UNIT 4

PHRASE STRUCTURE: X-BAR THEORY

English Grammar I. 2021-2022

1
 UNIT ORGANIZATION

4.1. Main types of phrases

4.1.1. The Verb Phrase (VP)
4.1.2. The Noun Phrase (NP)
4.1.3. The Adjectival Phrase (AP)
4.1.4. The Prepositional Phrase (PP)

4.2. Structural concepts vs. grammatical functions

2
 Preliminaries

3
 PRELIMINARIES
 To a large extent sentence structure is determined by
lexical information (θ-grid, argument structure, syntactic
category of words…).

 Lexical information determines phrase structure:

 VP → V – (NP) – (PP*)
 NP → (D) – (AP*) – N – (PP*)
 AP → (Adv) – A – (PP*)
 PP → (Adv) – P – NP

4
 PRELIMINARIES

 A-position (Argumental position): position occupied

by arguments (subject, object, object of a P, spec of NP;
position to which a θ-role can be assigned).

 A’-position (non-argumental position): positions

occupied by adjuncts or non-arguments.

5
 4.1. Main types of phrases

6
 PHRASES
 Phrase: constituent built around a head.

 Can you identify the heads in (1)?

(1) a. very bright sunflowers

b. overflow quite quickly
c. very bright
d. quite quickly
e. inside the house

7
 PHRASES
 Properties of heads:

(i) The head bears the most important semantic

information in the phrase.

(ii) The word class of the head determines the word

class of the entire phrase.

(iii) Heads are usually obligatory:

(2) a. She likes [NP very bright sunflowers].
b. *She likes [NP very bright ________].

8
 PHRASES
(iv) The head has the same distribution as the
entire phrase:

(3) a. She likes [NP very bright sunflowers].

b. She likes [NP sunflowers].

(4) a. Those [AP very bright] sunflowers are nice to

look at.
b. Those [AP bright] sunflowers are nice to look
at.

9
 PHRASES
(v) Heads select dependent phrases of a
particular word class and specific features:

(5) a. She bought [NP some books].

b. *She bought [AP very nice].

(6) a. I believe [that Mary is innocent].

b. *I believe [whether Mary is innocent].
(7) a. *I wonder [that Mary is innocent].
b. I wonder [whether Mary is innocent].

10
 PHRASES
(vi) Heads often require their dependents to
agree with some or all of the grammatical
features of the head:

(8) a. [Det_____] casas [Adj_____]

b. las casas blancas
c. *el casas blancos

11
 PHRASES
 Endocentricity: property of phrases which are
the projection of a head.

 Are phrases the way we have viewed them so far

endocentric or just words (or minor constituents)
next to each other forming a larger constituent?

12
 4.1.1. The Verb Phrase (VP)

13
 VP
 Flat structures vs. layered structures:
(9) Mary can meet our director at the office tomorrow.

 Two hypotheses:
(i) The VP has a flat structure.
(ii) The VP has a layered structure.

 Evidence in support of hypothesis (ii): do so

substitution (a structure-dependent process).

14
 VP

(10) Mary can meet our director at the office

tomorrow and you could do so too.

(11) Mary can meet our director at the office

tomorrow and you could do so next week.

(12) Mary can meet our director at the office

tomorrow and you could do so at the
restaurant next week.

15
 VP
(13) Lance would receive blood transfusions in the
team doctor’s hotel room during races and other
cyclists would do so too.

(14) Lance would receive blood transfusions in the

team doctor’s hotel room during races and other
cyclists would do so after training sessions.

(15) Lance would receive blood transfusions in the

team doctor’s hotel room during races and other
cyclists would do so in a hospital room after
training sessions.

16
 VP
 There seems to be a restriction on the type of constituent
do so can replace:
(16) *Mary can meet our director at the office tomorrow and you
could do so the secretary at the restaurant next week.
(17) *Lance would receive blood transfusions in the team doctor’s
hotel room during races and other cyclists would do so
adrenaline shots in a hospital room after training sessions.
(18) Mary will leave around midnight and John should do so
before then.

 A verb with no complement is a V but also a V’.

