Week 3. X-bar Theory CAS LX 522 Syntax I. Back to the trees: X-bar Theory Consider our current NP rule: Consider our current NP rule: NP: (D) (AdjP+)

Week 3. X-bar TheoryWeek 3. X-bar Theory

CAS LX 522CAS LX 522Syntax ISyntax I

Back to the trees: X-bar Back to the trees: X-bar TheoryTheory

Consider our current NP rule:Consider our current NP rule: NP: (D) (AdjP+) N (PP+)NP: (D) (AdjP+) N (PP+)

This yields a “flat structure” where all of the This yields a “flat structure” where all of the components of DP c-command each other.components of DP c-command each other.

NP

D N PP

this book P NP

of N

PP

poems

P NP

with D AdjP

the

N

coverAdj

blue

AdjP

Adj

big

X-bar Theory: NPX-bar Theory: NP I bought this big I bought this big book of poems with the book of poems with the

blue coverblue cover.. You bought this small You bought this small oneone..

NP

D N PP

this book P NP

of N

PP

poems

P NP

with D AdjP

the

N

coverAdj

blue

AdjP

Adj

big

X-bar Theory: NPX-bar Theory: NP We can substitute We can substitute oneone for for book of poems book of poems

with the blue coverwith the blue cover, which should mean , which should mean book of poems with the blue coverbook of poems with the blue cover is a is a constituent, but it isn’t in our structure.constituent, but it isn’t in our structure.

NP

D N PP

this book P NP

of N

PP

poems

P NP

with D AdjP

the

N

coverAdj

blue

AdjP

Adj

big

X-bar Theory: NPX-bar Theory: NP I bought this small I bought this small oneone with the red cover. with the red cover. We can also substitute We can also substitute oneone in for in for book of book of

poemspoems alone, which should thus also be a alone, which should thus also be a constituent.constituent.

NP

D N PP

this book P NP

of N

PP

poems

P NP

with D AdjP

the

N

coverAdj

blue

AdjP

Adj

big

X-bar Theory: NPX-bar Theory: NP This suggests a more deeply embedded This suggests a more deeply embedded

structure:structure:

?

D N PP

this book P NP

of N

PP

poems

P NP

with D AdjP

the

N

coverAdj

blue

AdjP

Adj

big

?

NP

X-bar Theory: NPX-bar Theory: NP These “intermediate” nodes of NP: These “intermediate” nodes of NP: NN (N-bar). (N-bar). Notice that you can also say Notice that you can also say I bought this I bought this oneone..

N

D N PP

this book P NP

of N

PP

poems

P NP

with D AdjP

the

N

coverAdj

blue

AdjP

Adj

big

N

NP

X-bar Theory: NPX-bar Theory: NP So, our final NP looks like this:So, our final NP looks like this:

N

D N PP

this book P NP

of N

PP

poems

P NP

with D AdjP

the

N

coverAdj

blue

AdjP

Adj

big

N

NP

N

X-bar Theory: NPX-bar Theory: NP We need to break up our NP rule; instead ofWe need to break up our NP rule; instead of

NP: (D) (AdjP+) N (PP+)NP: (D) (AdjP+) N (PP+) We have:We have:

NP: (D) NNP: (D) N NN : AdjP N : AdjP N NN : N : N PP PP NN : N (PP) : N (PP)

These yield the same results on the surface These yield the same results on the surface (note the recursion and the optionality) but (note the recursion and the optionality) but produce different structures (in terms of produce different structures (in terms of constituency).constituency).

Notice also that under these rules, any node of Notice also that under these rules, any node of NP has no more than two daughters (NP has no more than two daughters (binary binary branchingbranching).).

X-bar Theory: VPX-bar Theory: VP

The same kind of thing holds of VP as The same kind of thing holds of VP as well as NP. Instead of using well as NP. Instead of using oneone (which stands for N(which stands for N) we can try doing ) we can try doing replacements using replacements using do sodo so, and we’ll , and we’ll get a very similar result.get a very similar result.

Our old rule generated a flat structure Our old rule generated a flat structure for VP as well (all PPs, NPs, CPs, etc. for VP as well (all PPs, NPs, CPs, etc. in a VP c-command each other).in a VP c-command each other). VP: (AdvP+) V ({NP/CP}) (PP+) VP: (AdvP+) V ({NP/CP}) (PP+)

(AdvP+)(AdvP+)

X-bar Theory: VPX-bar Theory: VP

VP: (AdvP+) V ({NP/CP}) (PP+) VP: (AdvP+) V ({NP/CP}) (PP+) (AdvP+)(AdvP+)

I I quickly leftquickly left after Mary after Mary did sodid so.. I I left quicklyleft quickly after Mary after Mary did sodid so.. I I ate the pizzaate the pizza with gusto and Mary with gusto and Mary

did so did so with quiet reserve.with quiet reserve. I I ate the pizza with gustoate the pizza with gusto

immediately and Mary immediately and Mary did so did so later.later.

X-bar Theory: VPX-bar Theory: VP Again, it looks like we need to break our Again, it looks like we need to break our

rule into parts using Vrule into parts using V (for which (for which do sodo so can substitute).can substitute). VP: (AdvP+) V ({NP/CP}) (PP+) (AdvP+)VP: (AdvP+) V ({NP/CP}) (PP+) (AdvP+)

To:To: VP: VVP: V VV: AdvP V: AdvP V VV: V: V PP PP VV: V: V AdvP AdvP VV: V ({NP/CP}): V ({NP/CP})

Again, this is (almost) the same on the Again, this is (almost) the same on the surfacesurface, but yields a different , but yields a different structurestructure. . And again, binary.And again, binary.

X-bar Theory: VPX-bar Theory: VP Our new rules do not Our new rules do not quitequite make make

the same predictions about the the same predictions about the surface strings of VPs, however. surface strings of VPs, however. The old rules had (PP+) before The old rules had (PP+) before (AdvP+), the new rules allow them (AdvP+), the new rules allow them to intermingle.to intermingle.

But that’s actually better:But that’s actually better: John grabbed the book John grabbed the book quicklyquickly from from

the tablethe table triumphantlytriumphantly.. John grabbed the book John grabbed the book off the table off the table

quickly with a devilish grinquickly with a devilish grin

X-bar Theory: AdjPX-bar Theory: AdjP We should now be growing suspicious of our We should now be growing suspicious of our

other rules, now that we have had to split up NP other rules, now that we have had to split up NP and VP and introduce Nand VP and introduce N and V and V nodes. nodes. The governor was [The governor was [AdjP AdjP very very concerned about housing concerned about housing

costscosts ]; the tenants were [ ]; the tenants were [AdjPAdjP even more even more soso ]. ].

The studio was [The studio was [AdjPAdjP unusually unusually pleased with its actors pleased with its actors and confident of success and confident of success ].].

