Week 9b. A-movement cont’dWeek 9b. A-movement cont’d

CAS LX 522CAS LX 522Syntax ISyntax I

It is likely…It is likely…

Now, let’s think about Now, let’s think about the sentence the sentence It is likely It is likely that Mary leftthat Mary left..

LikelyLikely has one has one -role to -role to assign (Proposition) assign (Proposition) which it assigns to its which it assigns to its complement, the complement, the embedded CP.embedded CP.

LeaveLeave also has one also has one --role to assign, which it role to assign, which it assigns to assigns to MaryMary..

Alikely

AP

CP

Cthat

IP

Mary left

Vbe

VPI[pres]

IP

IDPit

It is likely…It is likely…

And, of course, since And, of course, since be be is an is an auxiliary verb, it will move up to auxiliary verb, it will move up to I.I.

Notice that both Notice that both -roles are -roles are assigned to things that are in assigned to things that are in the same clause as the predicate the same clause as the predicate that assigns the that assigns the -role.-role.

This is a general property of This is a general property of --role assignment (to be further role assignment (to be further clarified):clarified):A A -role must be assigned -role must be assigned locallylocally (within the same clause).(within the same clause).

Alikely

AP

CP

Cthat

IP

Mary left

Vti

VPVi+Iis

IP

IDPit

It is likely…It is likely… Great. But now, consider:Great. But now, consider:

Mary is likely [to leave].Mary is likely [to leave]. We already know a lot about this sentence; We already know a lot about this sentence;

we know that we know that likelylikely has one has one -role to -role to assign, which it assigns to the embedded assign, which it assigns to the embedded clause, we know that clause, we know that leaveleave has one has one -role -role to assign, which it assigns to to assign, which it assigns to MaryMary..

There are two apparent problems here:There are two apparent problems here: The embedded clause seems to have no subject The embedded clause seems to have no subject

(*EPP)(*EPP) The The -role assigned to -role assigned to MaryMary seems to be seems to be

assigned outside of its clause.assigned outside of its clause.

It is likely…It is likely…

Mary is likely [to leave]Mary is likely [to leave]

Concerning Concerning -roles, it’s clear from -roles, it’s clear from the meaning that the meaning that leaveleave really really doesdoes assign its assign its -role to -role to MaryMary and not and not likely likely (Mary is leaving—she’s isn’t in (Mary is leaving—she’s isn’t in any way any way likelylikely).).

This is definitely not This is definitely not locallocal——MaryMary is is not in the same clause as not in the same clause as leaveleave..

It is likely…It is likely…

Mary is likely Mary is likely [to leave][to leave]

And with respect to the EPP, we see And with respect to the EPP, we see that although the main clause IP has that although the main clause IP has something in its specifier (something in its specifier (MaryMary), the ), the embedded clause seems to have embedded clause seems to have nothing.nothing.

How can we reconcile this?How can we reconcile this?

It is likely…It is likely… Mary is likely [to leave]Mary is likely [to leave]

For For -role assignment to be local, -role assignment to be local, MaryMary has has to be in the same clause. to be in the same clause. -role assignment -role assignment takes place at the point of Merge, after takes place at the point of Merge, after which movement rules (like head-movement) which movement rules (like head-movement) apply.apply.

We can solve both problems at once by We can solve both problems at once by supposing that supposing that MaryMary movesmoves from the from the embedded subject position to the main embedded subject position to the main clause subject position. clause subject position. Initially:Initially: — is likely [Mary to leave]— is likely [Mary to leave] Becomes:Becomes: MaryMaryii is likely [ is likely [ tti i to leave] to leave]

It is likely…It is likely…

That is, we start out That is, we start out ((MergeMerge, , MergeMerge) with ) with Mary Mary in the in the embedded clause, in embedded clause, in the specifier of IP, the specifier of IP, receiving its receiving its -role -role locally.locally.

Ito leave

MaryVP

IDP

IP

It is likely…It is likely…

That is, we start out That is, we start out ((MergeMerge, , MergeMerge) with ) with Mary Mary in the in the embedded clause, in embedded clause, in the specifier of IP, the specifier of IP, receiving its receiving its -role -role locally.locally.

