SynSem2020 Lecture17

Faculty of Philosophy
General Linguistics
Syntax & Semantics WiSe 2020/2021

Lecture 17: Minimalism
19/01/2021, Christian Bentz

Overview
Section 1: Recap of Lecture 16
Section 2: Historical Notes
Section 3: Features in MP
Interpretable Features
Uninterpretable Features
Section 4: Feature Checking
Categorial Features
Agreement Features
Section 5: Merge and Move
External Merge
Internal Merge (Move)
Section 6: Phrase Structure
Verb Phrase
Tense Phrase (TP)
Complementizer Phrase
Section 7: Basic Concepts in Minimalism
Section 8: Pros and Cons of Minimalism
Pros (Advantages)
Cons (Disadvantages)
Section 9: References
2 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

General Linguistics
Section 1: Recap of Lecture 16

What is stored in the Human Brain (Lexicon)?
Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
I PSG answer: the set of terminals, i.e. lexical items
Section 2:
corresponding to words. Historical Notes
Section 3:
I GB answer: lexical items corresponding to words Features in MP
with some specification of what syntactic rules they can Section 4:

Feature Checking
be involved in (i.e. θ-roles (valency) for verbs) Section 5: Merge

and Move
I HPSG answer: lexical items corresponding to words Section 6:
Phrase Structure
with exact specifications of the specifiers, complements, Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
argument structures they require. Minimalism
Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
I CxG answer: constructions, which can be Minimalism
morphemes, words, idioms, phrasal patterns. Section 9:

References

Constructions
“All levels of grammatical analysis involve constructions: learned Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
pairings of form with semantic or discourse function, including Section 2:
Historical Notes
morphemes or words, idioms, partially lexically filled and fully general
Section 3:
phrasal patterns.” Features in MP
Goldberg (2006). Constructions at work, p. 5. Section 4:

Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
and Move
Section 6:
Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
Minimalism
Section 9:
References

How to Identify a Construction?
Section 1: Recap
Note that the reoccurring elements might not be material at of Lecture 16
“the surface” but the underlying sentence structure Section 2:

Historical Notes
represented by POS symbols. Section 3:

Features in MP
Section 4:
Feature Checking
Example (sentence): Section 5: Merge
and Move
I He gave Pat a ball Section 6:
Phrase Structure
I Pat baked George a cake
Section 7: Basic
I The child handed her the book Concepts in
Minimalism
I etc. Section 8: Pros

and Cons of
Minimalism
Construction: NPSubj V NPObj1 NPObj2 Section 9:
References

Multiple Constructions
Section 1: Recap
“Constructionist theories do not derive one construction from another, as of Lecture 16
is generally done in mainstream generative theory. An actual expression Section 2:
Historical Notes
typically involves the combination of at least half a dozen different
Section 3:
constructions.” Features in MP
Goldberg (2006), p. 10. Section 4:

Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
and Move
(1) what did Liza buy Zach? Section 6:
Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
I Liza, buy, Zach, what, do constructions (i.e. individual words) Concepts in
Minimalism
I ditransitive construction Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
I question construction (wh-word VP) Minimalism
Section 9:
I subject-auxiliary inversion construction (aux Subj, i.e. did Liza) References
I VP construction
I NP construction

Arguments for Constructions
Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
I Argument 1: The idea that main verbs specify the valency of whole Section 2:
Historical Notes
sentence does not match the creative use of linguistic patterns.
Section 3:
Constructions are a better alternative to analyze the productivity of Features in MP
sentence patterns. Section 4:

Feature Checking
I Argument 2: There are many examples across languages of the Section 5: Merge
and Move
world, where the overall meaning of a sentence is not derivable Section 6:
Phrase Structure
from the component parts, but is rather assigned to the whole
Section 7: Basic
construction. Concepts in
Minimalism
I Argument 3: The distinction between “core” syntax and the Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
“periphery” is arbitrary. Constructions, while often seen to be part of Minimalism
Section 9:
the periphery, might in fact constitute a core property of language. References

General Linguistics
Section 2: Historical Notes

Historical Perspective
Section 1: Recap
“Like the Government & Binding framework that was introduced in the of Lecture 16
previous chapter, the Minimalist framework was initiated by Noam Section 2:
Historical Notes
Chomsky at the MIT in Boston. Chomsky (1993; 1995b) argued that the
Section 3:
problem of language evolution should be taken seriously [...] To that end Features in MP
he suggested refocusing the theoretical developments towards models Section 4:

