Intermediate Gen Syntax (1)

Intermediate Generative Syntax
Michael Barrie
Sogang University
May 9, 2024
2
Foreword
This textbook is an investigation into contemporary understanding of Generative Gram-

mar. It presupposes the knowledge of Introduction to Generative Syntax.1
1
Available at http://mikebarrie.com/teaching.html.
3
Acknowledgements
This textbook is a continual work in progress. Thanks are due to all prior students
who have helped shape the details contained herein. I am most grateful to speakers I
have worked with Thanks also to numerous colleagues with whom I have chatted, who
have helped shape my ideas, including Victor Pan, Martina Wiltschko, Elizabeth Cow-
per, Dongwoo Park, Eric Mathieu, Myungwan Park, Jong-Un Park, Duk-Ho An, Inkie
Chung, Mamoru Saito, Seunghun Lee, Yosuke Sato, Michael Yoshitaka Erlewine, Moon-
hyun Sung,
4
Contents
Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1 Foundations of the study of language 9

1.1 The science of language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.2 Prescriptivism and descriptivism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1.3 Evidence of syntactic knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1.4 Syntactic theorizing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Key concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Further Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2 Review of basic syntax 23

2.1 The Lexicon and Theta Relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.2 Phrase structure and constituency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.2.1 Constituency tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.2.2 Bare Phrase Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Key Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Further Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
3 The Architecture of Grammar 43

3.1 Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
3.2 Internal Merge (Move) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
3.3 Head Movement and Grammar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
3.3.1 V-to-T Movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
3.3.2 T-to-C movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
3.3.3 Irish Reconsidered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
3.3.4 Summary of Head Movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
3.4 Parameterization and Word Order . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
5
6 CONTENTS
Key concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
4 Further developments of phrase structure 81

4.1 Nominal Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
4.1.1 Review of DP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
4.1.2 Classifiers and Plurality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
4.1.3 The structure of pronouns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
4.2 Tense phrases–TP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
4.3 CP–the complementizer phrase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
4.3.1 Topic and focus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
4.3.2 Embedded topics and focus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
4.4 Light Verb and vP Refined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Key Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
Further Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
5 Case theory and A-Movement 125

5.1 Case and the distribution of DPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
5.1.1 Nominative case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
5.1.2 Accusative case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
5.1.3 Case assignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
5.2 Passivization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
5.3 Other Variations on Passives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
5.3.1 SE in Romance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
5.3.2 Synthetic Passives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
5.4 Unaccusativity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
Key concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
Further Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
6 Licensing Nominals and Grammatical Relations 153

6.1 Subjects and objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
6.1.1 Quirky subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
6.1.2 Lexical case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
6.2 The Case Filter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
6.2.1 Multiple Case Checking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
6.2.2 Languages without Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
6.2.3 Pseudo Noun Incorporation - When Case is missing . . . . . . . . . . . 163
6.3 Diagnosing Subjecthood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
CONTENTS 7
6.3.1 Case Study 1: Greek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166

6.3.2 Case Study 2: Tagalog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
6.4 Ergativity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
6.5 Split intransitivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
Key concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
7 Wh-movement and relative clauses 183

7.1 Review of Wh-movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
7.2 Wh-in-situ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
7.3 Multiple wh-movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
7.4 Relative clauses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
7.4.1 Accessibility Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
7.4.2 Internally-headed relative clauses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
7.5 Restrictions on wh-movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
7.5.1 Complex DP constraint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
7.5.2 Subject constraint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
7.5.3 Coordinate Structure Constraint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
7.5.4 Wh-island constraint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
7.5.5 Resumptive pronouns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
7.6 Phases and constraining wh-movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
7.6.1 Relative clauses and islands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
7.6.2 Cross-over effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
Key concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
Further Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
Abbreviations 238
Calligraphy of tree drawing 239
Index 244
Bibliography 247
8 CONTENTS
Chapter 1
Foundations of the study of

language
1.1 The science of language
Language as an object of study can be traced back to Pān.ini in southern Asia, Aristotle in
Europe, and to the School of Mohism during the Warring States Period in China (Itkonen,
1991). From the Renaissance to the mid-nineteenth century, linguistics in Europe was
concerned largely with historical linguistics, sparked in part by Coeurdoux’s and Sir
William Jones’ discovery that Hindi and other languages of Northern India were related
to the languages of Europe (Clackson, 2007). When Europeans started to invade North
and South America during the Renaissance, their discovery of hundreds of Indigenous
languages sparked interest in the structure of human language, giving rise to an approach
to the study of language known as structuralism. This approach to language still informs
contemporary linguistic thinking to some degree, as evidenced by the fact that Leonard
Bloomfield’s 1933 text is still in print.
Modern generative linguistics started with Noam Chomsky with his 1955 dissertation
(which was not published until 1975) and its abridged version published in 1957. The
early development of modern generative linguistics was characterized by attempts to sim-
plify grammar from language specific rules to more universal rules.1 This approach cul-
minated in Government and Binding Theory (GB), which took hold in the early 1980s
(Chomsky, 1986a, 1981; Lasnik and Saito, 1992). The GB approach saw the creation
of modules of grammar, including X-Bar Theory, the Control Module, the Binding Mod-
ule, and so forth. GB Theory is characterized by an ever increasingly complex network of
1
The stages of early generative grammar include Standard Theory, Extended Standard Theory, and Revised
Extended Standard Theory. For a good pedagocial introduction to these earlier stages, see Cowper (1992).
For a more in depth discussion, see Newmeyer (2014). For a more acerbic discussion, see Harris (1995).
9
10 CHAPTER 1. FOUNDATIONS OF THE STUDY OF LANGUAGE
theoretical proposals. Part of the increase in complexity is due to the greater empirical
breadth of the field. Syntacticians were now immersed in a much wider cross-linguistic
base targeting languages in all four corners of the earth. The abstruse formalisms of GB
Theory were eventually abandoned in favour of the Minimalist approach covered here
(Chomsky, 1993).
The original goal of generative linguistics is to create a model of human language
(both spoken and signed) that accounts for all and only the grammatical sentences of a
language (Chomsky, 1955). More recently, it has been defined as, “a description of the
tacit knowledge of the speaker–hearer that underlies their actual production and percep-
tion (understanding) of speech” (Everaert et al., 2015). So, not only must we explain how
grammatical sentences are formed, we must also explain how ungrammatical sentences
are blocked. Chomsky (1986b) extended the domain of generative linguistics to include an
explanation of Plato’s problem, a term he coined based on the philosopher’s writings.
The gist of Plato’s problem is that children acquire language with rather limited expo-
sure, despite the surface intricacy and variety of human language. As such, generative
linguistics has concentrated on universals - those aspects of human language that are
invariant - and parameters - those aspects of human language that vary. The empirical
foundation of this textbook, then, includes the main syntactic phenomena of human lan-
guage and how these phenomena vary in languages around the world. We propose models
to account for these phenomena that account for the observed variation, but that block
ungrammatical forms or impossible languages. Furthermore, a proposed analysis must
meet the condition of explanatory adequacy, which states that there must be evidence
available to the child during acquisition to posit the model that the linguist proposes
(Chomsky, 1965). More recently, generative linguistics has been concerned with under-
standing language from a biologically plausible perspective (Chomsky, 2020; Chomsky
et al., 2019). This approach requires that any proposed universal mechanisms of human
language (see Universal Grammar below) have a plausible evolutionary underpinning–
a requirement that casts doubt on the abstruse mechanisms of older theories such as
Government and Binding Theory.
Let’s examine the following contrast in English and see how it can inform our under-
standing of grammar. The superscript numbers indicate coreference. Thus, in sentence
(1a), John and him both refer to the same person, namely John. The asterisk, *, in front of
the last two sentences means that they are ungrammatical. We will discuss this concept
in more detail in a bit, but for now, it just means that these sentences are unacceptable
to a native speaker of the language under study.2
2
The term native speaker should be used with caution. The so-called ideal speaker-hearer in Chomsky’s
(1965, p. 3)–a monolingual speaker who has lived their entire life in a homogeneous speech community is
1.1. THE SCIENCE OF LANGUAGE 11
Our task, then, is to formulate a model that accounts not only for the grammaticality
of the first two sentences, but also for the ungrammaticality for the latter two sentences.
(1) a. John1 thinks that Mary likes him1 .