Then, we continue up Then, we continue up ((MergeMerge, , MergeMerge, , MergeMerge, , MoveMove), giving ), giving the embedded IP its the embedded IP its -role locally.-role locally.

Alikely

AP

IP

Ito leave

Vti

VP

Mary

is

IP

VP

IDP

Vi+I

It is likely…It is likely…

And in the last step, And in the last step, we we MoveMove the DP the DP MaryMary up from the lower up from the lower SpecIP to the higher SpecIP to the higher SpecIP.SpecIP.

This is essentially like This is essentially like MergeMerge except that we except that we are Merging together are Merging together an object with (a copy an object with (a copy of) something from of) something from inside the object.inside the object.

Alikely

AP

IP

Ito leave

Vti

VP

tj

is

IP

IDPjMary

VP

IDP

Vi+I

It is likely…It is likely…

This satisfies the EPP in This satisfies the EPP in bothboth clauses. The main clauses. The main clause has clause has MaryMary in SpecIP. in SpecIP. The embedded clause has The embedded clause has the the trace trace in SpecIP.in SpecIP.

This type of movement is called This type of movement is called A-movement (“argument”)A-movement (“argument”).. Also “DP-movement” or “NP-Also “DP-movement” or “NP-

movement”movement” This specific instance of A-This specific instance of A-

movement, where we move a movement, where we move a subject from an embedded subject from an embedded clause to a higher clause is clause to a higher clause is generally called generally called subject raisingsubject raising..

Alikely

AP

IP

Ito leave

Vti

VP

tj

is

IP

IDPjMary

VP

IDP

Vi+I

Further support for Further support for raising…raising…

from idiomsfrom idioms For something to have an idiomatic For something to have an idiomatic

interpretation (an interpretation not interpretation (an interpretation not literally derivable from its literally derivable from its component words), the pieces need component words), the pieces need to be very close together when to be very close together when initially Merged.initially Merged. It is likely that the jig is up.It is likely that the jig is up. It is likely that the cat is out of the bag.It is likely that the cat is out of the bag. It is likely that the cat has your tongue.It is likely that the cat has your tongue.

IdiomsIdioms

It is ok if the pieces of the idiom move away It is ok if the pieces of the idiom move away after the original Merge, we can still get after the original Merge, we can still get the idiomatic interpretation:the idiomatic interpretation: [The cat][The cat]ii is likely is likely ttii to have your tongue. to have your tongue.

[The cat][The cat]ii is likely is likely ttii to be out of the bag. to be out of the bag.

[The jig][The jig]ii is likely is likely ttii to be up. to be up.

The important thing is that they be The important thing is that they be originally Merged together (the originally Merged together (the -role -role needs to be assigned by the predicate to the needs to be assigned by the predicate to the noun)noun)

Other raising verbsOther raising verbs

So far, we’ve only talked about So far, we’ve only talked about is likelyis likely, but , but there are a couple of other raising verbs as there are a couple of other raising verbs as well.well. [The cat][The cat]ii seemsseems [ [TPTP ttii to be out of the bag]. to be out of the bag]. [The cat][The cat]ii appearsappears [ [TPTP ttii to have his tongue]. to have his tongue]. [The jig][The jig]ii provedproved [ [TPTP ttii to be up]. to be up]. [The cat][The cat]ii beganbegan [ [TPTP ttii to get his tongue]. to get his tongue].

What these verbs have in common is that What these verbs have in common is that they have no external they have no external -role and an internal -role and an internal Proposition Proposition -role.-role.

PassivePassive

Now, let’s think about the Now, let’s think about the passivepassive. The . The passive morphology seems to directly passive morphology seems to directly affect the theta grid of a verb.affect the theta grid of a verb. Bill ate the sandwich.Bill ate the sandwich. The sandwich was eatThe sandwich was eatenen..

Eat Eat has two has two -roles to assign. By putting -roles to assign. By putting it in the passive, we seem to have it in the passive, we seem to have transitive (two transitive (two -role) verb into an -role) verb into an intransitive (one intransitive (one -role) verb.-role) verb.

PassivePassive

Bill ate the sandwich.Bill ate the sandwich. Here, Here, BillBill is the Agent (gets the is the Agent (gets the -role -role

with Agent) and with Agent) and the sandwich the sandwich is the is the Theme (gets the Theme (gets the -role with Theme).-role with Theme). The sandwich was eaten (by Bill).The sandwich was eaten (by Bill).