 The flat structure cannot represent the constituency of
these sequences.
17
 VP
 In the layered structure, the V’ nodes are the verbal
projections intermediate between V (zero level
category) and VP (maximal projections):

 The lowest V’ is formed by the V and its complement.

 The other V’ nodes are formed by V’ and adjuncts.

18
 X-bar Theory

 X-bar (x̄ or X’): each level of phrasal

expansion, bar-projection of X, intermediate
projections.

 In X-bar Theory: the rules of phrase structure

grammar are more constrained and more phrasal
categories are recognized.

19
 X-bar Theory
 Specifier: a category normally combining with a
single-bar category to form the related double-
bar category:

(20) She is [a doctor].

(21) John is [a student of Linguistics].
(22) She is [very proud of her son].
(23) She discovered it [quite independently of me].
(24) The plane crashed [right behind the mountain].
(25) The students will [all come at once].

20
 X-bar Theory
 Complements: combine with heads to form the lower X’.
 Adjuncts: combine with X’ to form other X’ constituents.
 Specifiers: combine with (the highest) X’ to form XP.
 The three levels are available for any VP even if not explicitly.

21
 X-bar Theory

22
 PRACTICE

 UNIT 4 – Practice (i)

23
 REFLECTIONS
 Questions:

(a) What about languages with orderings different

from that in English?

(b) What about other phrasal categories different

from VP?

24
 REFLECTIONS
(a) Ls with orderings different from that in English:

 We want our schema to be universally valid to account for

Phrase Structure (PS) in other languages. We want a schema
that allows both orders (OV, VO) and which relies on some
other principle to account for language specific orderings.

25
 REFLECTIONS
(b) Other phrases (besides VP):

 For theory-internal reasons (i.e. economy), we’d like to extend

what we have said so far for the VP to other types of phrases,
so that we can simplify the set of PS rules we gave above
(repeated here as (29)):

26
 CONCLUSION
 Conclusion: why do we prefer a layered VP as opposed to a
flat VP?
(i) It captures the internal hierarchy of elements within the VP (evidence
from do so substitution).
(ii) It captures the existence of verbal projections which are not VPs nor
Vs.
(iii) The fact that all phrases are V projections shows better that V is the
head of them all.
(iv) The schema is universally valid.

(v) This schema may be extended to other phrasal categories

(simplification of PS rules).

27
 4.1.2. The Noun Phrase (NP)

28
 NP
 Flat NP structures vs. layered NP structures:
(30) [The destruction of the city during the war] had
terrible consequences.

 Two hypotheses:
(i) The NP has a flat structure.
(ii) The NP has a layered structure.

 Evidence in support of hypothesis (ii): one

substitution test (a structure-dependent process).

29
 NP
(31) The destruction of the city during the war was nothing
compared to the one after the war.

 The flat structure cannot represent the

constituency of certain sequences.
 What type of constituent is replaced by one?

(32) This student of linguistics from Korea is more

dedicated than that one.
(33) This student of linguistics from Korea is more
dedicated than that one from China.
(34) *This student of linguistics from Korea is more
dedicated than that one of psychology from China.

30
 NP
 In X’ theory, we have a similar schema for VPs and
NPs:
(i) N combines with its complement to form the lowest N’.
(ii) Adjuncts combine with N’ to form another N’.
(iii) The spec of the NP combines with the highest N’ to
form N” (NP).

 Some of these nodes may not be phonetically realized

but we still have the three levels of projection.

31
 PRACTICE

 UNIT 4 – Practice (ii)

32
 NP
 Recall the old PS rule for English NPs:
(35) NP → (D) - (AP*) - N - (PP*)

 We want a schema that allows different orderings

and which relies on some other principle to account
for L specific orderings:
(36) NP → Spec ; N’
N’ → N’ ; XP
N’ → N ; XP

 The PS rule in (35) doesn’t capture what NPs and

VPs have structurally in common. What about the
one in (36)?

33
 NP
 Remember that an NP containing a clause is still an
NP:

(37) Gehry’s new building has been able to express [the

recognition that ideal beauty rarely exists in an
imperfect world].