b. John thinks that Mary2 likes herself2 .
c. * John1 thinks that Mary likes himself1 .
d. * John thinks that Mary2 likes her2 .
Based on this limited set of data, we might propose the following two principles of
anaphora, the concept of referring back to a previously mentioned element. We say that
John is the antecedent of him in the first sentence. Likewise, Mary is the antecedent of
herself in the second sentence. The reader can verify that the first two sentences above
satisfy the principles below. Example (1c) violates (2a) and that example (1d) violates (2b).
(2) Principles of Anaphora (to be revised)

a. A reflexive pronoun and its antecedent are in the same clause.
b. A non-reflexive pronoun and its antecedent are not in the same clause.
We will now address the notion of grammaticality raised above. A sentence is said to
be grammatical if it does not violate any rules of grammar. We related this to acceptability
above. A sentence is acceptable if a native speaker agrees that it has the intended mean-
ing in a given context. Testing sentences for acceptability with a native speaker requires
training in fieldwork methodology, which is a topic we will not go into great detail here.
Note that a native speaker may reject a sentence for a variety of reasons. There may be
a better or more natural way to say it. The sentence may be acceptable only in a given
context, and the speaker has a different context in mind. The sentence may require a
specific kind of intonation which the tester did not replicate or, again, the speaker did
not have in mind.
A sentence that is unacceptable to a speaker is marked with an asterisk (*). Sometimes,
the unacceptability is felt weakly by a speaker, so it is marked with a question mark (?).
Sometimes, there is variation in acceptability. Some speakers find a sentence acceptable
and others don’t. This could be the result of variation in the grammar from one speaker
to the next. Such sentences are marked with a percentage sign (%). Finally, a sentence
may be semantically or pragmatically odd, in which case it is marked with a number sign
(#). Here are some examples.
in fact a rare exception around the world. Much research has also been conducted on L2 grammar (Braidi,
2020) and heritage languages (Polinsky, 2018), which specifically requires speakers of varying degrees of
proficiency in the language under study.
(3) a. John ate an apple.

b. * Ate John an apple.
c. ? Which apple does John wonder whether to eat?
d. % Pat promised Alex to wash the dishes.
e. # My toothbrush is dead.
f. # John ate an apple, but he didn’t finish it.
The sentence in (3a) is grammatical, so does not have a marking. The sentence in (3b)
violates basic word order rules of English. This is a syntactic violation, so this sentence
is marked with an asterisk. The sentence in (3c) is felt by most speakers to be mildly
unacceptable. Syntacticians may describe this kind of sentence as degraded and mark
it with a question mark. The sentence in (3d) is acceptable for some speakers, but not
for others. The percentage sign indicates this variation in acceptability. Finally, the last
two sentences are unacceptable, but not for syntactic reasons. The words are all inflected
properly and are in the right order. In (3e), there is a semantic problem. Only animate
nouns can be described as living or dead, and a toothbrush is inanimate. In (3f) there is
a contradiction. The first clause is felicitous only in a context where John ate the whole
apple. This contradicts the next clause, which asserts that he did not eat the entire apple.
Semantic and pragmatic problems are indicated with a number sign.
Optionality is indicated by brackets. The use of the asterisk with brackets is used to
indicate whether a form is obligatory or impossible within the given sentence. Here are
some examples.
(4) English, Indo-European

a. I would like (for) John to wash the dishes.
b. I expect (*for) John to wash the dishes.
c. I would like very much *(for) John to wash the dishes.
In example (4a), the prepositional complementizer for is optional. In example (4b),

insertion of for results in ungrammaticality.3
Linguists have adopted a universal way of presenting linguistic data from any language
in the world called the Leipzig Glossing Convention. A sentence is presented with words
lined up with their glosses followed by an idiomatic translation into the language of
3
Another way of representing the facts in (4b) is as follows. The way of expressing this in (4b) is merely
an abbreviated way to capture the two pieces of data below.
(i) I expect John to wash the dishes.