The first statement was true; the second was less so.The first statement was true; the second was less so. This gives us evidence of This gives us evidence of

AdjP: (AdvP) AdjAdjP: (AdvP) Adj AdjAdj : Adj (PP) : Adj (PP)

X-bar Theory: PPX-bar Theory: PP The frisbee landed on the roof.The frisbee landed on the roof. It landed right on the edge.It landed right on the edge. John knocked it right off the roof and into the John knocked it right off the roof and into the

trashcan.trashcan. Mark was at odds with his supervisor.Mark was at odds with his supervisor. Mark was in love and at odds with his Mark was in love and at odds with his

supervisor.supervisor. So, this gives us (assuming So, this gives us (assuming rightright is an is an

AdjP):AdjP): PP: (AdjP) PPP: (AdjP) P PP : P : P (PP) (PP) PP : P DP : P DP

X-bar theoryX-bar theory

PP: (AdjP) PPP: (AdjP) P PP : P : P (PP) (PP) PP : P DP : P DP


The main idea behind X-bar theory is to explain the similarity between the rules for each category. It is an attempt to generalize over the rules we have.

AdjP: (AdvP) Adj Adj : Adj (PP)

VP: VV : AdvP VV : V PPV : V AdvPV : V ({NP/CP})




The X in X-bar theory is a variable over categories. When we talk of XP, we mean to be describing any kind of phrase (VP, NP, AdjP, AdvP, PP, TP, CP, …).






The rules all have the following form:XP: ZP X X : (YP) XX : X (YP) X : X (WP)




X-bar theory elevates this to a X-bar theory elevates this to a principle of principle of phrase structurephrase structure; it hypothesizes that ; it hypothesizes that allall phrases in a syntactic tree conform to this phrases in a syntactic tree conform to this template.template.

XP : (ZP) XXP : (ZP) X AA phrase (XP) consists of optionally another phrase phrase (XP) consists of optionally another phrase

and a bar-level projection (Xand a bar-level projection (X).). XX : YP X : YP X oror X X: X: X YP YP

AA bar-level projection (Xbar-level projection (X) can consist of another X) can consist of another X and another phrase (recursive).and another phrase (recursive).

XX : X (WP) : X (WP) AA bar-level projection (Xbar-level projection (X) consists of a head of the ) consists of a head of the

same category (X) and optionally another phrase.same category (X) and optionally another phrase.


Structurally, this looks Structurally, this looks like this (of course, there like this (of course, there can be any number of Xcan be any number of X nodes, here we see three).nodes, here we see three).

Different parts of this Different parts of this structure are given structure are given different names (and they different names (and they act different from one act different from one another, as we’ll see).another, as we’ll see).

ZP

X YP

X WP

X

X

XP

YP


The phrase which is The phrase which is immediately dominated immediately dominated by XP (designated ZP by XP (designated ZP here) is the here) is the specifierspecifier..

ZP

X YP

X WP

X

X

XP

YP



A phrase dominated by XA phrase dominated by X and the sister of Xand the sister of X is an is an adjunctadjunct..

ZP

X YP

X WP

X

X

XP

YP



A phrase dominated by XA phrase dominated by X and the sister of Xand the sister of X is an is an adjunctadjunct..

The phrase which is sister The phrase which is sister to X is the to X is the complementcomplement..

ZP

X YP

X WP

X

X

XP

YP


We have posited a structural We have posited a structural difference between difference between complements (WP here, of complements (WP here, of which there is only one) and which there is only one) and adjuncts (YP here, of which adjuncts (YP here, of which there can be any number), and there can be any number), and so we should expect to find so we should expect to find that they behave differently.that they behave differently.

Consider NP…Consider NP…

ZP

X YP

X WP

X

X

NP

YP

X-bar Theory: NPX-bar Theory: NP The head of this NP is The head of this NP is

bookbook..

N

D N PP

the book P NP

of N

PP

poems

P NP

with D AdjP

the

N

coverAdj

blue

AdjP

Adj

big

N

NP

N


bookbook.. The complement is The complement is of of

poemspoems..

N

D N PP

the book P NP

of N

PP

poems

P NP

with D AdjP

the

N

coverAdj

blue

AdjP

Adj

big

N

NP

N


bookbook.. The complement is The complement is of of

poemspoems.. With the blue coverWith the blue cover and and

bigbig are adjuncts. are adjuncts.N

D N PP

the book P NP

of N

PP

poems

P NP

with D AdjP

the

N

coverAdj

blue

AdjP

Adj

big

N

NP

N

X-bar Theory: NPX-bar Theory: NP The head of this NP is The head of this NP is bookbook.. The complement is The complement is of poemsof poems.. With the blue coverWith the blue cover and and bigbig

are adjuncts.are adjuncts. TheThe is in specifier position.is in specifier position.

N

D N PP

the book P NP

of N

PP

poems

P NP

with D AdjP

the

N

coverAdj

blue

AdjP

Adj

big

N

NP

N

Note: D here is not a phrase; it does not conform to X-bar theory. We will fix this soon.

X-bar theory: NPX-bar theory: NP

The The complementcomplement of a head (e.g., of a head (e.g., of poemsof poems in in a book of poemsa book of poems) tends to feel more ) tends to feel more intimately related to the head. Compare intimately related to the head. Compare a a book on the tablebook on the table..

The complement of N in English is almost The complement of N in English is almost always introduced by the preposition always introduced by the preposition ofof..

X-bar theory allows for only one complement, X-bar theory allows for only one complement, and indeed in NP we cannot have two and indeed in NP we cannot have two ofof-PPs -PPs of this sort:of this sort: *The book of poems of fiction*The book of poems of fiction

Cf. Cf. The book of poems and of fictionThe book of poems and of fiction

X-bar theory: NPX-bar theory: NP An An adjunctadjunct, on the other hand, feels more “optional”, on the other hand, feels more “optional”

A book on the tableA book on the table X-bar theory allows for any number of adjuncts (not just X-bar theory allows for any number of adjuncts (not just

one, like with complements).one, like with complements). The book with the blue cover on the third shelf about C++The book with the blue cover on the third shelf about C++

Adjuncts can generally be re-ordered freely.Adjuncts can generally be re-ordered freely. The book with the blue cover about C++ on the third shelfThe book with the blue cover about C++ on the third shelf The book about C++ with the blue cover on the third shelfThe book about C++ with the blue cover on the third shelf The book about C++ on the third shelf with the blue coverThe book about C++ on the third shelf with the blue cover The book on the third shelf with the blue cover about C++The book on the third shelf with the blue cover about C++ The book on the third shelf about C++ with the blue coverThe book on the third shelf about C++ with the blue cover


X-bar structure also predicts X-bar structure also predicts that the complement PP of an that the complement PP of an NP must be NP must be firstfirst; it cannot be ; it cannot be re-ordered with respect to re-ordered with respect to adjunct PPs.adjunct PPs. The book The book of poemsof poems with the blue with the blue

cover on the third shelfcover on the third shelf *The book with the blue cover *The book with the blue cover of of

poemspoems on the third shelf on the third shelf *The book on the third shelf *The book on the third shelf of of

poemspoems with the blue cover with the blue cover *The book with the blue cover on *The book with the blue cover on

the third shelf the third shelf of poemsof poems

ZP

X YP

X WP

X

X

XP

YP

X-bar theory: NPX-bar theory: NP Other tests differentiate adjuncts and Other tests differentiate adjuncts and

complements too.complements too. Conjoining two elements of a given category Conjoining two elements of a given category

yields an element of the same category; if yields an element of the same category; if conjunction is possible the two conjuncts are conjunction is possible the two conjuncts are of the same category.of the same category.