Feature Checking
[...] that assume less language specific innate knowledge.” Section 5: Merge
and Move
Müller (2019). Grammatical theory, p. 311. Section 6:
Phrase Structure
CxG Section 7: Basic

Concepts in
Minimalism
HPSG
Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
LFG Minimalism
Section 9:
MP References
X GB
PSG
DG
1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

The Minimalist Program
Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
I “It is important to recognize that Section 2:
the Minimalist Program (MP) Historical Notes
under development in this work, Section 3:

Features in MP
and since, is a program, not a
theory, a fact that has often been Section 4:
Feature Checking
misunderstood. In central
Section 5: Merge
respects, MP is a seamless and Move
continuation of pursuits that trace Section 6:
back to the origins of generative Phrase Structure
grammar [...]” Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
Chomsky (2015). The Minimalist Section 8: Pros

and Cons of
Program, p. vii. Minimalism
Section 9:
References

The Minimalist Program
Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
I “The Minimalist Program shares Section 2:
several underlying factual Historical Notes
assumptions with its Section 3:

Features in MP
predecessors back to the early
1950s [...]. One is that there is a Section 4:
Feature Checking
component of the human
Section 5: Merge
mind/brain dedicated to language and Move
– the language faculty – Section 6:
interacting with other systems.” Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
Chomsky (2015). The Minimalist
Program, p. 3. Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
Minimalism
Section 9:
References

Syntactic Framework Tree
Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
DG DG: Dependency Grammar Section 2:
Historical Notes
PSG: Phrase Structure Grammar
Section 3:
PSG GB: Government & Binding Features in MP
GPSG: Generalized Phrase Section 4:

Feature Checking
Structure Grammar
X-bar theory Section 5: Merge
LFG: Lexical Functional Grammar and Move
Section 6:
HPSG: Head-Driven Phrase Phrase Structure
GB GPSG LFG Structure Grammar Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
CxG: Construction Grammar Minimalism
MP HPSG CxG MP: Minimalist Program Section 8: Pros

and Cons of
Minimalism
Section 9:
References

General Linguistics
Section 3: Features in MP
Features
Features are a core part of Minimalist Syntax. The term is Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
here generally interpreted in a similar way as for feature Section 2:
Historical Notes
descriptions seen in earlier lectures. An important Section 3:
terminological difference, however, is that the term feature in Features in MP
Section 4:
MP refers to a feature value, rather than to the feature label. Feature Checking
For example, verbs might be said to have the “feature” past, Section 5: Merge
and Move
plural, etc. Against this background, the following types of Section 6:

Phrase Structure
features are defined: Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
1. categorial features Section 8: Pros

and Cons of
Minimalism
2. φ-features Section 9:
3. Case features References
4. strong F, where F is categorial

Chomsky (2015). The Minimalist Program, p. 254.

Categorial Features
Section 1: Recap
Categorial features take as values the “category” of a word of Lecture 16
or phrase, i.e. the POS in case of words, and the phrase Section 2:
Historical Notes
symbol in case of phrases. Examples for categorial features Section 3:
Features in MP
are then A, N, V, NP, VP, etc. Section 4:
Feature Checking
Examples: Section 5: Merge

and Move
I The noun airplanes takes the categorial feature [N] Section 6:
Phrase Structure
I The determiner the takes [D] Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
I The phrase the airplanes takes [DP]1 Minimalism
Section 8: Pros
I The verb build takes [V] and Cons of
Minimalism
I The phrase build an airplane takes [VP]
Section 9:
References
I The preposition to takes [P]
I etc.
1
Note that this is a deviation from other frameworks, where the combination of
determiner and noun is often defined as an NP.

φ-features
Section 1: Recap
φ-features are considered to cover features relevant for of Lecture 16
agreement such as, for example, PERSON, NUMBER and Section 2:

Historical Notes
GENDER in English.2 Section 3:
Features in MP
Section 4:
Example: Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
airplanes takes the categorial feature value [N], and the and Move
φ-feature values [plural], [neuter], [3 person]. Section 6:

Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
Minimalism
2
Note that Chomsky (2015), p. 31, seems to include Case features in φ-features Section 9:
References
according to the following quote: “A typical lexical entry consists of a phonological
matrix and other features, among them the categorial features N, V, and so on; and in
the case of Ns, Case and agreement features (person, number, gender), henceforth
φ-features.” Also, the same quote suggests that only Ns can take φ-features since he
uses the specification “[...] and in the case of Ns, [...]”.