(ii) * I expect for John to wash the dishes.
1.1. THE SCIENCE OF LANGUAGE 13
use. We are using English, so we give an idiomatic translation into English. Here is a
straight-forward example from Portuguese (da Cunha and Cintra, 1985, 137).
(5) Portuguese Indo-European (da Cunha and Cintra, 1985, 137)

Este aluno obteve ontem uma boa nota.
this student received yesterday a good score
‘This student received a good score yesterday.’
Morphologically complex words are broken down into separate morphemes, which
are shown by dashes in the example and in the gloss. Here is an example with rather
straightforward morphology.
(6) Mongolian, Mongolic (Guntsetseg, 2016, 82)

Tujaa eež-ijg-ee xar-san
Tujaa mother-acc-refl see-pst
‘Tujaa1 saw her1 mother.’
In some cases a word cannot be separated easily into separate morphemes, as is the
case for suppletion and fusional morphology. In this case a period is used to separate each
unit of meaning. Here are two examples from German. Observe in the first example the
root and the plural morpheme are easily distinguished and are separated by a hyphen.
In the second example, though, we cannot easily discern a separate plural morpheme.
(7) German
a. Auto, Auto-s
car, car-pl
‘car’ ‘cars’
b. Garten, Gärten
garden, garden.pl
‘garden’, ‘gardens’
Here is the Portuguese example repeated from above with the gloss indicated as per
the Leipzig Glossing Convention.
(8) Portuguese Indo-European (da Cunha and Cintra, 1985, 137)

Este aluno obteve ontem uma boa nota.
this.m student receive.3sg.pst yesterday a.f good.f score
‘This student received a good score yesterday.’
The following Korean example illustrates the same point.4 Observe that the verb molu-
n-ta has three identifiable morphemes. The first morpheme (molu) is a suppletive form
4
Note that in the traditional Yale system 부 (IPA [pu] ‘neg’) is transcribed as pu rather than as pwu since 브
(IPA [p1]) is not historically found in Korean. However, because of recent borrowings such as 브랜드 (‘brand’)
and 블로그 (‘blog’) 부 is romanized as pwu in this textbook. 블로그 then, is Romanized as pulloku.
that means ‘not know’, so it is glossed as neg.know.
(9) Korean, Koreanic (Dongwoo Park, pc)

민수가 그 사람을 모른다.
Minswu-ka ku salam-ul molu-n-ta
Minsoo-nom dem person-acc neg.know-prs-decl
‘Minsoo does not know that person.’
If a language has complex morphophonology that obscures the underlying morpho-

logical structure a four-line gloss is used. Here is an example from Blackfoot.
(10) Blackfoot, Algic (Bliss, 2008, 1)

Nitsíksstaata ana Leo ninááhksspommowahsi
Nit-iksstaat-a an-wa Leo nin-aahk-sspommo-a-hsi
1-want.tr.anim-1sbj:3.obj dem-prox Leo 1-mod-help.tr.anim-1.subj:3.obj-comp
‘I want to help Leo.’
All of the abbreviations used in the glosses are listed in the appendix. Grammatical
persons are indicated by numerals (1, 2, 3). Let’s consider the first word in the Blackfoot
example. The person prefix indicates first person (however, it does not indicate whether
the first person is the subject or the object). The form for want indicates that this is a
transitive construction (tr) and that the object is animate (anim). The agreement suffix
indicates that the subject is first person and the object is third person. Some of these
concepts may be unfamiliar for now. The important message is that the gloss must clearly
indicate the morphological breakdown of the example.
Blackfoot (bla) is an Algonquian language of the Algic fam-

ily (알그어족). It is spoken in central-western North Amer-
ica on the border between Canada and the United States.
Blackfoot is an endangered language, although revitaliza-
tion efforts are underway. Image source: Staff LiveWire Cal-
gary (2019)
1.2 Prescriptivism and descriptivism
Our goal in linguistics is to understand natural human language, including how children
acquire language and how the brain processes language. Thus, we are interested in lan-
guage as a natural object. To understand this we need to examine how language is used
by people in everyday speech situations. Thus, we describe and analyze the way people
use language in everyday life.
1.2. PRESCRIPTIVISM AND DESCRIPTIVISM 15
Prescriptivism is the practice of dictating, by virtue of some authority, acceptable

standards of language use. Prescriptivist attitudes are most often applied to written lan-
guage, but are sometimes applied to spoken language, too. Examples of prescriptive au-
thorities include the National Institute of Korean Language (국립국어원) the Académie
Française, the National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics (立語究所), and
the Commission of the Filipino Language, to name just a few. A prescriptive grammar
is a collection of the prescribed rules of a given language, and usually includes some
common proscribed forms with advice on how to avoid them. A prescribed form is one
which is deemed acceptable by some authority and a proscribed form is one which is
deemed unacceptable. A prescribed sentence is given in example (11a), followed by a pro-
scribed sentence (11b). The issue is whether the preposition to appears at the front of
the sentence with its nominal complement who(m) or whether it appears at the end of
the sentence, a phenomenon known as preposition stranding.
(11) a. To whom do you wish to speak?

b. Who do you wish to speak to?
Let’s consider a specific example of a prescriptive rule in more detail. The following
sentences all contain an instance of singular they.
(12) a. Everyone forgot their homework yesterday.

b. Someone left their dirty dishes on the table.
c. Who remembered to bring their sleeping bag?
All of these sentences were originally proscribed in English by most style manuals
because of the number agreement between the subject and the possessive pronoun mod-
ifying the object. Everyone, someone, and who are singular, and thus require singular
pronouns. Note, though, that as of 2022 a large number of style manuals in the English-
speaking world tolerate or even advocate singular they. Furthermore, singular they as
found in (12) has been attested since the 14th century and is found in the works of
Shakespeare and Austen among numerous other writers. Forms such as he or she are
usually no longer advised by the majority of style manual as they sound unnatural to
English speakers and exclude non-cisgender and non-binary people who use they or
another pronoun.5
Descriptivism is the approach that linguists take in the study of language. Linguists
do not prescribe how language is to be used (although they are sometimes asked to).
5
There is an extensive literature on singular they (Bodine, 1975; Bjorkman, 2017; Hwang, 2022; Konnelly
and Cowper, 2020; Lagunoff, 1997; Moulton et al., 2022; Conrod, 2019; Moulton et al., 2020).
Rather, they record, describe, and analyze the way language is actually used. This in-
cludes language in all its forms, including its dialects (the form of a language used in a
geographically determined area), sociolects (the form of a language used by a given socio-
economic class) and even idiolects (the particular form of a language used by a specific
person).
1.3 Evidence of syntactic knowledge
A primary goal of linguistic inquiry is to understand how language is processed in the

brain and how children acquire language. Unfortunately, we still have a very poor un-
derstanding of the human brain. We do know that children acquire language in a very
short period of time rather effortlessly. This observation has led to two controversial ideas
of human language. The first is the Poverty of Stimulus (POS) (Chomsky, 1986b). The
POS claims that children are not exposed to enough data to determine all the rules of
human language. The consequence of this is that humans are born with an innate lan-
guage faculty referred to as Universal Grammar (UG) (Chomsky, 1965). Both POS and
UG have been challenged by linguists, and the debate of their existence continues to this
day (Fodor and Crowther, 2002; Lasnik and Uriagereka, 2002; Legate and Yang, 2002;
Pullum and Scholz, 2002).
A common empirical illustration of the POS argument is subject-auxiliary inversion
in English. In a polarity question in English the auxiliary in the matrix clause appears
to the left of the subject as in the following example.
(13) a. Mary is reading a book.