You cannot conjoin a complement and an You cannot conjoin a complement and an adjunct PP (where could it go in the adjunct PP (where could it go in the structure?), although you can conjoin structure?), although you can conjoin complements and you can conjoin adjuncts:complements and you can conjoin adjuncts: The book The book of poemsof poems and and of essaysof essays The book The book with the blue coverwith the blue cover and and with the red with the red

spinespine *The book *The book of poemsof poems and and with the red spinewith the red spine


Finally, recall our Finally, recall our oneone--replacement test. replacement test. OneOne can stand in for an Ncan stand in for an N, , but not for an N.but not for an N.

This predicts that you This predicts that you should not ever be able should not ever be able to get to get oneone followed by followed by a a complementcomplement PP; PP; OneOne should only be able to should only be able to be followed by adjunct be followed by adjunct PPs.PPs.

ZP

X YP

X WP

X

X

XP

YP

One would replacean X node.


And this prediction is met:And this prediction is met: The book of poems on the third shelfThe book of poems on the third shelf The one on the fourth shelfThe one on the fourth shelf *The one of essays on the third shelf*The one of essays on the third shelf

So, X-bar structures seem to So, X-bar structures seem to accurately characterize the accurately characterize the structure of the NP.structure of the NP.


Adjuncts do not have to be on Adjuncts do not have to be on the right, as all of the PP’s that the right, as all of the PP’s that we’ve looked as so far have we’ve looked as so far have been.been.

Left-handed adjuncts to NP Left-handed adjuncts to NP include AdjP, like:include AdjP, like: The very big book of poemsThe very big book of poems The big red boring book of poemsThe big red boring book of poems The big boring red book of poemsThe big boring red book of poems

ZP

X YP

X WP

X

X

XP

YP

X-bar theory: NPX-bar theory: NP In fact, it appears that In fact, it appears that complementscomplements do do

not always have to be on the right. A not always have to be on the right. A complement is the phrase which is sister complement is the phrase which is sister to the head, but either of these structures to the head, but either of these structures has a complement XP. Nevertheless, has a complement XP. Nevertheless, there there can be only one complementcan be only one complement..

N

N XP

N

XP N


An example of a left-sided An example of a left-sided complement is complement is linguisticslinguistics in in linguistics booklinguistics book..

Is it really a complement? What kind Is it really a complement? What kind of tests can you think of to see if it is of tests can you think of to see if it is really a complement?really a complement?


There can be only one complementThere can be only one complement The The linguisticslinguistics book book The book The book of essaysof essays *The *The linguisticslinguistics book book of essaysof essays The boring book The boring book of essaysof essays.. The boring The boring linguisticslinguistics book. book.

X-bar theory: NPX-bar theory: NP The complement has to be closest to the The complement has to be closest to the

head. Adjuncts can be re-ordered.head. Adjuncts can be re-ordered. The boring linguistics bookThe boring linguistics book *The linguistics boring book*The linguistics boring book The boring old linguistics bookThe boring old linguistics book The old boring linguistics bookThe old boring linguistics book

Note:Note: English adjectives tend to have a English adjectives tend to have a preferred order, but putting them out of preferred order, but putting them out of order sounds a lot better than having a order sounds a lot better than having a complement separated from the head N.complement separated from the head N. The big red linguistics bookThe big red linguistics book ?The red big linguistics book?The red big linguistics book *The big linguistics red book*The big linguistics red book


Complements cannot be conjoined Complements cannot be conjoined with adjuncts; likes can only be with adjuncts; likes can only be conjoined with likes.conjoined with likes. The long and boring linguistics bookThe long and boring linguistics book The The linguisticslinguistics and and literatureliterature book book *The boring and *The boring and literatureliterature book book *The long and *The long and linguisticslinguistics book book


OneOne-replacement can’t strand the -replacement can’t strand the complement.complement. The big linguistics bookThe big linguistics book The big oneThe big one *The linguistics one*The linguistics one


An interesting ambiguity:An interesting ambiguity: The French teacherThe French teacher

What can this mean?What can this mean? The teacher of FrenchThe teacher of French The teacher from FranceThe teacher from France

In the first case, we paraphrased with In the first case, we paraphrased with a complement PP, in the second, we a complement PP, in the second, we paraphrased with an adjunct PP.paraphrased with an adjunct PP.


FrenchFrench can be either a complement can be either a complement or an adjunct, but the two structures or an adjunct, but the two structures yield the same surface word order:yield the same surface word order:

N

NP Nteacher

French

NP

N

AdjP

NFrench

NP

N

teacher

X-bar theory: NPX-bar theory: NP But, now we have a bag of tricks that we But, now we have a bag of tricks that we

can use to disambiguate this in one sense or can use to disambiguate this in one sense or another.another.

Complements have to be closest to the head.Complements have to be closest to the head. The French German teacherThe French German teacher The German French teacherThe German French teacher

OneOne cannot strand the complement cannot strand the complement The French oneThe French one

Conjuncts must be of the same categoryConjuncts must be of the same category The French and Math teacherThe French and Math teacher The tall and German teacherThe tall and German teacher

Side commentSide comment A quick pause to remind us of what we’re doing…A quick pause to remind us of what we’re doing… We are characterizing what native speakers know We are characterizing what native speakers know

about language (in this instance, NPs).about language (in this instance, NPs). Chances are, those of you who are native speakers Chances are, those of you who are native speakers

of English, didn’t of English, didn’t know aboutknow about the distinction the distinction between complements and adjuncts and the rules between complements and adjuncts and the rules governing their use.governing their use.

Yet, if you agree with my assignment of Yet, if you agree with my assignment of grammaticality and ungrammaticality, you grammaticality and ungrammaticality, you nevertheless nevertheless knewknew the distinction and the the distinction and the structures.structures.

That is, there really That is, there really isis a system here hiding a system here hiding beneath our consciousness. There really beneath our consciousness. There really isis something to this stuff.something to this stuff.

