest Conjunct Agreement is a difficult term to pin down.

▶ Closest in terms of linear order?

▶ Closest in terms of (vertical) hierarchical order?

al-Khalaf (2015) gives an interesting account of closest conjunctagreement (and Coordinate Structure Complexes) but relies onconstruction specific processes and additional covert material.

43 / 47


al-Khalaf (2015)

▶ “...arguing for a primary role of linear order in the syntax.”

▶ “...requires a special mode of structure building.”

Linear order plays an important role, but not an all-encompassingone. Examples in which the last conjunct controls agreement arenot so straightforward, and not worth the cost.

▶ Special labeling process for coordinate structures, ‘Set Label’.

▶ Unpronounced coordinators accompany all nouns.

▶ Structure is built left to right, new definition of hierarchy.

▶ Optional pronunciation of (some) coordinators.

I’m partial to analyses of Closest Conjunct Agreement (Linares2012, among others), that treat Closest Conjunct Agreement as aPF repair mechanism.

44 / 47


Bidirectional agreement in Hindi.

(31) Rina-neRina-ERG

gaa-yiising-PFV.F

eka

ghazalghazal.F

aurand

eka

nazamnazam.F

thiibe.PST.F.SG

“Rina has sung a ghazal and a nazam”

(32) * Rina-neRina-ERG

gaa-yiising-PFV.F

eka

ghazalghazal.F

aurand

eka

gaanagaana.M

thabe.PST.M.SG

“Rina has sung a ghazal and a gaana.”

45 / 47

Appendix: al-Khalaf (2015) MCC

{NP1, NP2, NP3}

NP1

&C NP1

a mystery novel

{NP2, NP3, ∪}

NP2∪

&O

(and)

NP2

a thriller

NP3∪

&O

and

NP3

a history book

46 / 47

Appendix: al-Khalaf (2015) RCC

{NP1, {NP2, NP3}}

NP1

&C NP

ice cream

{NP2, NP3}∪

&O

and

{NP2, NP3}

NP2∪

&C NP2

milk

NP3

&O

and

NP3

cookies

47 / 47

Documents

The Syntax of Coordinate Structure Complexesrci.rutgers.edu/~ngw9/pdfs/slides.pdf · Peak Novelty Condition The PNC is an revision of the Extension ... Derivation With \and" TP XP