b. Is Mary reading a book?
When a child is acquiring language they must figure out a general rule for this kind of
question formation. The difficulty comes when the child is confronted with the following
kind of sentence.
(14) The girl who is playing is named Rosie.
During language acquisition children produce many forms that differ from the adult
form of the language. English-speaking children produce forms such as eated (instead of
ate). Korean speaking children produce forms such as 안 밥 먹어 (an pap meke ‘not rice
eat’) instead of 밥 안 먹어 (pap an meke ‘rice not eat’). In these cases, the child has made
a guess at how to form the past tense of an English verb (add ‘-ed’) or at how to negate
a Korean verb (maintain uninterrupted object-verb order). Both of these are reasonable
guesses that turn out to be wrong in these situations. The question here is what kinds
1.3. EVIDENCE OF SYNTACTIC KNOWLEDGE 17
of guesses does the child make in formulating a rule of question formation. A child could
guess that the first auxiliary in (14) should be moved to the left of the subject resulting
in the following.
(15) *Is the girl who playing is named Rosie?
Eventually, the child would learn that the matrix auxiliary appears at the front of the
sentence, not the auxiliary that is first linearly.
(16) Is the girl who is playing named Rosie?
It turns out that children never make errors of the kind in (15) (Legate and Yang, 2002).
That is, children never entertain a rule that makes use of linear order in the sentence.
Instead children know that language is hierarchically organized and eventually arrive at
the rule that picks out the matrix auxiliary. Despite the disagreement in the literature
as to how children arrive at this conclusion, the fact is that they do, and we as linguists
must model that knowledge.
There is considerably more evidence of tacit syntactic knowledge. In a famous ex-
periment by de Villiers (1995) it was shown that children as young as 3;6 possess tacit
knowledge about their language.6 The experiment involves telling a short story to young
children as follows.
(17) Once there was a boy who loved to climb trees in the forest. One afternoon he
slipped and fell to the ground. He picked himself up and went home. That evening
when he had a bath, he noticed a big bruise on his arm. He said to his father, “I
must have hurt myself when I fell this afternoon.” (de Villiers et al., 1990, 265)
The children are then asked either one of the following two questions.
(18) a. When did the boy say he hurt himself?

b. When did the boy say how he hurt himself?
Observe that the first sentence is ambiguous while the second sentence is not. Con-
sider the following possible answers.
(19) a. a few minutes ago (possible answer for either question)

b. while climbing a tree (possible answer for (18a) only)
6
Note that in acquisition studies ages are given in years;months. Thus, children of age 3;6 are three and
a half years old.
Somehow English speakers know that (18a) is ambiguous but that (18b) is not. When
the children in the experiment were presented with the question in (18a) they either
answered, “when he was having a bath” or “when he was climbing a tree.” When they
were asked the question in (18b) they only responded with “when he was having a bath.”
Children as young as 3.5 somehow know that (18a) is ambiguous while (18b) is not. It is
exactly this kind of linguistic knowledge we are trying to model.
1.4 Syntactic theorizing
Recall that the goal of generative grammar is to create a model of language that captures
the full range of possible sentences in a language. First, note that we do not mean a ‘full
sentence’ as intended in traditional grammar. Consider the following short dialogue.
(20) A - What did you buy?
B - a book
B’s response is not a full sentence in the sense of traditional grammar as it lacks a verb
and a subject. In terms of descriptive grammar, however, B’s response is appropriate and
grammatical. A question, then, that we must answer is how B’s response is generated.
Note that B’s response means, “I bought a book.” It cannot mean, “I want to buy a book.”
or “There’s a book on the table.” or anything else that might have to do with the book. To
reiterate from above, the linguist is responsible for describing and analyzing spoken and
signed language. This includes sentences with elided material as in B’s response above.
A syntactic analysis begins with a descriptive generalization based on data gath-
ered by the linguist. A descriptive generalization is a statement that describes a pattern
for a variable of interest.7 Let’s illustrate with an example building on the data from En-
glish set at the beginning of this chapter. Say you have gathered the following Korean
data. Pay close attention to the reflexive pronoun caki (glossed as self). Our variable of
interest here is the distribution of caki. Again, the numbers indicate co-reference.
a. 민수가1 자기를1 봤다.

Minswu-ka1 caki-lul1 po-ass-ta.
Minsoo-nom self-acc see-pst-decl
‘Minsoo saw himself.’
7
For a good discussion of these principles, see Nakajima (2001) and Hashimoto (2020).
1.4. SYNTACTIC THEORIZING 19
b. 민수는1 자기가1 똑똑하다고 생각한다.

1 1
Minswu-nun caki-ka ttokttok-ha-ta-ko sayngkak-ha-n-ta.
Minsoo-top self-nom smart-do-decl-comp think-do-prs-decl
‘Minsoo1 thinks he1 is smart.’
c. 영희가1 자기에게1 책을 사 줬다.
1 1
Yenghuy-ka caki-eykey chayk-ul sa cwu-ess-ta
Younghui-nom self-to book-acc buy give-pst-decl
‘Younghuy bought herself a book.’
d. 규민은1 주원이2 자기를1/2 좋아 한다고
1 2 1/2
Kyumin-un Cwuwen-i caki-lul coh-a ha-n-ta-ko
Kyumin-nom Juwon-nom self-acc like-lnk doprs-decl-com
생각한다.
sayngkak-ha-n-ta
think-do-pst-decl
‘Kyumin thinks that Juwon likes him(self)/her(self).’
In these data, we see that the reflexive pronoun caki (self) can refer to a noun in the
same clause or in a different clause. Recall that this is unlike the reflexive pronouns in
English, which must refer to a noun in the same clause.
(22) Descriptive Generalization (Korean): An anaphor and its antecedent may

appear in the same clause or in different clauses. (subject to revision)
If we test this conclusion against further data, we see that we must revise our gener-
alization. Consider the following data.
(23) a. * 자기가1 민수를1 봤다.