Case features
Case features take as values the case of the respective Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
noun, similar to the CASE feature we have seen in earlier Section 2:
Historical Notes
frameworks such as GPSG, LFG, and HPSG. Section 3:
Features in MP
Example: Section 4:
Feature Checking
In the sentence we build airplanes the subject we takes [nominative] as Section 5: Merge
and Move
Case feature, and airplanes takes [accusative] as Case feature.
Section 6:
Phrase Structure
Strong Features Section 7: Basic

Concepts in
Minimalism
“Languages differ in the values that certain features may Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
have and in addition to this, features may be strong or Minimalism
Section 9:
weak and feature strength is also a property that may vary References
from language to language. Strong features make

syntactic objects move to higher positions.”
Müller (2019), p. 127-128.

Interpretable and Uninterpretable Features
Section 1: Recap
A further fundamental distinction is made between so-called of Lecture 16
interpretable and uninterpretable features: Section 2:

Historical Notes
“The Interpretable features, then, are categorial fea- Section 3:

Features in MP
tures generally and φ-features of nouns. Others are Section 4:
Feature Checking
-Interpretable [i.e. Uninterpretable].” Section 5: Merge
and Move
Chomsky (2015), p. 255. Section 6:
Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
Interpretable features: Concepts in
Minimalism
categorial features (N, V, etc.) Section 8: Pros

and Cons of
φ-features of nouns (e.g. plural, neuter, third person) Minimalism
Section 9:
Uninterpretable features: References
φ-features of predicates (e.g. number and person of a verb)

Case features (e.g. nominative, accusative)
F features
Section 1: Recap
Importantly: The notion of interpretability makes reference of Lecture 16
to semantics. Section 2:
Historical Notes
Section 3:
“The plural feature clearly has an effect not just on the mor- Features in MP
phology of the word, but also on its meaning: in this case it Section 4:
Feature Checking
affects whether we are talking about one child or more than
Section 5: Merge
one; one man or more than one, and so on. Features that and Move
have an effect on semantic interpretation in this way are Section 6:

Phrase Structure
called interpretable features.” Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
Section 8: Pros
“Another clear example of a feature which is uninterpretable and Cons of
Minimalism
is nominative or accusative case. We saw that this feature ap-
Section 9:
peared to simply regulate the syntactic position of words, References
while telling us nothing about the semantics of those words.”
Adger (2003), Core Syntax: A minimalist introduction, p. 24 and p. 53.

Interpretable Features in English
Section 1: Recap
Broad category: Feature labels: Feature values: of Lecture 16
categorial features POS N, P, V, NP, VP, etc. Section 2:

Historical Notes
φ-features of nouns GENDER masculine, feminin, neuter Section 3:
NUMBER singular, plural Features in MP
Section 4:
PERSON 1 person, 2 person, 3 person Feature Checking
Semantically TENSE present, past Section 5: Merge
and Move
interpretable features ASPECT perfective, imperfective
Section 6:
of predicates (not Phrase Structure
φ-features) Section 7: Basic

Concepts in
Minimalism
Example: Section 8: Pros

and Cons of
Minimalism
(2) The girl saw ghost-s
Section 9:
the.NOM.3SG girl.F.NOM.3SG see/PAST.3SG ghost-N.ACC.3PL References
Note: As pointed out above, feature labels are normally not given within the MP
framework, only the feature values. I here add the feature labels for completeness.
Also, it is assumed here that we know the GENDER value of girl and ghost (F and N)
since these could be replaced by the respective pronouns, i.e. she and it.