In the passive, the In the passive, the roles roles are the same are the same but now the Theme is the subject and but now the Theme is the subject and the Agent is in an optional the Agent is in an optional byby-phrase -phrase (a PP).(a PP).

PassivePassive

Since optional thematic relations do not get Since optional thematic relations do not get included in the included in the -grid, what we conclude -grid, what we conclude about the passive is that it changes the about the passive is that it changes the -grid -grid of the verb by removing the external of the verb by removing the external -role.-role.

eat Agent Theme

i j

eat+en Agent Theme

i j

PassivePassive

We also assume that We also assume that passive verbs are formed in passive verbs are formed in the lexiconthe lexicon. When you pull this verb out of the . When you pull this verb out of the lexicon to put it on the workbench and Merge it lexicon to put it on the workbench and Merge it into the structure, it was into the structure, it was eateneaten (one (one -role) from -role) from the get-go.the get-go.

eat Agent Theme

i j

eat+en Agent Theme

i j

ActiveActive

Let’s start with the structure Let’s start with the structure for the active sentence, for the active sentence, Bill Bill ate the sandwichate the sandwich..

Here, the (internal) Theme Here, the (internal) Theme -role is assigned to the -role is assigned to the object DP and the (external) object DP and the (external) Agent Agent -role is assigned to -role is assigned to the subject DP.the subject DP.

Now, suppose that for the Now, suppose that for the passive we simply eliminate passive we simply eliminate the external the external -role…-role…

DP

thesandwich

Veat

VPI[past]

I

IP

DP

Bill

PassivePassive

(The passive also requires (The passive also requires the addition of the auxiliary the addition of the auxiliary verb verb bebe, but this is not , but this is not relevant to the point at hand)relevant to the point at hand)

We have changed the main We have changed the main verb to the passive form, verb to the passive form, thereby removing the thereby removing the external external -role, leaving us -role, leaving us with this structure forwith this structure for The sandwich was eaten.The sandwich was eaten.

Now, what needs to happen?Now, what needs to happen?

DP

thesandwich

Veaten

VP

I[past]

IP

Vbe

VP

PassivePassive

The sandwich was eaten.The sandwich was eaten. Now, what needs to happen?Now, what needs to happen?

SpecIP must be filled (EPP).SpecIP must be filled (EPP). The word order needs to be The word order needs to be

altered fromaltered from was eaten the was eaten the sandwichsandwich toto the sandwich was the sandwich was eateneaten..

It should be clear where this is It should be clear where this is going—here, we posit another going—here, we posit another instance of A-movement, like instance of A-movement, like with raising. In the passive, with raising. In the passive, the object moves to SpecIP the object moves to SpecIP satisfying the EPP.satisfying the EPP.

DP

thesandwich

Veaten

VP

I[past]

IP

Vbe

VP

PassivePassive

The sandwich was eaten.The sandwich was eaten. So, to review, the idea is So, to review, the idea is

that the active and the that the active and the passive have very similar passive have very similar underlying representations, underlying representations, except that the passive has except that the passive has had its external had its external -role -role removed and thus no removed and thus no subject is generated in subject is generated in SpecIP (as required by the SpecIP (as required by the -Criterion). Then the -Criterion). Then the object moves into SpecIP, object moves into SpecIP, satisfying the EPP.satisfying the EPP.

DPj

thesandwich

Veaten

VP

Vi+Iwas

I

Vti

VP

IP

DPtj

PassivePassive

As for the optionally expressed Agent As for the optionally expressed Agent in the in the byby-phrase, we take this to be -phrase, we take this to be like any optionally expressed like any optionally expressed adjoined phrase, a PP adjoined to VP.adjoined phrase, a PP adjoined to VP.

As expected, the As expected, the byby-phrase can be re--phrase can be re-ordered with respect to other ordered with respect to other adjuncts.adjuncts. The sandwich was eaten…The sandwich was eaten… ……by Billby Bill under the tree at noon. under the tree at noon. ……under the tree under the tree by Billby Bill at noon. at noon. ……at noon under the tree at noon under the tree by Billby Bill..