1
caki-ka Minswu-lul1 po-ass-ta.
SELF-nom Minsoo-acc see-pst-decl
‘(Himself saw Minsoo.)’
b. * 자기는1 민수가1 똑똑하다고 생각한다.
1 1
caki-nun Minswu-ka ttokttok-ha-ta-ko sayngkak-ha-n-ta.
SELF-top Minsoo-nom smart-do-decl-comp think-do-prs-decl
‘(He1 thinks Minsoo1 is smart.)’
The data above show that the reflexive pronoun must appear after its antecedent.
(24) Descriptive Generalization (Korean): An anaphor must appear after its

antecedent. (subject to revision)
We will cover one more example. Consider the following Cayuga (cay) data.
(25) Cayuga, Iroquoian (Barrie, 2017, 3,4)

a. Mary aPesPah gwe:go˛h neP ohyaP

Mary she.ate all det apple
‘Mary ate all the apples.’
b. gwe:go˛h aPesPah neP ohyaP neP Mary.
all she.ate det apple det Mary
‘Mary ate all the apples.’
Observe that the quantifier gwe:go˛h (‘all’) and the noun it modifies do not have to
appear together in Cayuga. A similar pattern is also found in English. When the quantifier
is separated from the noun it modifies we call it a floated quantifier .
(26) a. All the children have eaten lunch.

b. The children have all eaten lunch.
We might make the following generalization.
(27) Certain quantifiers, such as all can appear separately from the noun they modify
and can appear anywhere in the sentence.
Consider, however, the following additional Cayuga example Barrie (2017, 3) and En-
glish examples.
(28) a. * swahyo:wah John aha:k gwe:go˛h

apple John he.ate all
(‘John ate all the apples.’)
b. Yesterday all the children ate lunch.
c. * All yesterday the children ate lunch.
In Cayuga the floated quantifier cannot appear to the right of the noun it modifies.8
Furthermore, in English the floated quantifier cannot appear to the left of the noun it
modifies. We must now modify our generalization from above.
(29) Certain quantifiers, such as all can appear separately from the noun they modify
and are called floated quantifiers. In Cayuga the floated quantifier must appear to
the left of the noun it modifies. In English, the floated quantifier must appear to
the right of the noun it modifies.
We will have more to say about floated quantifiers later, but this short forray suffices
to show that a generalization can be made more precise by considering a broader range
of data.
8
As we mentioned above, this generalization would have to be established with several examples, not with
just one. We show just one example here to illustrate the principles involved.
1.4. SYNTACTIC THEORIZING 21
Key concepts
• generative linguistics - a school of linguistics that attempts to model unconscious

knowledge of language
• universal - a property of grammar that is invariant and is found in all languages
• parameter - a property of grammar that varies across languages
• prescriptivism - the practice of dictating standard language use
• descriptivisim - the practice of describing actual language use without place value
judgements on the forms observed
• Poverty of Stimulus - the notion that children do not receive enough input to fully
determine the rules of grammar
• Universal Grammar - that part of human language that is invariant across the
species
• Grammatical - A sentence is grammatical if it does not violate any rule of grammar.
• Acceptable - A sentence is acceptable if a native speaker judges it to have the rele-

vant meaning in the context under discussion.
• descriptive generalization - a statement that characterizes a set of data by finding

a pattern in the variable of interest
Further Reading
• Ghomeshi (2010) - A concise and entertaining discussion on common misconcep-

tions of language and prescriptivism
• Bodine (1975) - A study on androcentric phenomena in the English language, fo-

cusing on he, she and singular they
• Cameron (1992) - A collection of articles dealing with feminist issues in grammar

and linguistics
• Chomsky (1957) and Chomsky (1965) - Two early works of Chomsky’s. His 1965
monograph is an accessible introduction to generative grammar
• Cowper (1992) - Contains an accessible and concise history of generative syntax

starting with Chomsky’s 1957 Syntactic Structures and working up to the start of
Government and Binding Theory
• Lagunoff (1997) - Dissertation on the sociolinguistics, syntax and semantics of

singular they
• Milroy and Milroy (1998) - A discussion on the role of prescriptivism in grammar

and linguistics
• McWhorter (1998) - A collection of essays debunking some common myths about

the English language. Included is a discussion on gender-neutral pronouns, African
American Vernacular English and arguments in favour of translating Shakespeare
into modern English.
• Roberts (2017) - An up-to-date lay-person introduction to language

Chapter 2
Review of basic syntax
By the end of this chapter you should:
• have a firm grasp on θ-relations and θ-role,
• have a basic appreciation of how θ-roles are linked to argument structure,
• have fully reviewed diagnostics for constituency,
• have an understanding of Bare Phrase Structure,
• understand Labelling Theory,
• understand the difference between set Merge and pair Merge.
2.1 The Lexicon and Theta Relations
This section investigates what kind of information is attached to a word. Let’s initially say
that the word is stored in the mental lexicon with some sort of phonological matrix that
tells us what the pronunciation is and something that tells us what the word means. The
information stored with a lexical item in the mental lexicon is called its lexical entry.
Lexical items place various selectional restrictions on their arguments, which is also
thought to be stored in the mental lexicon. These restrictions are related to the kind of
role the arguments play in the event depicted by the predicate. These roles are called the-
matic relations (Fillmore, 1968) For instance, in the sentence John washed the dishes,
John is purposefully bringing about the action of washing the dishes, so he is an <agent>.
However, in the sentence, John cried in the basement, John did not purposefully bring
about the event of crying. Unless John is an actor in a play, we would normally under-
stand John to have experienced the event of crying, rather than bringing it about. Thus,
23
24 CHAPTER 2. REVIEW OF BASIC SYNTAX
he is an <experiencer>. These differences in interpretation have important linguistic ef-

fects, as we will see below. The most commonly used thematic relations are found in the
following chart with some examples. The nominal that carries the thematic relation in
question is underlined.
Thematic relations:
<agent> - the initiator of an action
John ate an apple.
<theme> - the entity that moves or changes possession
Mary gave a book to John.
The book fell off the shelf.
<patient> - the entity that is physically affected by the event
John broke the mirror.
<experiencer> - the entity that perceives an event or has a psychological reaction
Pat enjoyed the opera.
<percept> - the entity that is perceived
Fred tasted the wine.
<location> - the place in which an event takes place
Fred ate some pickerel in Winnipeg.
<goal> - the place to which movement takes place
Gyumin flew from Busan to Nagoya
<recipient> - the individual to whom ownership is transferred
Pat sent the manuscript to Alex.
<source> - the place from which movement takes place or the individual who
provides the entity being transferred
Makiko flew from Tokyo to Seoul.
Fred bought a car from Alice.
<benefactive> - the individual for whose benefit an event is carried out
Pat washed the dishes for Alex.
Take care to note the following distinction. A predicate assigns particular theta-roles
(or θ-roles), to its arguments. Each θ-role will correspond to one or more thematic rela-
tions (Gruber, 1965; Fillmore, 1968). See Harley (2010) in particular for a good review.
For example, in the sentence John gave Mary a book, John carries the θ-role correspond-
ing to the role as a giver. This θ-role bears two thematic relations: the <agent> and the
<source>. We say that the θ-role for John contains two thematic relations: <agent> and
<source>.
Theta Criterion
i. Every argument bears one and only one θ-role.
ii. Every θ-role is assigned to one and only one argument.
2.1. THE LEXICON AND THETA RELATIONS 25
θ-roles have been linked to argument structure, as summarized by Gruber (2001).