Uninterpretable Features in English
Section 1: Recap
Broad category: Feature labels: Feature values: of Lecture 16
φ-features of NUMBER singular, plural Section 2:

Historical Notes
predicates PERSON 1 person, 2 person, 3 person Section 3:
Features in MP
Case features CASE nominative, accusative
Section 4:
F features _ strong, weak Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
and Move
Example: Section 6:
Phrase Structure
(3) The girl saw ghost-s Section 7: Basic
the.NOM.3SG girl.F.NOM.3SG see/PAST.3SG ghost-N.ACC.3PL Concepts in
Minimalism
Note: Counterintuitively, NUMBER and PERSON are supposed to be Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
interpretable on nouns, but not on verbs. This definition is later used to Minimalism
justify why agreement is necessary between nouns and verbs. Section 9:

References

Cross-Linguistically Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
Section 2:
The interpretability of features might change from one Historical Notes
language to another. For instance, while for English the Section 3:

Features in MP
GENDER feature is interpretable (i.e. grammatical gender Section 4:
Feature Checking
maps onto semantic gender), in German (and many other Section 5: Merge
and Move
languages) it does not necessarily.
Section 6:
See also the discussion in Adger (2003), p. 31 pp. Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Example: Minimalism
Section 8: Pros
(4) Das Mädchen sag-t, dass es/sie Geist-er and Cons of
Minimalism
the.N.NOM.SG girl.N.NOM.SG say-3P.SG that it/she ghost-M.ACC.PL
Section 9:
sah References
see/PAST.3SG
“The girl says that she saw ghosts.”

Uninterpretable Categorial Features
Section 1: Recap
We have defined above that categorial features (i.e. POS and phrase of Lecture 16
symbols) are interpretable. This generally holds true for categorial Section 2:
Historical Notes
features which describe the lexical item itself. However, lexical items can Section 3:
also have uninterpretable categorial features, namely, representing a Features in MP
Section 4:
complement or specifier that is missing to build a complete phrase. Feature Checking
See also Adger (2003), p. 91. Section 5: Merge
and Move
Section 6:
Examples: Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
kiss [V, uN] → a noun is missing as the complement, e.g. kiss trees Concepts in
Minimalism
letter [N, uP] → a preposition is missing, e.g. letters to
Section 8: Pros
to [P, uD] → a determiner (or single noun uN) is missing, e.g. to the and Cons of
Minimalism
the [D, uN] → a noun is missing, e.g. the letters3
Section 9:
References
3
Remember that for the combination of determiners and nouns the MP framework
generally assumes a DP rather than NP, i.e. the determiner is the head. For arguments
why, see Adger (2003), p. 250.

General Linguistics
Section 4: Feature Checking

Feature Checking
Section 1: Recap
A core mechanism within Minimalist Syntax is feature of Lecture 16
checking. Note that feature checking essentially links Section 2:

Historical Notes
features with phrase structure, and hence replaces Section 3:

Features in MP
traditional phrase structure rules. Section 4:
Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
The Checking Requirement and Move
Section 6:
Phrase Structure
Uninterpretable features must be checked, and once Section 7: Basic
checked they delete. Concepts in
Minimalism
See also Adger (2003), p. 91. Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
Minimalism
Section 9:
References

Checking of Categorial Features: NP
Section 1: Recap
Lexical item: of Lecture 16
Section 2:
letters [N, uP] Historical Notes
Section 3:
Incomplete phrase: Features in MP
Section 4:
NP Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
and Move
Section 6:
letters [N, uP] to [P, uN] Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Complete phrase: Minimalism
Section 8: Pros
NP and Cons of
Minimalism
Section 9:
References
letters [N, uP] PP
to [P, uN] Peter [N]

Checking of Categorial Features: NP with
Adjective Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
Section 2:
NP Historical Notes
Section 3:
Features in MP
Section 4:
Feature Checking
beautiful [A] NP
Section 5: Merge
and Move
Section 6:
Phrase Structure
letters [N, uP] PP Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
Section 8: Pros
to [P, uN] Peter [N] and Cons of
Minimalism
Section 9:
Note: According to Adger (2003, pp. 275) it is an open research question how adjectives and other References
adjuncts (e.g. adverbs) are integrated into this framework. One option is to model them as attaching to a
higher level NP, but without an uninterpretable categorial feature that needs to be checked. The problem
here is that if we positied an uN feature for the adjective, then the adjective would head the noun phrase,
which is counter the general idea that adjectives purely modify nouns, and are hence complements of
the noun phrase.

Checking of Categorial Features: DP
Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
DP Section 2:
Historical Notes
Section 3:
Features in MP
the [D, uN] NP Section 4:
Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
and Move
letters [N, uP] PP Section 6:
Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
to [P, uN] Peter [N] Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
Minimalism
Section 9:
References

Checking of Categorial Features: VP
Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
VP Section 2:
Historical Notes
Section 3:
Features in MP
burn [V, uD] DP Section 4:
Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
and Move
the [D, uN] NP Section 6:
Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
letters [N, uP] PP Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
Minimalism
Section 9:
to [P, uN] Peter [N] References
Adopted from Adger (2003), p. 84.