DPj

thesandwich

Veaten

VP

Vi+Iwas

I

Vti

VP

IP

DPtj

VP PPby

Bill

Nagging questionsNagging questions

Things have been working out well so far, Things have been working out well so far, but there are a couple of things that are but there are a couple of things that are still unexplained…still unexplained… If in the passive, movement of the object into If in the passive, movement of the object into

subject position is done in order to satisfy the subject position is done in order to satisfy the EPP, why couldn’t we instead insert EPP, why couldn’t we instead insert itit in in SpecIP like we do in SpecIP like we do in it rainsit rains or or it is likely it is likely thatthat……??

Similarly, for raising, what is wrong with Similarly, for raising, what is wrong with *It is *It is likely John to leavelikely John to leave??

The answer to this will be The answer to this will be CaseCase—which —which we will turn to next.we will turn to next.

The “Case Filter”The “Case Filter” Case FilterCase Filter

All DPs must have CaseAll DPs must have Case

(That is, all DPs have a Case feature, (That is, all DPs have a Case feature, which must subsequently be checked)which must subsequently be checked)

Case is available Case is available (roughly)(roughly) To the specifier of a finite I To the specifier of a finite I (nominative)(nominative) To the sister of a V or a P To the sister of a V or a P (accusative, (accusative,

oblique)oblique)

Conditions for Case Conditions for Case checkingchecking

The thing which makes the analysis run is The thing which makes the analysis run is the supposition that only under certain the supposition that only under certain situations can I or V check Case. In situations can I or V check Case. In particular:particular:

For I, only For I, only finitefinite I checks Nom I checks Nom— a nonfinite — a nonfinite I (I (toto) does not check (nominative) Case.) does not check (nominative) Case.

For V, only transitive verbs check ObjFor V, only transitive verbs check Obj— — intransitive verbs and passive verbs do not intransitive verbs and passive verbs do not check Case.check Case.

Back to Back to raising…raising…

Let’s go back to Let’s go back to Mary Mary is likely to leaveis likely to leave. . Recall that this is the Recall that this is the underlying structure.underlying structure.

In the embedded In the embedded clause, clause, Mary Mary is in is in SpecIP, but nonfinite SpecIP, but nonfinite I cannot assign Case.I cannot assign Case.

Unless the DP Unless the DP Mary Mary moves, its Case moves, its Case feature will not be feature will not be checked.checked.

Alikely

AP

IP

Ito leave

Vti

VPis

IP

DPMary

VP

I

Vi+I

Nonfinite Icannot check

Nom

Back to Back to raising…raising…

When the DP When the DP MaryMary moves up to the moves up to the main clause SpecIP, main clause SpecIP, its Nom Case feature its Nom Case feature can be checked.can be checked.

So, So, this movement this movement does does twotwo things things: It : It satisfies the EPP and satisfies the EPP and it checks the Case of it checks the Case of the subject.the subject.

Alikely

AP

IP

Ito leave

Vti

VP

tj

is

IP

IDPjMary

VP

IDP

Vi+I

Finite Ican check

Nom

Back to Back to raising…raising…

Notice that this Notice that this explains why…explains why… *It is likely Mary to *It is likely Mary to

leaveleave ……is ungrammatical: is ungrammatical:

Even though the Even though the sentence satisfies sentence satisfies the EPP, it violates the EPP, it violates the Case Filter the Case Filter ((MaryMary doesn’t get doesn’t get its Case feature its Case feature checked).checked).

Alikely

AP

IP

Ito leave

Vti

VPis

DPMary

VP

I

Vi+I

Nonfinite Icannot check

Nom

IP

IDPit

*Mary has an

unchecked Casefeature

Back to Back to raising…raising…

When the embedded When the embedded clause is finite…clause is finite… It is likely that she left.It is likely that she left.

……everything is fine everything is fine because because sheshe gets gets (nominative) Case (nominative) Case from the embedded from the embedded finite I.finite I.

Alikely

AP

CP

Cthat

Vti

VPVi+Iis

IP

IDPit

IP

I[past] leave

DP

VP

Ishe

Finite Ichecks nom.