X-bar theory: VPX-bar theory: VP

X-bar theory hypothesizes that X-bar theory hypothesizes that phrases of all categories have the phrases of all categories have the same basic structure.same basic structure.

In particular, VP has the same In particular, VP has the same properties as NP:properties as NP: Only one complementOnly one complement Adjuncts which can be of any number Adjuncts which can be of any number

and are re-orderableand are re-orderable So, let’s see how this plays out in So, let’s see how this plays out in

phrases other than NP.phrases other than NP.

X-bar theory: VPX-bar theory: VP

In the VP, the In the VP, the direct objectdirect object is the is the complement.complement. The students ate The students ate the sandwichesthe sandwiches..

Other things (AdvPs, PPs) are Other things (AdvPs, PPs) are adjuncts.adjuncts. The students left at 7 o’clock.The students left at 7 o’clock. The students left swiftly.The students left swiftly.

X-bar theory: VPX-bar theory: VP Let’s go through some of our bag of tricks…Let’s go through some of our bag of tricks… There can be only one complement.There can be only one complement.

*The students ate *The students ate the sandwichesthe sandwiches the pizzathe pizza.. Cf. Cf. The students ate The students ate the sandwichesthe sandwiches and and the pizzathe pizza..

The complement must be closest to the head.The complement must be closest to the head. The students ate The students ate the pizzathe pizza in record time. in record time. *The students ate in record time *The students ate in record time the pizzathe pizza..

Adjuncts may be re-orderedAdjuncts may be re-ordered The students ate The students ate the pizzathe pizza in record time on in record time on

Thursday.Thursday. The students ate The students ate the pizzathe pizza on Thursday in record on Thursday in record

time.time.

X-bar theory: VPX-bar theory: VP Do so Do so can’t strand the complement.can’t strand the complement.

*John ate *John ate the pizzathe pizza and Mary did so and Mary did so the sandwichesthe sandwiches.. John ate John ate the pizzathe pizza in short order but Mary did so in in short order but Mary did so in

record time.record time. Likes conjoin only with likes.Likes conjoin only with likes.

John ate the pizza quickly and with gusto.John ate the pizza quickly and with gusto. ?Mary ate the pizza and with gusto.?Mary ate the pizza and with gusto.

Note:Note: The reason this does not sound so bad is The reason this does not sound so bad is that it is possible to interpret this as that it is possible to interpret this as Mary ate Mary ate the pizza and (she did so) with gustothe pizza and (she did so) with gusto, leaving , leaving she did soshe did so unpronounced. It is hard to get unpronounced. It is hard to get around this problem, so this test is not very around this problem, so this test is not very reliable for VP.reliable for VP.

X-bar theory: PP, AdjP, X-bar theory: PP, AdjP, AdvPAdvP

It turns out to be more difficult to It turns out to be more difficult to show parallels in PPs, AdjPs, and show parallels in PPs, AdjPs, and AdvPs, but we will still assume that AdvPs, but we will still assume that they follow the same structural rules they follow the same structural rules as VPs and NPs.as VPs and NPs.

Nevertheless, here are a couple of Nevertheless, here are a couple of suggestive data points…suggestive data points…

X-bar theory: AdjP, PPX-bar theory: AdjP, PP

SoSo-replacement can’t strand the -replacement can’t strand the complement (AdjP).complement (AdjP). John was afraid John was afraid of tigersof tigers; Mary was less so; Mary was less so

(*(*of lionsof lions)).. There can be only one complement (AdjP).There can be only one complement (AdjP).

*John was afraid *John was afraid of tigersof tigers of lionsof lions.. There can be only one complement (PP).There can be only one complement (PP).

*John fell off *John fell off the roofthe roof the housethe house..

X-bar theory: SpecifiersX-bar theory: Specifiers One position we haven’t One position we haven’t

addressed yet is the addressed yet is the specifierspecifier position (ZP here), the position (ZP here), the daughter of XP and sister of daughter of XP and sister of XX..

In our rules so far, we have In our rules so far, we have had almost nothing which had almost nothing which occupies that position, but we occupies that position, but we will see more shortly.will see more shortly.

X-bar theory allows for only X-bar theory allows for only one specifierone specifier (like with the (like with the complement).complement).

ZP

X YP

X WP

X

X

XP

YP

X-bar theory: SpecifiersX-bar theory: Specifiers

The main example of a specifier we The main example of a specifier we have seen so far is the D in the NP (have seen so far is the D in the NP (thethe in in the booksthe books or or thisthis in in this bookthis book).).

But as you’ve probably heard by now, But as you’ve probably heard by now, this is problematic for X-bar theory this is problematic for X-bar theory because D is a head, and specifiers are because D is a head, and specifiers are supposed to be phrases.supposed to be phrases.

X-bar theory: DPX-bar theory: DP

So what’s the deal with this D, So what’s the deal with this D, anyway?anyway?

If we want to believe in X-bar theory, If we want to believe in X-bar theory, our structure for NP that has D in its our structure for NP that has D in its specifier cannot really be the specifier cannot really be the structure. Specifiers should have structure. Specifiers should have phrases (XPs), yet D is a head.phrases (XPs), yet D is a head.

Where do we start?Where do we start?


Well, if D is really a head, we have Well, if D is really a head, we have an immediate conclusion we can an immediate conclusion we can draw based on X-bar theory:draw based on X-bar theory:

D heads a DP.D heads a DP. There must be a There must be a structure like this:structure like this:




Dthe

D

DP




So is it actually So is it actually DP DP which iswhich isin the specifier of NP?in the specifier of NP?

Dthe

D

DP


Actually, Actually, nono. In fact, . In fact, the DP is not inside the DP is not inside the NP at all.the NP at all.

Rather, the NP is Rather, the NP is inside the DP. The NP inside the DP. The NP is the is the complementcomplement to to D.D.

Dthe

D

DP

Nbook

N

NP


This structure is in This structure is in accord with X-bar accord with X-bar theory, but what other theory, but what other evidence can we come evidence can we come up with that it is up with that it is actually actually rightright??

Dthe

D

DP

Nbook

N

NP


Consider the genitive (possessive) Consider the genitive (possessive) ’s’s in English: in English: John’s hatJohn’s hat The student’s sandwichThe student’s sandwich The man from Australia’s bookThe man from Australia’s book The man on the hill by the tree’s binocularsThe man on the hill by the tree’s binoculars

Notice that the Notice that the ’s’s attaches to the attaches to the whole possessor whole possessor phrasephrase——in the last two examples, it isn’t even in the last two examples, it isn’t even attached to the head noun attached to the head noun (it’s the man’s book and (it’s the man’s book and binoculars, not Australia’s or the tree’s, after all)binoculars, not Australia’s or the tree’s, after all)..

This is not a noun suffix. It seems more like a This is not a noun suffix. It seems more like a little little wordword that signals possession, standing between that signals possession, standing between the possessor and the possessee.the possessor and the possessee.