Checking Agreement Features
Section 1: Recap
“Selectional features are atomic, that is, the preposition of Lecture 16
cannot select an DP[acc] as in GB and the other theories in Section 2:

Historical Notes
this book unless DP[acc] is assumed to be atomic. Section 3:
Features in MP
Therefore, an additional mechanism is assumed that can Section 4:
check other features in addition to selectional features. This Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
mechanism is called Agree.” and Move
Section 6:
Müller (2019), p. 130. Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
NP
Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
Minimalism
Section 9:
letters [N, pl, uP] PP References
to [P, uD, acc] him [D, acc]

Checking Agreement Features
Section 1: Recap
“The features that are checked via Agree do not have to be of Lecture 16
at the top node of the object that is combined with a head.” Section 2:
Historical Notes
Müller (2019), p. 131. Section 3:
Features in MP
In other words, agreement features can be checked in a Section 4:
Feature Checking
sister node or further down the tree, whereas categorial Section 5: Merge
features have to be checked in the sister node (or right and Move
Section 6:
below the sister node) of the feature to be checked. Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
NP Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
Minimalism
Section 9:
References
letters [N, pl, uP] PP
to [P, uD, acc] him [D, acc]

General Linguistics
Section 5: Merge and Move

Merge
Section 1: Recap
Note that in the examples above we have implicitely of Lecture 16
assumed that the tree is binary. This naturally derives from Section 2:
Historical Notes
the fact that there is always only one uninterpretable Section 3:
Features in MP
categorial feature in each node which has to be feature Section 4:
checked and deleted. The operation which combines Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
exactly two elements to a complex phrase is called merge. and Move
Section 6:
Phrase Structure
VP Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
burn [V, uD] DP Section 8: Pros

and Cons of
Minimalism
Section 9:
the [D, uN] NP References
letters [N, uP] PP
to [P, uN] Peter [N]

External and Internal Merge
Section 1: Recap
“Chomsky assumes that there are just two operations of Lecture 16
(rules) for combining linguistic objects: External and Section 2:

Historical Notes
Internal Merge. External Merge simply combines two Section 3:
Features in MP
elements like the and book and results in a complex phrase. Section 4:
Feature Checking
Internal Merge (aka Move (α)) is used to account for
Section 5: Merge
movement of constituents. It applies to one linguistic object and Move
Section 6:
and takes some part of this linguistic object and adjoins it Phrase Structure
to the left of the respective object.” Section 7: Basic

Concepts in
Müller (2019), p. 128. Minimalism
Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
Minimalism
Section 9:
References

External Merge (Merge)
Section 1: Recap
External Merge simply combines two elements like the and book and of Lecture 16
results in a complex phrase. Section 2:
Historical Notes
Section 3:
External Merge (aka Merge) Internal Merge (aka Move) Features in MP
Section 4:
Feature Checking
XP
Section 5: Merge
and Move
Section 6:
X Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
α X Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
Minimalism
Section 9:
X References
Note: An XP his here built by first merging α with X (i.e. X) and then merging the
resulting X with an empty element . Remember that this has to be motivated by
feature checking, and essentially replaces phrase structure rules.

Section 1: Recap
Internal merge (Move) applies to one linguistic object and takes some of Lecture 16
part of this linguistic object and adjoins it to the left of the respective Section 2:
Historical Notes
object.
Section 3:
Features in MP
External Merge (aka Merge) Internal Merge (aka Move) Section 4:

Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
XP XP and Move
Section 6:
Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
X α X Concepts in
Minimalism
Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
α X hαi X Minimalism
Section 9:
References
X X
Note: α moves into the position of and replaces it (i.e. it fills the empty slot). Again this will be
motivated by feature checking, for example, checking an agreement feature. The original position of α,
i.e. the trace, is indicated here by hαi. In Chomsky (2015) it is indicated by t.