Consider the following two sentences.
(1) a. Fred chopped the wood.

b. The lightning frightened the dogs.
Here are the θ-roles for each of the arguments in these two sentences.
(2) a. subject <agent>; object <patient>

b. subject <percept>; object <experiencer>
There are many instances in which the subject and object θ-roles can be switched for
<percept> and <experiencer>, but not for <agent> and <patient>. In (1b) the verb frighten
has a subject with a <percept> θ-role and an object with an <experiencer> θ-role. In (3b),
the θ-roles are reversed for the verb fear. However, there is no hypothetical verb thop as
in (3a) in which the subject is a <patient> and the object is an <agent>.
(3) a. *The wood thopped Fred.

b. The dogs fear the lightening.
The way arguments are marked in the clause is often correlated with θ-roles. First, let’s
review the notions of internal argument (외재논항) and external argument (내재논항)
(Williams, 1980). The internal arguments are introduced by VP. The external argument
is introduced outside of VP (by vP). Note that in passives, the internal argument becomes
the grammatical subject. The following example illustrates these two properties.
(4) Mary ate the apple .
External Argument Internal Argument
The apple was eaten.
Consider, now, the following Eastern Tamang data.
(5) Eastern Tamang, Sino-Tibetan (Sujan Lama, speaker)

> >
a. sudZan-se SjaU tSa-dZi
˙ “ eat-pst
apple
Sujan-erg
‘Sujan ate an apple.’
>
b. sudZan-da SjaU dZa mu-la
˙ “ like cop-n.pst
apple
Sujan-dat
‘Sujan likes apples.’
Observe in the first example that the subject is an <agent> and bears ergative case.1
In the second example, the subject is an <experiencer> and bears dative case.
Finally, argument-taking lexical items have theta grids that state how θ-roles are
assigned (Williams, 1981). Theta grids form part of the lexical entry of the verb. Consider
the verb chop, which requires a direct object.
(6) a. Pat chopped the wood.

b. * Pat chopped.
When theta grids were originally conceived, the external argument (often the subject
in active voice) was considered an argument of the verb. There is now good evidence that
the external argument is introduced by a distinct functional projection (Kratzer, 1996).2
Under this original conception, the theta-grid for the verb chop appears as follows. The
external argument is underlined and is indicated by 1. In this case, it is an agent. The
internal arguments are indicated by 2 and (in the case of ditransitives) 3.3 If there is no
external argument, then the first argument is indicated with the numeral 1 without an
underline.
CHOP 1 2
<agent> <patient>
An updated theta grid for chop appears in the following example.
CHOP 1
<patient>
The functional head v has its own theta grid, which indicates that the external argu-
ment is an <agent>.
We are now left with the following question. How do we account for the tendency for
verbs to consistently appear with either an <agent> or an <experiencer> θ-role for the
external argument. For instance, the external argument of chop is an <agent>, and the
external argument of like is an <experiencer>, as in the following examples.
(7) a. Mary chopped the wood.

1
Recall that ergative case appears on the subject of transitive verbs.
2
In later chapters we will clarify the notions of subject, external argument, and the role of v in the clause.
For now recall from Introduction to Generative Syntax that the external argument is introduced by v.
3
This notation of assigning θ-roles is borrowed from Role and Reference Grammar (Foley and Van Valin,
1984; Van Valin and LaPolla, 1997).
2.1. THE LEXICON AND THETA RELATIONS 27
b. John likes apples.
There is more than one way to tackle this problem. Certainly, the θ-role of the external
argument associated with a given verb is the kind of information a language learner
or a lexicographer would want to encode. The approach we take here is that syntax is
responsible for putting words together in a sentence. It is not responsible for the choices
of which words and functional heads to use. The fact that chop conventionally appears
with a v that assigns an <agent> θ-role is simply something the syntax is not concerned
with. Other theories of syntax, however, may take a different approach. It is instructive to
note at this point that the ways words are used change over time. Consider the following
example.
(8) Mary liked John’s Facebook post.
This sentence is ambiguous between the <experiencer> reading for the subject and
the <agent> reading.4
Recall that severing the external argument from the verb allows us to simplify the
theta grids for alternating unaccusative verbs. Consider the following examples.
(9) a. Pat opened the door.

b. the door opened.
Before, we had to posit two different theta grids for open. Assuming that v assigns the
external θ-role, only one theta grid for open and similar verbs like break, shatter, boil,
and melt are needed. Here, then, are the two theta grids necessary for (9a).
v 1 a big long space OPEN 1

<agent> <theme>
Other θ-roles are assigned often by adpositions in many languages. If we change the
sentence above as follows to include a location we get the following.
(10) Minsoo ate the apple in the kitchen.
Here, the preposition in assigns a θ-role to the kitchen.
IN 1
<location>
4
This is, of course, a more recent use of like, which has the approximate meaning ‘to click like’. Merriam
Webster’s online dictionary, for example, has the following definition: “to electronically register one’s approval
of (something, such as an online post or comment) for others to see (as by clicking on an icon designed for
that purpose)”
To conclude, we have seen that verbs assign θ-roles to their internal arguments. The
external argument is assigned a θ-role by v. The external argument is usually either an
<agent> or an <experiencer>. There are pairs of verbs such as frighten/fear in which
the θ-roles can be reversed so that the object is the <experiencer>; however, the <agent>
θ-relation can never be assigned to an internal argument.
2.2 Phrase structure and constituency
2.2.1 Constituency tests
We will briefly review some constituency diagnostics. Note that constituency diagnostics
are often one-way entailments. That is, if a test string of words fails a constituency di-
agnostic it may be because it is not a constituent, but it may be because the diagnostic
being used does not apply to the constitent being tested. For example, ellipsis is a com-
mon constituency diagnostic. Some languages have VP ellipsis but some do not. A VP is a
constituent, but if the language you’re looking at doesn’t have VP ellipsis, then attempting
to elide the VP will result in ungrammaticality.
The first test we discuss is often called the replacement test. Many constituents can
be replaced by pro-forms. The notion that a constituent can be replaced by a pro-form is
called the pro-form Criterion (Miller, 1992). Here are some common English pro-forms.
(11) Common English Pro-forms