X-bar theory: DPX-bar theory: DP It is impossible to have both a It is impossible to have both a ’s’s and a and a

determiner.determiner. *The building’s the roof*The building’s the roof

Cf. Cf. The roof of the buildingThe roof of the building *The tiger’s the eye*The tiger’s the eye

Determiners like Determiners like thethe and the possession and the possession marker marker ’s’s seem to be in seem to be in complementary complementary distributiondistribution—if one appears, the other —if one appears, the other cannot.cannot.

This would make sense if both This would make sense if both thethe and and ’s’s are instances of the category D; DP can are instances of the category D; DP can have only one head.have only one head.

X-bar theory: DPX-bar theory: DP This suggests a structure like This suggests a structure like

this for possession phrases:this for possession phrases:

The possessor DP is in the The possessor DP is in the specifier of DP. specifier of DP. And of course, And of course, this can be as complex a DP as this can be as complex a DP as we like, e.g., we like, e.g., the very hungry the very hungry linguistics student by the tree linguistics student by the tree with the purple flowers over with the purple flowers over therethere..

The possessed NP is the The possessed NP is the complement of D.complement of D.

D’s

D

DP

Nbook

N

NP

DP

D

D

Nstudent

N

NPthe


Note that if we took the old view and Note that if we took the old view and supposed that D is in the specifier of supposed that D is in the specifier of NP, then we shouldn’t be able to NP, then we shouldn’t be able to have anything else in the specifier of have anything else in the specifier of NP, since we’re only allowed one NP, since we’re only allowed one specifier.specifier.

We would have no way to draw We would have no way to draw the the student’s bookstudent’s book, since there would be , since there would be no place to attach no place to attach the studentthe student..


We used to think that the subject of a We used to think that the subject of a sentence (like sentence (like the studentthe student) or the object ) or the object of a verb or preposition (like of a verb or preposition (like the the sandwichessandwiches) was an NP, but now we ) was an NP, but now we know better. Accordingly, we’ll need to know better. Accordingly, we’ll need to revise our rules that refer to NP to revise our rules that refer to NP to instead refer to DP.instead refer to DP.

Having done that, the Having done that, the onlyonly rule we will rule we will have left that introduces an NP is the have left that introduces an NP is the one which says:one which says: DD : D NP : D NP


Another thing of interest about the Another thing of interest about the possessor phrase is its possessor phrase is its recursiverecursive property.property.

The possessor is a DP in the specifier of The possessor is a DP in the specifier of DP. That means that the DP possessor DP. That means that the DP possessor could have a possessor too…could have a possessor too…

The student’s father’s bookThe student’s father’s book The student’s mother’s brother’s The student’s mother’s brother’s

roommateroommate

X-bar theory: DPX-bar theory: DP The The

student’s student’s mother’s mother’s brother’s brother’s roommateroommate

D’s

D

DP

Nroommate

N

NP

DP

D

D

Nstudent

N

NPthe

D’s

D

Nbrother

N

NP

DP

D’s

D

Nmother

N

NP

DP


One thing worth addressing is the question One thing worth addressing is the question of what to do with apparently of what to do with apparently simplesimple “NPs” “NPs” like like JohnJohn or or studentsstudents (e.g., (e.g., Students in the Students in the class complained bitterlyclass complained bitterly).).

Are these also DPs?Are these also DPs? According to what we just said, According to what we just said, the subject the subject

of the sentence is of the sentence is alwaysalways a DP a DP (as is the (as is the object of a verb or of a preposition, etc.) and object of a verb or of a preposition, etc.) and never just an NP.never just an NP.

So, how do we draw these?So, how do we draw these?

X-bar theory: PronounsX-bar theory: Pronouns

Consider pronouns like Consider pronouns like meme, , youyou, , himhim (or (or II, , youyou, , hehe).).

Since a pronoun can be the subject of Since a pronoun can be the subject of a sentence (e.g., a sentence (e.g., I leftI left), a pronoun ), a pronoun must be part of a DP.must be part of a DP.

For pronouns, however, there’s some For pronouns, however, there’s some reason to believe that they actually reason to believe that they actually headhead the DP. That is, that the the DP. That is, that the pronoun pronoun II is a D. is a D.


Consider the following:Consider the following: You politicians are all alike.You politicians are all alike. We linguists need to stick We linguists need to stick

together.together. The media always mocks us The media always mocks us

academics.academics. These seem to have a pronoun These seem to have a pronoun

followed by a noun inside the followed by a noun inside the DP; we can make sense of this DP; we can make sense of this if the pronoun is a D which if the pronoun is a D which can optionally take an NP can optionally take an NP complement.complement.

Dwe

D

DP

Nlinguists

N

NP


So in the basic case, it So in the basic case, it looks like we should treat looks like we should treat pronouns as being of pronouns as being of category D.category D.

Dwe

D

DP

X-bar theory: Bare nouns X-bar theory: Bare nouns and proper namesand proper names

How about something like How about something like studentsstudents (in (in Students poured out of the auditorium at Students poured out of the auditorium at noonnoon) or ) or JohnJohn (in (in John went for a walkJohn went for a walk)?)?

For For studentsstudents, we want to believe that it is , we want to believe that it is an instance of the N category (in order to an instance of the N category (in order to make sense of make sense of the studentsthe students or or we studentswe students or or John’s studentsJohn’s students. But if this N is . But if this N is contained in a DP (the complement of a D contained in a DP (the complement of a D head), where is the D?head), where is the D?

In order to maintain consistency, we’ll In order to maintain consistency, we’ll suppose that suppose that in bare nouns D is present in bare nouns D is present but null but null (it has no phonological (it has no phonological representation; we write this as Ø).representation; we write this as Ø).

X-bar theory: Bare nouns X-bar theory: Bare nouns and proper namesand proper names

So for the bare noun So for the bare noun studentsstudents, we have a , we have a structure like that shown structure like that shown here.here.

As for proper names like As for proper names like JohnJohn, we will for the , we will for the moment assume that they moment assume that they are more like pronouns are more like pronouns than like bare nouns—the than like bare nouns—the proper noun is an instance proper noun is an instance of the category D.of the category D.

DØ

D

DP

Nstudents

N

NP

X-bar theory: Proper X-bar theory: Proper namesnames

We can draw We can draw JohnJohn as shown here. as shown here.

It’s worth pointing out that there is a It’s worth pointing out that there is a lot more to say on the subject of lot more to say on the subject of proper names and on the structure of proper names and on the structure of DP in general, but we will return to DP in general, but we will return to these questions in Syntax II.these questions in Syntax II. For something to ponder, consider that For something to ponder, consider that

in many languages you would say in many languages you would say something analogous to “something analogous to “the Johnthe John” for ” for JohnJohn, and consider the implications of , and consider the implications of something like something like Good old John left earlyGood old John left early. . Nevertheless, we’ll draw proper names Nevertheless, we’ll draw proper names as shown.as shown.