Section 1: Recap
Internal merge (Move) applies to one linguistic object and takes some of Lecture 16
part of this linguistic object and adjoins it to the left of the respective Section 2:
Historical Notes
object. Section 3:
Features in MP
External Merge (aka Merge) Internal Merge (aka Move) Section 4:

Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
XP XP and Move
Section 6:
Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
X α X Concepts in
Minimalism
Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
α X hαi X Minimalism
Section 9:
References
X X
[XP [ X [α X [X] ] ] ] [XP [α X [hαi X [X] ] ] ]

General Linguistics
Section 6: Phrase Structure

X Structure in GB and MP
Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
Maximal Structure in GB: Maximal Structure in MP: Section 2:
Historical Notes
XP (X) XP (X) Section 3:

Features in MP
Section 4:
Feature Checking
specifier X specifier X Section 5: Merge
and Move
Section 6:
adjunct X specifier X Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
complement X complement X Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
Müller (2019). Grammatical theory, p. 78 and p. 131. Minimalism
Section 9:
References

First Merge – Complements
Section 1: Recap
First merge always combines a head with a single of Lecture 16
complement to create a complete phrase (XP), i.e. a Section 2:

Historical Notes
maximal projection. Section 3:

Features in MP
Section 4:
Feature Checking
VP
1. Peter (complement) is first-merged Section 5: Merge
with to (head) to yield a complete PP and Move
burn [V, uD] DP Section 6:
2. to Peter (complement) is Phrase Structure
first-merged with letters (head) to Section 7: Basic
the [D, uN] NP yield a complete NP Concepts in
Minimalism
3. letters to Peter (complement) is Section 8: Pros
letters [N, uP] PP and Cons of
first-merged with the (head) to yield Minimalism
a complete DP
Section 9:
References
to [P, uN] Peter [N] 4. the letters to Peter (complement) is
first-merged with burn (head) to
yield a complete VP
Adopted from Adger (2003), p. 82-84.

Second Merge – Specifiers
Section 1: Recap
Second merge then combines a head with a specifier. of Lecture 16
Section 2:
Historical Notes
VP Section 3:
I In the case of a transitive verb like
Features in MP
burn, it is assumed that there are
Section 4:
They [N] V [uN] actually two uninterpreted categorial Feature Checking
features (here construed as a Section 5: Merge
determiner phrase and a noun and Move
burn [V, uD, uN] DP phrase). Section 6:
Phrase Structure
I Note that second merge is different Section 7: Basic
the [D, uN] NP from first merge here, since the Concepts in
Minimalism
uninterpretable uN feature is first
handed to the next node up (V-bar Section 8: Pros
letters [N, uP] PP and Cons of
level) and then checked by the Minimalism
specifier. Section 9:
to [P, uN] Peter [N] References
I Beware notational variant:
Sometimes the uN is then not even
shown in the features of the verb, just
on the node where it is checked.
Ditransitives
“In Section 3.4, I used X-structures in which a ditransitive verb was combined with its Section 1: Recap
accusative object to form a V, which was then combined with the dative object to form of Lecture 16
a further V. Such binary branching structures and also flat structures in which both Section 2:
Historical Notes
objects are combined with the verb to form a V are rejected by many practitioners of
Section 3:
GB and Minimalism since the branching does not correspond to branchings that would Features in MP
be desired for phenomena like the binding of reflexives [...]”
Section 4:
Müller (2019), p. 132. Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
and Move
V
Section 6:
Phrase Structure
NP V Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
NP V Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
Minimalism
Section 9:
... der Frau den Jungen zeig-t References
the.DAT.SG woman.DAT.SG the.ACC.SG boy.ACC.SG show-3SG

Little v
There are at least three different ways of how to model ditransitives (in Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
this case with a reflexive pronoun) in a tree structure. The last of the Section 2:
three options below – which involves another higher level of the verb Historical Notes
Section 3:
phrase termed little v – is preferred by many practitioners of the MP, Features in MP
since here himself is higher in the tree than Benjamin (i.e. c-commands Section 4:
Feature Checking
Benjamin) and cannot be interpreted as referring to Benjamin.
Section 5: Merge
Müller (2019), p. 132. and Move
Section 6:
Phrase Structure
V V v
Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
show himself Benjamin V Benjamin show VP Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
Minimalism
show himself himself V Section 9:
References
V Benjamin
Note: The full sentence assumed here is Peter shows himself Benjamin in the mirror.
Where the reflexive pronoun refers back to Peter.