a. NP - pronouns: I, you, etc.
b. VP - so
c. PP - there, then
d. AdvP - thus
e. AdjP - such, so
NPs can be replaced by pronouns, as in the following examples.
(12) The tall man is reading the interesting book.
He is reading the interesting book .
He is reading it.
VPs in English can be replaced by the pro-form so, as in (13). Here, so replaces the
VP writing a tough exam.
2.2. PHRASE STRUCTURE AND CONSTITUENCY 29
(13) John is writing a tough exam, and so is Mary.
Pro-forms vary from one language to the next and must be worked out on a case-by-
case basis. The following example gives some Korean pro-forms.
(14) a. NP - pronouns: ku, kyey (그, 걔)

b. VP - kulehta (그렇다)
Consider the traditional Korean VP pro-form 그렇다 (kulehta, ‘to do so’). Here is an ex-
ample. The VP pro-form replaces the italicized (or underlined) strings in the two sentences
below, showing that they are constituents.
(15) Korean, Koreanic (Moonhyun Sung, pc)

a. 영희가 케이크를 포크로 먹었다. 민수도
Yenghuy-ka kheykhu-lul phokhu-lo mek-ess-ta. Minswu-to
Younghui-nom cake-acc fork-with eat-pst-decl. Minsoo-also
그랬다.
kuleh-ess-ta.
do.so-pst-decl
‘Younghui ate the cake with a fork. Minsoo did so, too.’
b. 규민이 부산에 KTX로 갔다. 수민도 그랬다.
Kyumin-i Pwusan-ey KTX-lo ka-ess-ta. Swumin-to kuleh-ess-ta.
Gyumin-nom Busan-to KTX-with go-pst-decl. Sumin-also do.so-pst-decl
‘Gyumin went to Busan by KTX (a high-speed train). Sumin did so, too.’
French has a locative clitic, y (‘there’), which can replace a locative PP, as in the fol-
lowing example.
(16) French, Indo-European

a. Marie est allée à l’école.
Mary is gone.fem to the school
‘Mary went to school.’
b. Marie y est allée.
Mary there is gone.fem
‘Mary went there.’
Constituency can also be diagnosed by the ability of a string of words to stand alone
in a single utterance. Here are some examples.
(17) a. Who is writing a tough exam? → the bright student

b. What is the bright student writing? → a tough exam
c. What is the bright student doing? → writing a tough exam
d. What’s going on? → The bright student is writing a tough exam.

e. Where is the student writing the exam? → in the classroom
Only constituents of the same type can be coordinated. This test works well for virtu-
ally all types of constituents, unlike some of the other diagnostics, which only work well
for certain types of constituents. Consider the following examples.
(18) a. John ate [[NP a cake] and [NP an apple pie]].

b. The children scribbled [[PP in the books] and [PP on the wall]].
c. Minjoon [[VP ate an apple] and [VP drank some tea]].
In (18a) the two NPs are coordinated into one large NP, and in (18b) the two PPs are
likewise coordinated. (18c) show more evidence that a verb and an object together form
a constituent. The following data show that phrases of different categories cannot be
coordinated.
(19) a. Minsoo is a doctor and a singer.

b. Minsoo is reading a book and drinking some tea.
c. * Minsoo is a doctor and drinking some tea.
d. * Minsoo is reading a book and a singer.
In the first example two NPs are coordinated, and in the second example two VPs
are coordinated. In the third example, however, an NP is coordinated with a VP, and the
sentence is ungrammatical. Likewise in the last example a VP is coordinated with an NP,
and again the sentence is ungrammatical.
The next test we explore is called clefting. A clefted sentence has the following form,
such that X is always a constituent. There are some examples to the side in which the
constituent in the X position is italicized. As can be seen from the examples, NPs and
PPs can be clefted in English.
(20) It was X that Y

a. It was the apple that Mary ate.
b. It was the magazine that John read.
c. It was into the kitchen that Hilda walked.
Let’s use this test in the following two sentences to see if the underlined string of words
are constituents or not.
(21) a. John likes the lamp in the living room.

b. John put the cake in the oven.
To execute this test, we put the underlined string of words in the X position in the
cleft. This gives us the following results, showing us that the underlined string of words
in the first sentence is a constituent, but not the underlined string of words in the second
sentence.
(22) a. It was the lamp in the living room that John likes.
b. * It was the cake in the oven that John put.
Now, let’s consider the following ambiguous sentence, with the two paraphrases given
below.
(23) Mary saw the child with binoculars.

a. The child had the binoculars, and Mary saw him.
b. Mary used binoculars to see the child.
Let’s see what happens when we try to cleft the relevant parts of the sentence.
(24) a. It was the child with binoculars that Mary saw.

b. It was the child that Mary saw with binoculars.
Here, we see that the range of possible meanings has changed. In (24a), we only get
the reading in (23a); however, in (24b), we only get the reading in (23b). Thus, in order to
get the reading in (23a), the string of words the child with binoculars is a constituent. To
get the reading in (23b), we see that this string does not form a constituent, otherwise
(24a) would still be ambiguous. (24b) shows us that the child is a constituent, of course.
Pseudoclefting is another reliable test for constituency. A pseudoclefted sentence has
the form in (25), where X is always a constituent. As you can see from the examples, NPs
and PPs can be clefted in English. A pseudocleft must select the appropriate wh-word
(question word – what for things, who for people, etc.). Not only can NPs and PPs be
pseudoclefted, but VPs can be pseudoclefted, too. When a VP is pseudoclefted some form
of the verb do is required.
(25) X is what/who/when/where Y (did ∼)

a. The apple is what Mary ate.
b. The boy is who Mary saw.
c. Into the kitchen is where Hilda walked.
d. Eat the apple is what Joshua did.
Korean has a similar pseudocleft construction that diagnoses constituency (Kim, 1978,
140-141). It has the following structure, where X is a constituent.
(26) Y 것/사람/곳은 X이다

Y kes/salam/kos-un X-i-ta
Y thing/person/place-top X-be-decl
‘X is what/who/when/where Y did.’
a. 영희가 먹은 것은 사과다.
Yenghuy-ka mek-un kes-un sakwa-∅-ta
Younghui-nom eat-prfv thing-top apple-be-decl
‘What Younghui ate is an apple.’
b. 민수가 본 사람은
Minswu-ka po-n salam-un
Minsoo-nom see-prfv person-top
쌍안경 가지고 있는 아이다.
ssangankyeng ka-ci-ko iss-nun ai-∅-ta
binoculars go-ci-comp aux-impfv child-be-decl
‘Who Minsoo saw was a child with binoculars’
c. 규민이 읽은 것은 내 재밌는 책이다.
Kyumin-i ilk-un kes-un nay caymiss-nun chayk-i-ta
Kyumin-nom read-prfv thing-top my fun-adn book-be-decl
‘What Kyumin read was my interesting book.’
d. 철수가 사과를 먹은 곳은 부엌에서다.
Chelswu-ka sakwa-lul mek-un kos-un pwuekh-eyse-∅-ta
Cheolsoo-nom apple-acc eat-prfv place-top kitchen-in-cop-decl
‘Where Cheolsoo at the apple is in the kitchen.’
Many languages have various kinds of dislocation such as passivization, topicaliza-