DJohn

D

DP


We have now seen at least We have now seen at least one case of a specifier, one case of a specifier, namely the possessor phrase namely the possessor phrase in a DP.in a DP.

X-bar theory allows for only X-bar theory allows for only one specifierone specifier (like with the (like with the complement).complement).

And, as predicted, there can And, as predicted, there can only be one possessor phrase only be one possessor phrase per DP:per DP: The student’s bookThe student’s book *The student the professor’s *The student the professor’s

bookbook

ZP

X YP

X WP

X

X

XP

YP


The structure also predicts The structure also predicts that that the specifier should be the specifier should be the element furthest away the element furthest away from the headfrom the head, outside of all , outside of all adjuncts and complements.adjuncts and complements. The student’s big red book of The student’s big red book of

poemspoems *Big the student’s red book of *Big the student’s red book of

poemspoems *Big red the student’s book of *Big red the student’s book of

poemspoems

ZP

X YP

X WP

X

X

XP

YP

X-bar theory: SpecifiersX-bar theory: Specifiers Incidentally, if we look back to the rules we had for Incidentally, if we look back to the rules we had for

PP and AdjP, we PP and AdjP, we initiallyinitially posited things in these posited things in these specifiers as well.specifiers as well.

It turns out to be hard to get any internal evidence to It turns out to be hard to get any internal evidence to show whether these are or are not really specifiers; in show whether these are or are not really specifiers; in the book, this is simply glossed over as we skip to the the book, this is simply glossed over as we skip to the next step. I opted to present them as the simplest next step. I opted to present them as the simplest structures we had evidence for at the time.structures we had evidence for at the time.

PP: (AdjP) PP : P (PP)P : P DP


X-bar theory: SpecifiersX-bar theory: Specifiers However, for the purpose of a) However, for the purpose of a) consistencyconsistency and b) and b)

compatibility down the roadcompatibility down the road, we will assume this , we will assume this was not in fact correct.was not in fact correct.

Instead, we will assume that, except for the Instead, we will assume that, except for the possessor in DP, possessor in DP, we have not met any specifiers yetwe have not met any specifiers yet..

So, when you go back and look over your notes, So, when you go back and look over your notes, consider the proper interpretation to be as follows:consider the proper interpretation to be as follows:

PP: PP : (AdjP) PP : P (PP)P : P DP

AdjP: Adj Adj : (AdvP) Adj Adj : Adj (PP)adjuncts

X-bar theory: TPX-bar theory: TP Now, let’s look a bit more globally. We left Now, let’s look a bit more globally. We left

off last time with a rule for TP (which we off last time with a rule for TP (which we used to call “S”) that looks like this:used to call “S”) that looks like this: TP: NP T VPTP: NP T VP

Since X-bar theory has been working so far, Since X-bar theory has been working so far, we assume that TP too must have an X-bar-we assume that TP too must have an X-bar-compliant structure, not the flat structure compliant structure, not the flat structure this rule provides.this rule provides.

And, of course, now that we know And, of course, now that we know the the studentstudent is a DP and is a DP and the studentthe student is a perfectly is a perfectly fine subject, we need to change the fine subject, we need to change the NPNP in in the rule to a the rule to a DPDP..

X-bar theory: TPX-bar theory: TP

This one is pretty easy; we can see This one is pretty easy; we can see exactly what to try first. The subject exactly what to try first. The subject should be in the specifier of TP and the should be in the specifier of TP and the VP should be the complement of T. Our VP should be the complement of T. Our new rules look like this:new rules look like this: TP: DP TTP: DP T TT : T VP : T VP

The subject is in the specifier of TPThe subject is in the specifier of TP(“SpecTP” for short). (“SpecTP” for short). That’s likeThat’s likesaying “DP daughter of TP”.saying “DP daughter of TP”. T

T

TP

VP

DP

X-bar theory: CPX-bar theory: CP

The last phrase we need to deal The last phrase we need to deal with is the CP phrase headed by with is the CP phrase headed by complementizers like complementizers like thatthat. The . The obvious proposal is that they look obvious proposal is that they look like this:like this: CP: CCP: C CC : C TP : C TP

We’ll make use of SpecCPWe’ll make use of SpecCPlater; for now it remains empty.later; for now it remains empty.

C

C

CP

TPthat

Sentencing guidelinesSentencing guidelines

We now have all of the pieces organized We now have all of the pieces organized to draw a structure of a basic sentence.to draw a structure of a basic sentence.

With X-bar theory, our structures will in With X-bar theory, our structures will in general be general be tallertaller, because they involve , because they involve onlyonly binary branching. binary branching.

Every phrase (XP) has a head and at Every phrase (XP) has a head and at least one Xleast one X constituent. constituent.

Every sentence will have a TP and a VP.Every sentence will have a TP and a VP.

A basic sentenceA basic sentence

Here’s the structure for Here’s the structure for the very simple sentencethe very simple sentence I left.I left.

We see that:We see that: There is a TP.There is a TP. There is a VP.There is a VP. The subject is in SpecTP.The subject is in SpecTP. Every XP has a head and Every XP has a head and

an Xan X..

I

leaveV

V

VP

DP

T-ed

T

TP

D

D

More More complex…complex…

Slightly more complex:Slightly more complex: John’s dog chewed a bone.John’s dog chewed a bone.

We see that:We see that: There is a TP.There is a TP. There is a VP.There is a VP. The subject is in SpecTP.The subject is in SpecTP. Every XP has a head and Every XP has a head and

an Xan X.. The possessor is in The possessor is in

SpecDP.SpecDP. The direct object is the The direct object is the

complement of V.complement of V.

’s

chewV

V

VP

DP

T-ed

T

TP

D

D

John

DP

D

D

dog

NP

N

N

a

DP

D

D

bone

NP

N

N

Where we are…Where we are…

X-bar theory says that X-bar theory says that all phrases have the all phrases have the structure here.structure here. ZP is the specifier,ZP is the specifier, The YPs are adjuncts,The YPs are adjuncts, The WP is the The WP is the

complement,complement, The X is the head,The X is the head, The XP is the phraseThe XP is the phrase

ZP

X YP

X WP

X

X

XP

YP

Where we are…Where we are…

X-bar structure constrains the X-bar structure constrains the formform that structures can take. that structures can take. Specifiers, adjuncts, and Specifiers, adjuncts, and

complements must themselves complements must themselves be phrases (XP-type trees, not be phrases (XP-type trees, not heads)heads)

There can be only one There can be only one complement and only one complement and only one specifier.specifier.

There can be indefinitely many There can be indefinitely many adjuncts, iterating at the Xadjuncts, iterating at the X level.level.