Little v
In the full example [with categorial features checked], we would put the Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
subject Peter in the specifier position of the highest level v P. Also, it is Section 2:
Historical Notes
assumed that the verb starts out in V, and moves up to v (for checking
Section 3:
its inflectional features, see next slide). Features in MP
Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
and Move
vP I We here only show the checking of
Section 6:
categorial features. Phrase Structure
Peter [N] v [uN] I The feature description of the lexical Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
item show is here assumed to be [V, Minimalism
v + show [V] VP uN, uN], where both uNs are Section 8: Pros
complements (i.e. himself, and Cons of
Minimalism
Benjamin), while the specifier (Peter )
Section 9:
himself [N] V [uN] is assumed a feature of little v. References
I v + show [V] stands in for another

hshow [V, uN]i (to) Benjamin [N] binary branching with v and show as
sisters (see next slide).

Tense Phrase (TP)
“Section 3.1.5 dealt with the CP/IP system in GB. In the course of the development of Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
Minimalism, the Inflectional Phrase was split into several functional projections
Section 2:
(Chomsky 1989) of which only the Tense Phrase is assumed in current Minimalist Historical Notes
analyses. So, the TP of Minimalism corresponds to IP in the GB analysis.” Section 3:
Features in MP
Müller (2019), p. 134.
Section 4:
Feature Checking
TP Section 5: Merge
I The Tense Phrase (TP) is and Move
T [sg, 3pers] vP
introduced on top of the vP. Section 6:
Phrase Structure
I We here only look at inflectional
Section 7: Basic
Peter v features (categorial features are Concepts in
dropped). Minimalism
v VP Section 8: Pros
I Uninterpretable Infl features are and Cons of
Minimalism
checked with what follows after the
show v [uInfl: sg, 3pers] himself V Section 9:
colon ‘:’.
References
hshowi Benjamin I Note that feature checking from T to

v is possible due the definition of the
Agree mechanism (see definitions
above).

Complementizer Phrase (CP)
In contrast to GB – where full sentences could be IPs – full sentences in the MP are Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
always complementizer phrases. The head of a complementizer phrase (C) can take
Section 2:
an actual complementizer (e.g. that) or a wh-word (i.e. question word Q) as before in Historical Notes
GB. However, if it is empty then it still contributes a so-called clause-type feature, e.g.
Section 3:
Decl for declarative. Features in MP

Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
CP and Move
I The Complementizer Phrase (CP)
Section 6:
C [Decl] TP
is thus considered the highest level Phrase Structure
phrase in MP. Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
T vP I Here we only look at the tree Minimalism
structure with the respective lexical Section 8: Pros
Peter v items of the sentence, but without and Cons of
Minimalism
feature checking of categorial or
Section 9:
v VP inflectional features. References
I Note that feature checking can also

show v himself V be relevant for the CP (see Adger
2003, pp. 240), but we do not
hshowi Benjamin discuss this here further.
Adopted from Müller (2019), p. 136.

General Linguistics
Section 7: Basic Concepts in Minimalism

Basic Concepts in Minimalism
Section 1: Recap
I 4 of Lecture 16
Constituency X Section 2:
I POS X5 Historical Notes
Section 3:
I Heads X6 Features in MP
Section 4:
I Valency X7 Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
I Grammatical Functions X8 and Move
Section 6:
Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
4 Minimalism
Relevant for merge operations.
5 Section 8: Pros
Relevant for categorial feature checking, though not strictly adhered to in the tree and Cons of
structure, e.g. C is not necessarily a complementizer. Same as for GB. Minimalism
6
Strictly necessary for merge operations and categorial feature checking. Section 9:
7 References
Given strictly binary branching, as well as the new X-bar schema with one
complement and otherwise specifiers, the valency of verbs is not as important for
structure building as before.
8
Rather marginal, relevant for deciding on specifiers and complements of verbs (as
in GB).