(38) He moved to L.A. as a teenager, at [a moment when

his family was teetering on the brink of poverty].

34
 NP
 There are restrictions on the positions in which NPs can
occur in a sentence (see The Case Filter, English
Grammar II):
(39) a. a man [AP more handsome than Adonis]
b. a house [PP with wide windows]
c. a person [VP standing by my door]
d. a car [CP that I wanted to look at]

(40) a. *John is afraid [NP exams].

b. John fears [NP exams].

(41) a. *It was stolen [NP a car].

b. [NP A car] was stolen

35
 NP
(42) a. *It is believed [NP Mary] to be smart.
b. [NP Mary] is believed to be smart.

(43) a. *It seems [NP Mary] to be frustrated

b. It seems that [NP Mary] is frustrated.
c. [NP Mary] seems to be frustrated.

(44) a. *We wanted very much [NP them] to react to the

announcement.
b. We very much wanted [NP them] to react to the
announcement.
c. We wanted [NP them] to react to the announcement very
much.

(45) a. destroy [NP the city] brutally

b. *destroy brutally [NP the city]

36
 PRACTICE

 UNIT 4 – Practice (iii)

37
 4.1.3. The Adjectival Phrase (AP)

38
 AP
 Old Phrase Structure Rule for APs:
(46) AP → (Adv) - A - (PP*) [or AP → (Adv) – A - (clause)]

 Flat AP structures vs. layered AP structures:

(47) John is [very fond of Mary in some ways].

 Two hypotheses:
(i) The AP has a flat structure.
(ii) The AP has a layered structure.

 Evidence in support of hypothesis (ii): so substitution

test & preposing in though-clauses (structure-
dependent processes).
39
 AP
(48) John used to be very fond of Mary in some ways, but now he
is much less so.

(49) Very fond of Mary in some ways though he is, he doesn’t

really love her.

 The flat structure cannot represent the constituency of

certain sequences.

 Obligatoriness/optionality of the different components of the

AP:

(50) John is fond of Mary in some ways.

(51) *John is fond in some ways.
(52) John is fond of Mary.
(53) *John is fond in some ways of Mary.

40
 AP
 What type of constituent does so substitute for?

(54) John is very fond of Mary in some ways, but less

so in other ways.
(55) John is very fond of Mary in some ways, but less
so than he used to be.
(56) *John is very fond of Mary, but less so of Jenny.

41
 AP
 In X’ theory, we have a similar schema for VPs, NPs
and APs:

(i) A combines with its complement to form the

lowest A’.
(ii) Adjuncts combine with A’ to form another A’.
(iii) The spec of the AP combines with the highest A’
to form AP.

42
 PRACTICE

 UNIT 4 – Practice (iv)

43
 AP
 Recall the old PS rule for English APs:
(57) AP → (Adv) - A - (PP*)

 We want a schema that allows different orderings and

which relies on some other principle to account for L
specific orderings:

(58) AP → Spec ; A’
A’ → A’ ; XP
A’ → A ; XP

 The PS rule in (57) doesn’t capture what APs, NPs and

VPs have structurally in common. What about the one in
(58)?
44
 AP

 Other typical specifiers of APs: as, so, how, quite,

rather, that, more, less, least, most, pretty,
awfully.

 APs within NPs: APs can be used as Attributes

(adjuncts) expanding N’ into N’.

45
 PRACTICE

 UNIT 4 – Practice (v)

46
 4.1.4. The Prepositional Phrase
(PP)

47
 PP
 Old Phrase Structure Rule for PPs:
(59) PP → (Adv) - P – NP

 Flat PP structures vs. layered PP structures:

(60) The ball went [just over the fence].

 Two hypotheses:
(i) The PP has a flat structure.
(ii) The PP has a layered structure.

 Evidence in support of hypothesis (ii):

pronominalization with there & so substitution
(structure-dependent processes).
48
 PP
(60) The ball went just over the fence.

(61) The ball went just there.

(62) I know that he is at odds with his colleagues, but

he is less so with his friends.

(63) I know that he always used to be at odds with his

friends, but he’s less so these days.