ZP

X YP

X WP

X

X

XP

YP

Matrix clausesMatrix clauses

A simple clause (subject, predicate) A simple clause (subject, predicate) which “stands on its own” is often which “stands on its own” is often called a called a root clauseroot clause or a or a matrixmatrix clauseclause or a or a main clausemain clause. Most of the . Most of the sentences we’ve seen so far are of sentences we’ve seen so far are of this type.this type. The students ate the sandwiches.The students ate the sandwiches. Mary left.Mary left.

Embedded clausesEmbedded clauses

We also know that it is possible to We also know that it is possible to embedembed a clause inside another a clause inside another clause.clause. John said John said that the students ate the that the students ate the

sandwichessandwiches.. Sue claimed Sue claimed that Mary leftthat Mary left..

These are called, sensibly enough, These are called, sensibly enough, embedded clausesembedded clauses or or subordinate subordinate clausesclauses..

FinitenessFiniteness

There are several different There are several different kindskinds of of clauses.clauses.

We’re all probably familiar with the We’re all probably familiar with the infinitive form of verbs: infinitive form of verbs: to walkto walk, , to singto sing, , ……

In general, the infinitive form of the verb In general, the infinitive form of the verb is is toto plus a plus a bare stembare stem. By “bare stem” we . By “bare stem” we mean the verb without any marking for mean the verb without any marking for past tense (past tense (eateat not not ateate) or for subject ) or for subject agreement (agreement (eateat not not eatseats).).


We refer to the infinite forms of the We refer to the infinite forms of the verb as verb as nonfinitenonfinite, and forms of the verb , and forms of the verb without without toto and with tense marking or and with tense marking or subject agreement marking as subject agreement marking as finitefinite..

We’ve already discussed the idea that We’ve already discussed the idea that tense information is something that is tense information is something that is represented in the tree in the T node.represented in the tree in the T node.

T can be either T can be either finitefinite (past, present) or (past, present) or nonfinitenonfinite (in which case it often holds (in which case it often holds toto).).


Matrix clauses seem never to be Matrix clauses seem never to be nonfinite; all matrix clauses are finite.nonfinite; all matrix clauses are finite.

Embedded clauses can be either Embedded clauses can be either nonfinite or finite (depending on nonfinite or finite (depending on certain other factors).certain other factors). I want I want John to leaveJohn to leave.. I said that I said that John leftJohn left.. I said that I said that Mary should leaveMary should leave.. I see that I see that Ben exercises regularlyBen exercises regularly..

Finiteness: tense and Finiteness: tense and agreementagreement

The hallmark of finiteness is the The hallmark of finiteness is the presence of tense and agreement. presence of tense and agreement. This is generally reflected on the This is generally reflected on the verb in the form of suffixes.verb in the form of suffixes. I walk; I walkI walk; I walkeded.. You walk; you walkYou walk; you walkeded.. He walkHe walkss; he walk; he walkeded.. She walkShe walkss; she walk; she walkeded..


Although other languages of the Although other languages of the world often mark tense and/or world often mark tense and/or agreement more explicitly, in English agreement more explicitly, in English we find a lot of we find a lot of zero morphologyzero morphology in in the tense and agreement system.the tense and agreement system.

Remember, all matrix clauses are Remember, all matrix clauses are finite, yet the finite, yet the youyou (2nd person) form (2nd person) form of of walkwalk looks just like the bare form looks just like the bare form in in to walkto walk..


We think of We think of walkedwalked as having two parts, the as having two parts, the verb stem (verb stem (walkwalk) and the past tense suffix () and the past tense suffix (--eded).).

In the present tense, we often In the present tense, we often seesee only the only the verb stem (verb stem (I walkI walk), but it is, after all, ), but it is, after all, present tense—it is finite. The assumption is present tense—it is finite. The assumption is that the that the pronunciation pronunciation of the present tense of the present tense suffix in English is suffix in English is ØØ, null, nothing. That is, , null, nothing. That is, a finite verb always has a tense suffix, but a finite verb always has a tense suffix, but sometimes it is pronounced as sometimes it is pronounced as -ed-ed, , sometimes as sometimes as ØØ..

Present tense is a Present tense is a zero morphemezero morpheme..


In English, there is also (limited) agreement In English, there is also (limited) agreement with the with the subjectsubject of the clause. We can see of the clause. We can see this most clearly with the verb this most clearly with the verb to beto be:: I I amam; ; he he isis; ; wewe//theythey//you you areare

And with most other verbs, there is an And with most other verbs, there is an -s-s suffix that appears when the subject is 3rd suffix that appears when the subject is 3rd person singular; in the other cases, we person singular; in the other cases, we assume a assume a Ø Ø suffix.suffix. I/you/they/we walkI/you/they/we walk; ; she walkshe walkss

Finite verbs are those which have tense Finite verbs are those which have tense and/or agreement marking (even if it is and/or agreement marking (even if it is ØØ).).


In English, an overt (non-In English, an overt (non-ØØ) tense suffix ) tense suffix generally “takes priority” over subject generally “takes priority” over subject agreement. Having a past tense suffix (agreement. Having a past tense suffix (-ed-ed) for ) for nearly all verbs precludes having an overt nearly all verbs precludes having an overt subject agreement in 3sg:subject agreement in 3sg: I walkI walk;; he walkhe walkss I walkI walkeded; ; he walkhe walkeded..

The only exception is the The only exception is the copulacopula ( (to beto be) which ) which shows both tense and subject agreement:shows both tense and subject agreement: I I amam; ; he he isis; ; you/they/we you/they/we areare I/he I/he waswas; ; you/they/we you/they/we werewere

Nevertheless, the assumption is that they are Nevertheless, the assumption is that they are both there abstractly. Finite verbs agree with both there abstractly. Finite verbs agree with the subject and have tense morphology.the subject and have tense morphology.


Because of all the zero morphology, it Because of all the zero morphology, it isn’t always obvious when a clause is isn’t always obvious when a clause is nonfinite. Although nonfinite. Although toto is a good tip- is a good tip-off, it’s not off, it’s not alwaysalways present in a present in a nonfinite clause.nonfinite clause. I told I told you to eat broccoliyou to eat broccoli.. I saw I saw you eat broccoliyou eat broccoli.. I know I know you eat broccoliyou eat broccoli..

The first is clearly nonfinite, but so is The first is clearly nonfinite, but so is one of the other ones. Which one?one of the other ones. Which one?

FinitenessFiniteness I saw you eat broccoli.I saw you eat broccoli. I know you eat broccoli.I know you eat broccoli.

Because the Because the youyou form (2sg; 2pl) does not form (2sg; 2pl) does not show overt subject agreement, one thing show overt subject agreement, one thing to try is to change the subject to 3sg:to try is to change the subject to 3sg: I saw him eat broccoli.I saw him eat broccoli. I know he eatI know he eatss broccoli. broccoli.