General Linguistics
Section 8: Pros and Cons of Minimalism

Pros (Advantages)
Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
I Reduces the operations assumed for structure building (Merge and Section 2:
Historical Notes
Move) and is hence more evolutionary plausible (?).
Section 3:
Features in MP
I The MP analyses with one complement (first merge) and several
Section 4:
specifiers (second merge) leads to a strictly binary structure Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
without lots of unary branches (as in the earlier GB framework). and Move
Section 6:
Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
Minimalism
Section 9:
References

Cons (Disadvantages)
Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
I Not formalized fully, i.e. hard to implement computationally. Section 2:
Historical Notes
I While the GB literature in the 80s and 90s was reasonably coherent Section 3:
Features in MP
with regards to fundamental assumptions, the MP quickly Section 4:
fragmented into many divergent frameworks. Feature Checking
Section 5: Merge
and Move
I The development of implementations of large grammar fragments
Section 6:
(even for a single language) requires collaboration of researchers Phrase Structure
over years and even decades. As Müller (2019, p. 176) puts it: Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
“This process is disrupted if fundamental assumptions are Minimalism
repeatedly changed at short intervalls.” Section 8: Pros

and Cons of
Minimalism
Section 9:
References

General Linguistics
Section 9: References
References
Adger, D. (2003). Core Syntax. A minimalist approach. Oxford: Oxford University Section 1: Recap
of Lecture 16
Press.
Section 2:
Chomsky, Noam (2015). The minimalist program. 20th anniversary edition. Historical Notes
Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. Section 3:
Features in MP
Goldberg, Adele (2006). Constructions at work. The nature of generalization in
language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Section 4:
Feature Checking
Müller, Stefan. 2019. Grammatical theory: From transformational grammar to Section 5: Merge
constraint-based approaches. Third revised and extended edition. Volume I. Berlin: and Move
Language Science Press. Section 6:
Phrase Structure
Section 7: Basic
Concepts in
Minimalism
Section 8: Pros
and Cons of
Minimalism
Section 9:
References

Thank You.
Contact:
General Linguistics
Dr. Christian Bentz
SFS Wihlemstraße 19-23, Room 1.24
chris@christianbentz.de
Office hours:
During term: Wednesdays 10-11am
Out of term: arrange via e-mail

SynSem2020 Lecture17

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SynSem2020 Lecture17

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Faculty of Philosophy

Syntax & Semantics WiSe 2020/2021

19/01/2021, Christian Bentz

2 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

Section 1: Recap of Lecture 16

with some specification of what syntactic rules they can Section 4:

be involved in (i.e. θ-roles (valency) for verbs) Section 5: Merge

morphemes, words, idioms, phrasal patterns. Section 9:

4 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

Goldberg (2006). Constructions at work, p. 5. Section 4:

5 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

“the surface” but the underlying sentence structure Section 2:

represented by POS symbols. Section 3:

I etc. Section 8: Pros

6 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

Goldberg (2006), p. 10. Section 4:

7 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

sentence patterns. Section 4:

8 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

Section 2: Historical Notes

he suggested refocusing the theoretical developments towards models Section 4:

CxG Section 7: Basic

10 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

under development in this work, Section 3:

Chomsky (2015). The Minimalist Section 8: Pros

11 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

assumptions with its Section 3:

12 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

GPSG: Generalized Phrase Section 4:

MP HPSG CxG MP: Minimalist Program Section 8: Pros

13 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

plural, etc. Against this background, the following types of Section 6:

1. categorial features Section 8: Pros

4. strong F, where F is categorial

15 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

Examples: Section 5: Merge

16 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

agreement such as, for example, PERSON, NUMBER and Section 2:

φ-feature values [plural], [neuter], [3 person]. Section 6:

17 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

Strong Features Section 7: Basic

from language to language. Strong features make

18 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

interpretable and uninterpretable features: Section 2:

“The Interpretable features, then, are categorial fea- Section 3:

categorial features (N, V, etc.) Section 8: Pros

φ-features of predicates (e.g. number and person of a verb)

have an effect on semantic interpretation in this way are Section 6:

while telling us nothing about the semantics of those words.”

Adger (2003), Core Syntax: A minimalist introduction, p. 24 and p. 53.

20 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

categorial features POS N, P, V, NP, VP, etc. Section 2:

φ-features) Section 7: Basic

Example: Section 8: Pros

21 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

φ-features of NUMBER singular, plural Section 2:

justify why agreement is necessary between nouns and verbs. Section 9:

22 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

language to another. For instance, while for English the Section 3:

23 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

24 | Syntax & Semantics, WiSe 2020/2021, Bentz c 2012 Universität Tübingen

Section 4: Feature Checking

checking. Note that feature checking essentially links Section 2:

[XP [ X [α X [X] ] ] ] [XP [α X [hαi X [X] ] ] ]