Case

She checksCase with I

Back to passives…Back to passives…

We had a similar question about We had a similar question about what was wrong with:what was wrong with: *It was eaten the sandwich*It was eaten the sandwich

……where it appears that even though where it appears that even though the EPP could be satisfied by the EPP could be satisfied by inserting the expletive inserting the expletive itit, the , the sentence is still ungrammatical.sentence is still ungrammatical.

Back to passives…Back to passives…

What we can say here is that the What we can say here is that the addition of the passive morpheme addition of the passive morpheme -en -en to a transitive verb to a transitive verb not onlynot only removes removes its external its external -role, but -role, but alsoalso revokes its revokes its ability to check Case.ability to check Case.

Burzio’s GeneralizationBurzio’s GeneralizationA verb which does not assign an A verb which does not assign an external external -role cannot check -role cannot check accusative Case.accusative Case.

Active Active again…again…

Let’s review the structure for Let’s review the structure for the active sentence, the active sentence, Bill ate the Bill ate the sandwichsandwich..

Here, Here, eateat assigns two assigns two -roles, -roles, the internal the internal -role (Theme) to -role (Theme) to the DP the DP the sandwichthe sandwich, and the , and the external external -role (Agent) to the DP -role (Agent) to the DP BillBill..

Since it assigns an external Since it assigns an external --role, role, eat eat is also a Case-checker.is also a Case-checker.

DP

thesandwich

Veat

VPI[past]

I

IP

DP

Bill

Active Active again…again…

After the movement, After the movement, BillBill checks (nominative) Case checks (nominative) Case with the finite I, and with the finite I, and the the sandwichsandwich checks checks (accusative) Case with the (accusative) Case with the V.V.

DP

thesandwich

Veat

VPI[past]

I

IP

DP

BillV checksacc. Case

Bill checksCase with I

Finite Ichecks nom.

Case

The sandwichchecks Case

with V

Passive Passive again…again…

The sandwich was eaten.The sandwich was eaten. Now, let’s look at the passive Now, let’s look at the passive

sentence.sentence.

The external The external -role was -role was removed from removed from eateneaten and thus V and thus V can no longer check Case can no longer check Case (Burzio’s Generalization).(Burzio’s Generalization).

Unless the DP Unless the DP the sandwichthe sandwich moves to a place where it can moves to a place where it can get Case, it will end up with a get Case, it will end up with a Case feature unchecked. Case feature unchecked.

DP

thesandwich

Veaten

VP

I[past]

IP

Vbe

VP

Passive Passive again…again…

By moving the DP By moving the DP the the sandwichsandwich to SpecIP we to SpecIP we satisfy satisfy bothboth the Case the Case checking requirements checking requirements andand the EPP.the EPP.

Simply satisfying the EPP by Simply satisfying the EPP by using using itit in SpecIP wouldn’t in SpecIP wouldn’t solve the problem of checking solve the problem of checking Case on Case on the sandwichthe sandwich; hence ; hence the ungrammaticality of the ungrammaticality of *It *It was eaten the sandwich.was eaten the sandwich.

DPj

thesandwich

Veaten

VP

Vi+Iwas

I

Vti

VP

IP

DPtj

Finite Ichecks nom.

CaseThe sandwichchecks Case

with I

Flavors of intransitives…Flavors of intransitives… Let’s think for a moment about Let’s think for a moment about intransitive verbsintransitive verbs. .

These are verbs have a theta grid with a single These are verbs have a theta grid with a single --role to assign. Like role to assign. Like walkwalk, say., say.

WalkWalk: : AgentAgent.. Now, think about the passive of a transitive verb; Now, think about the passive of a transitive verb;

this is a verb with only a single this is a verb with only a single internalinternal -role.-role. Eat: Eat: AgentAgent Theme Theme Eaten: ThemeEaten: Theme Taken together, it might occur to us to wonder Taken together, it might occur to us to wonder

whether there might be intransitive verbs that whether there might be intransitive verbs that inherently (like inherently (like eateneaten) have only a single internal ) have only a single internal --role to assign…role to assign…

UnaccusativesUnaccusatives

And it turns out that, yes, such And it turns out that, yes, such verbs do exist. For example:verbs do exist. For example:

FallFall: Theme.: Theme. Fall Fall is an “inherently passive” verb, is an “inherently passive” verb,

an an unaccusative verbunaccusative verb. It has only . It has only one one -role to assign, and that -role to assign, and that -role -role is an is an internal internal -role. Because it has -role. Because it has no external no external -role, by Burzio’s -role, by Burzio’s Generalization, it also cannot assign Generalization, it also cannot assign accusative Case.accusative Case.