Ah-ha! With a 3sg subject, we find Ah-ha! With a 3sg subject, we find agreement in the second sentence; it must agreement in the second sentence; it must be finite. There is no agreement in the be finite. There is no agreement in the first sentence, so it must be nonfinite.first sentence, so it must be nonfinite.


I saw I saw himhim eat broccoli. eat broccoli. I know I know hehe eats broccoli. eats broccoli. HeHe eats broccoli. eats broccoli. **HimHim eats broccoli. eats broccoli.

Another point to notice is the form of Another point to notice is the form of the pronoun: In finite sentences the the pronoun: In finite sentences the masculine 3sg pronoun is masculine 3sg pronoun is hehe, but in , but in nonfinite sentences it is nonfinite sentences it is himhim..

Finiteness and CaseFiniteness and Case This difference between This difference between he he and and himhim is a is a

difference in Case—Case, basically, marks the difference in Case—Case, basically, marks the position (or role) of a pronoun in the structure.position (or role) of a pronoun in the structure.

A pronoun in subject position of a finite clause A pronoun in subject position of a finite clause has has nominativenominative (subject) case: (subject) case: II left left; ; hehe left left; ; sheshe left left; ; wewe left left; ; theythey left left..

A pronoun in almost any other position (object A pronoun in almost any other position (object position; subject of a nonfinite clause) has position; subject of a nonfinite clause) has accusativeaccusative (object) case: (object) case: J met J met meme; ; J met J met himhim; ; J met J met herher; ; J met J met usus; ; J met J met themthem.. J saw J saw meme eat broccoli eat broccoli; ; J saw J saw herher eat broccoli eat broccoli..

Finiteness and CaseFiniteness and Case

Although in English, Case is limited Although in English, Case is limited to the pronominal system, many to the pronominal system, many languages show Case distinctions on languages show Case distinctions on all nouns.all nouns. Korean:Korean:

Chelswu-Chelswu-kaka Sunhi- Sunhi-lullul manna-ss-ta manna-ss-taChelswu-Chelswu-nomnom Sunhi- Sunhi-accacc met-past-decl met-past-decl‘‘Chelswu met Sunhi.’Chelswu met Sunhi.’

Japanese:Japanese:Akira Akira gaga ringo ringo oo tabeta tabetaAkira Akira nomnom apple apple accacc ate ate‘‘Akira ate an apple.’Akira ate an apple.’


Another way to tell whether a clause is Another way to tell whether a clause is finite is to look at the complementizer, if finite is to look at the complementizer, if there is one.there is one.

The complementizer The complementizer thatthat always always introduces finite clauses, and the introduces finite clauses, and the complementizer complementizer forfor always (in always (in contemporary English) introduces contemporary English) introduces nonfinite clauses.nonfinite clauses. John’s parents wish John’s parents wish forfor him to succeed. him to succeed. John’s parents said John’s parents said thatthat he will succeed. he will succeed.

Some more thoughts on Some more thoughts on TT

Let’s narrow in just a little bit on T for a Let’s narrow in just a little bit on T for a moment.moment.

A clause, finite or nonfinite, must have a T node, A clause, finite or nonfinite, must have a T node, must have a TP. In a nonfinite clause the T often must have a TP. In a nonfinite clause the T often is where we see is where we see toto..

In a finite clause, T is where we see modals like In a finite clause, T is where we see modals like shouldshould, , wouldwould, , mightmight, , shallshall, … Note that these , … Note that these clauses clauses do notdo not show subject agreement, but they show subject agreement, but they are nevertheless finite (and arguably show tense are nevertheless finite (and arguably show tense distinctions, e.g., distinctions, e.g., shouldshould vs. vs. shallshall, , couldcould vs. vs. cancan)) He should leaveHe should leave I might leave.I might leave.


T is also where we seem to see T is also where we seem to see auxiliary verbsauxiliary verbs, namely , namely havehave and and bebe.. I I amam (not) hungry. (not) hungry. She She hashas (not) eaten. (not) eaten.

Auxiliary verbs are a special kind of Auxiliary verbs are a special kind of verb, but they are verb, but they are verbsverbs after all. after all. They aren’t modals, and it isn’t clear They aren’t modals, and it isn’t clear that they really should be classified that they really should be classified as being of category T (rather than as being of category T (rather than category V).category V).


So why do we see auxiliary verbs in So why do we see auxiliary verbs in T?T?

This is something we will cover in This is something we will cover in more detail later, but the idea which more detail later, but the idea which we will be adopting here (generally, we will be adopting here (generally, the mainstream view) is that the mainstream view) is that auxiliary verbs are verbs, the head auxiliary verbs are verbs, the head of a VP, and then they of a VP, and then they movemove into T. into T.

Auxiliary Auxiliary bebe John is (not) happy.John is (not) happy.

The verb The verb bebe starts out starts out (abstractly) as shown (abstractly) as shown here, the head of the VP.here, the head of the VP.

beV

V

VPT[+past]

T

TP

John

DP

D

D

happy

AdjP

Adj

Adj

Auxiliary Auxiliary bebe John is (not) happy.John is (not) happy.

The verb The verb bebe starts out starts out (abstractly) as shown (abstractly) as shown here, the head of the VP.here, the head of the VP.

The verb then The verb then movesmoves (before we pronounce it) (before we pronounce it) up to T.up to T.

But not if a modal is in TBut not if a modal is in T John might (not) be happy.John might (not) be happy.

This is sort of similar to This is sort of similar to (but backwards from) the (but backwards from) the idea of how [past] idea of how [past] -ed-ed “hops” down from T to V “hops” down from T to V to form past tense verbs.to form past tense verbs.

—V

V

VPV+Tbe+[past]

T

TP

John

DP

D

D

happy

AdjP

Adj

Adj

Auxiliary Auxiliary havehave The same can be said of The same can be said of havehave.. In general In general havehave is a “helping is a “helping

verb”; when it is an auxiliary verb”; when it is an auxiliary is not the only verb in the is not the only verb in the sentence. The other verb is in sentence. The other verb is in its ownits own VP, in the complement VP, in the complement of of havehave’s VP.’s VP. John might (not) have John might (not) have

written.written. For the moment, we’ll treat For the moment, we’ll treat

the participle the participle writtenwritten as if it as if it were a simple verb (not were a simple verb (not worrying about where the worrying about where the -en-en came from); we’ll come to came from); we’ll come to that within a couple of weeks.that within a couple of weeks.

—V

V

VPV+Thave+[past]

T

TP

John

DP

D

D

written

VP

V

V

Documents

Week 3. X-bar Theory CAS LX 522 Syntax I. Back to the trees: X-bar Theory Consider our current NP rule: Consider our current NP rule: NP: (D) (AdjP+)