 What type of constituent does the proform so

replace?
49
 PP
 Typical specifiers of PPs: right, just, well, straight,
slap (=exactly), bang (=suddenly), exactly,…

(64) He ran slap into a tree.

(65) They found the dead miners two miles under the
surface.
(66) They held a reunion twenty years after the war.
(67) The rabbit burrowed quite deep under the surface.
(68) The bodyguards stood really close behind him.
(69) He disappeared immediately before the drugs raid.
(70) He died very shortly after the operation.
(71) I found it up in the attic.
(72) You must have left it down in the cellar.

50
 PP
 What about from and over in (73) and (74)?
(73) The dispute dates from before the war.
(74) I’ve put your books over in the corner.

 Propose your hypothesis and use the data below as

evidence:
(75) *The dispute dates before the war.
(76) The dispute dates from the time of World War I.
(77) I’ve put your books in the corner.
(78) *I’ve put your books over right in the corner.
(79) The dispute dates from right before the war.
51
 PRACTICE

 UNIT 4 – Practice (vi)

52
 PP
 Ps can take PPs as their complements:
(80) from [after his decay], out [of my life], since [before his
depression]...

 Ps can take clauses as their complements:

(81) In [that you are here now] let’s not wait any longer to do it.
(82) With [her children already in college] she felt no longer
needed.
(83) With [her children always asking for money] she felt used.

 According to certain analyses, prepositions can be used

intransitively (= without a complement):
(84) The student was here before.
(85) Put your clean pile of clothes underneath!
53
 PP
 Recall the old PS rule for English PPs:
(86) PP → (Adv) – P – NP

 We want a schema that allows different orderings and

which relies on some other principle to account for L
specific orderings:

(87) PP → Spec ; P’
P’ → P’ ; XP
P’ → P ; XP

 The PS rule in (86) doesn’t capture what PPs, APs, NPs

and VPs have structurally in common. What about the
one in (87)?
54
 SUMMARY
 X-bar Theory collapses what all phrases have in common.

 General schema (plus some sort of L-specific principle

that will determine the specific order):

 We don’t need any more different PS rules for every

single type of phrasal category in every language.
55
 SUMMARY
(88) XP → Spec ; X’
X’ → X’ ; YP
X’ → X ; YP

 All phrases are headed by a lexical head X. The lexical head of

the projection is a zero level projection (Xº). Complements
combine with lexical heads (Xº, X) to form X’ projections;
adjuncts combine with X’ to form X’ projections. The specifier
combines with the highest X’ to form XP (or X”).

 It has been assumed that the schema in (88) is part of UG and

that the principles of X-bar Theory are innate. The principles
that govern word order in every L are language-specific.

56
 4.2. Structural concepts vs.
grammatical functions

57
 GRAMMATICAL FUNCTIONS
 Grammatical function: grammatical function of a
phrase in a sentence.

 Structural concept: type of structural constituent

or phrase.

 The same structural constituent can have distinct

grammatical functions:

(89) [My father] will come tomorrow.

(90) He saw [my father] at the beach.
(91) I went to the movies with [my father].
(92) I gave [my father] the money.
(93) [My father]´s money will be for me.
58
 GRAMMATICAL FUNCTIONS
 The same applies to regular clauses (see Unit 5):
(94) [That you are here now] means a lot to me.
(95) I can’t believe [that you are here now].
(96) I’m glad [that you are here now].
(97) The rumor [that you are here now] has been circulating for
quite some time.
(98) In [that you are here now] let’s not wait any longer to do it.

 The same applies to special types of clauses (small

clauses):
(99) I want [Mary out of the picture].
(100) With [Mary out of the picture] there are only two of us left.

 In English the subject position can be filled by an

expletive (dummy pronoun):
(101) There are many people waiting for me outside.
(102) It won’t be too hard for you to convince him.
59
 REFERENCES

BORSLEY, R. (1999). Syntactic Theory. Arnold (pp. 15-37).

HAEGEMAN, L. (1994). Introduction to Government and
Binding Theory. Blackwell (pp. 81-106).
RADFORD, A. (1988). Transformational Grammar.
Cambridge University Press (pp. 167-286).

60