Unaccusatives vs. Unaccusatives vs. unergativesunergatives

There are many reasons to think that verbs like There are many reasons to think that verbs like fallfall have only an internal argument.have only an internal argument.

First, the subject is really a Theme as far as First, the subject is really a Theme as far as thematic relations go, it is thematic relations go, it is affectedaffected, not an agent. , not an agent. Themes are always objects.Themes are always objects.

Another suggestive piece of evidence comes from Another suggestive piece of evidence comes from Romance languages like French, where passives Romance languages like French, where passives and verbs like and verbs like fallfall act similarly, and differently act similarly, and differently from other (truly agentive) intransitive verbs.from other (truly agentive) intransitive verbs. Jean Jean estest tombé. tombé. ‘John fell.’ (past unaccusative) ‘John fell.’ (past unaccusative) Le frômage a Le frômage a été été mangé.mangé. ‘The cheese was eaten.’ ‘The cheese was eaten.’

(passive)(passive) Jean Jean aa marché. marché. ‘John walked.’ (past unergative) ‘John walked.’ (past unergative)

Unaccusatives vs. Unaccusatives vs. unergativesunergatives

The point is really that we can distinguish two The point is really that we can distinguish two types of single-argument (intransitive) verbs types of single-argument (intransitive) verbs in terms of their theta grid with respect to in terms of their theta grid with respect to whether they have an external whether they have an external -role to assign -role to assign or not. Their (highly unintuitive) names, for or not. Their (highly unintuitive) names, for the record, are:the record, are:

UnaccusativesUnaccusatives: Have one, internal : Have one, internal -role.-role. (Sometimes called “ergative” too)(Sometimes called “ergative” too)

UnergativesUnergatives: Have one, external : Have one, external -role.-role.

Bill fellBill fell

DP

Bill

Vfall

I[past]

IP

VP

UnaccusativeV cannot

check Case

DPi

Bill

Vfall

I

IP

VP

tiFinite I cancheck Case

I[past]

Back to raisingBack to raising

Of course, nothing keeps us from piling Of course, nothing keeps us from piling raising verbs one atop the other:raising verbs one atop the other: [The cat][The cat]ii seems [ seems [ ttii likely [ likely [ ttii to get his to get his

tongue]].tongue]]. [The jig][The jig]ii began [ began [ ttii to seem [ to seem [ ttii likely [ likely [ ttii to be to be

up]]]up]]]

In these cases, the subject moves from In these cases, the subject moves from SpecIP to SpecIP, only receiving Case at SpecIP to SpecIP, only receiving Case at the last stop, satisfying the EPP at each IP.the last stop, satisfying the EPP at each IP.

Back to raisingBack to raising

Raising verbs will cause anything in a Raising verbs will cause anything in a complement IP that isn’t getting Case to move complement IP that isn’t getting Case to move up to their SpecIP.up to their SpecIP.

Passive arguments:Passive arguments: [The sandwich][The sandwich]ii seems [ seems [ ttii to have been [ eaten to have been [ eaten ttii]]]]

Even expletive Even expletive itit:: ItItii began [ began [ ttii to rain] to rain] ItItii began [ began [ ttii to seem [ to seem [ ttii likely [ likely [ ttii to rain]]] to rain]]]

Here, Here, itit was inserted to satisfy the EPP in the was inserted to satisfy the EPP in the most embedded IP, but then raised from most embedded IP, but then raised from SpecIP to SpecIP to satisfy the rest of their SpecIP to SpecIP to satisfy the rest of their EPP conditions.EPP conditions.

A-movement in sumA-movement in sum

Raising:Raising: BillBillii is likely [ is likely [ ttii to win the to win the race].race].

Passive:Passive: [The sandwich][The sandwich]ii was eaten was eaten ttii . .

Unaccusatives:Unaccusatives: BillBillii fell fell ttii . .

A-movement occurs either to allow A-movement occurs either to allow Case features to be checked or to Case features to be checked or to satisfy the EPP.satisfy the EPP.