tion, scrambling, VP fronting, and right node raising, all of which can be used to diagnose
constituency.
Passivization is a well known diagnostic for nominals. Here is an example. This exam-
ple shows that the string the big window is a constituent.
(27) a. Billy broke the big window with a stone. (Consider only the meaning in which
Billy used the stone to break the window)
b. The big window was broken with a stone.
Topicalization also diagnoses constituency. Based on the example above we can also
say the following to show that the big window is a constituent.
(28) The big window Billy broke with a stone...the small one he broke with a stick.
Many languages also have a dislocation operation called scrambling. In Korean and
many languages around the world, word order is rather free. When a phrase moves in the
sentence, as the object does in the example below, we say it has undergone scrambling.
(29) Korean, Koreanic adapted from Cho and Whitman (2019)

a. 영희가 피자를 먹었다
Yenghuy-ka phica-lul mek-ess-ta
Younghui-nom pizza-acc eat-pst-decl
‘Younghui ate a pizza.’
b. 피자를 영희가 먹었다
phica-lul Yenghuy-ka mek-ess-ta
pizza-acc Younghui-nom eat-pst-decl
‘Younghui ate a pizza.’
Some languages also have VP fronting, showing that the VP is a constituent. Consider
the following example.
(30) Eat anchovies, John never would.
The following examples also show that the VP is a constituent in Korean as the string
phica-lul mek (‘eat pizza’) can be fronted.
(31) Korean, Koreanic (Cho and Whitman, 2019, 204f)

a. 피자를 먹기는 영희가 했다.
Phica-lul mek-ki-nun Yenghuy-ka ha-yess-ta.
pizza-acc eat-nlzr-top Younghui-nom do-pst-decl
‘Eat pizza, Younghui did.’
b. * 영희가 먹기는 피자를 했다.
Yenghuy-ka mek-ki-nun phica-lul hay-ss-ta.
Yenghuy-nom eat-nlzr-top pizza-acc do-pst-decl
(‘Younghui eat is what was done to the pizza’)
This test shows that the string of the verb and the object (‘pizza eat’) is a constituent.
We give another example of VP fronting from German. Consider first the following
base pair of sentences. These data are similar to the Korean data above as they involve
scrambling of an object to the left of a subject.
(32) German, Indo-European (Webelhuth, 1990, 50)

a. Gestern hat niemand dem Großvater geholfen.
yesterday has nobody.nom the.dat grandfather help.ptcp
‘Yesterday nobody helped grandfather.’
b. Gestern hat dem Großvater niemand geholfen.

yesterday has the.dat grandfather nobody.nom help.ptcp
German also has a process of VP-fronting similar to Korean. Consider the following
data.
(33) German, Indo-European (Webelhuth, 1990, 51)

a. Dem Großvater geholfen hat gestern niemand.
the.dat grandfather help.ptcp hat yesterday nobody.nom
b. * Niemand geholfen hat gestern dem Großvater.
nobody.nom help has yesterday the.dat grandfather.ptcp
(‘Yesterday nobody helped grandfather.’)
Again, these data show that the verb and the object together dem Großvater helfen
(‘grandfather help’) form a VP constituent.
Finally, we discuss right node raising (Postal, 1974). Bresnan (1974) proposes that
right node raising is a reliable constituency diagnostic. Consider the following examples.
The italicized portion has undergone right node raising.
(34) a. Mary bought, and Fred read, a recent best-seller.

b. Fred read, and Mary threw out, a bunch of newspapers.
Using the Revised Extended Standard Theory at the time (before X-Bar Theory), these
structures were represented as follows. The constituent that adjoins to S is said to have
undergone right node raising.
(35)
S
S NPi
S and S a recent best-seller
NP VP NP VP
Mary V ti Fred V ti
bought read
We set aside the BPS representation of right node raising, but see Citko (2017) for
recent discussion.
We finish off this section with a refresher on the c-command relation (Reinhart, 1976),
which is defined as follows.
C-Command:
A node α c-commands a node β, iff every branching node that dominates α also
dominates β, and α does not dominate β.
Let’s remind ourselves how c-command works using anaphors as an illustration.

Anaphors must be c-commanded by their antecedent. This restriction doesn’t hold for
non-anaphoric pronouns, however (regular pronouns such as her, me, 나 (na ‘I/me’)).
Consider the following data. Again, recall that the superscript numbers mean that John
and himself refer to the same person.
(36) a. John1 likes himself1 .
b. * John1 ’s sister likes himself1 .
To understand why the anaphor is grammatical in (36a) but not in (36b), consider
the trees for these sentences to see the c-command relations between the elements in
question. Note that we will consider the structure of possessives in more detail later, but
the structure below will suffice for now.
(37) a.
CP
C TP
TP
DP1 i
John T vP
ti vP
v VP
Vj v tj D
likes himself1
b.
CP
C TP
DPi TP
DP T
DP1
vP
John D N ti vP
’s sister
v VP
Vj v tj D
likes himself1
Observe that in (37a) the antecedent John c-commands the anaphor; however, in
(37b), the antecedent does not c-command the anaphor. Although this notion is discussed
in detail in chapter 10, we will see the notions of c-command and anaphora in chapter 4.
2.2.2 Bare Phrase Structure
Early in the GB era phrase structure was constrained by X-Bar Theory, which evolved
into Bare Phrase Structure (Chomsky, 1994). Recall the basic structure of X-Bar Theory.
Note that the terms specifier and complement are still in use.
(38)
XP
Spec X’
X Compl
In Bare Phrase Structure, phrases are built up by an operation called Merge, which
takes two syntactic objects and merges them together into a single syntactic object. In
the following example, α and β are merged together. This operation is called more specif-
ically set Merge, or often just Merge for short. We keep to the simplest mechanism and
assume that Merge always takes exactly two syntactic objects, α and β, giving rise to
an unordered nested set with a label, γ. Since Merge is defined as taking two syntactic
objects, branching is necessarily binary.
(39) Merge (α, β) → {γ, {α, β}}
We need a way to determine the label, γ. The following algorithm has been proposed
to determine the label after merge. The original algorithm is found in Chomsky (2013,
2015); however, the precise formulation is the subject of ongoing research (Cecchetto
and Donati, 2015; Citko, 2011; Hornstein and Nunes, 2008; Saito, 2016; Sato, 2010;
Sheehan, 2013).
(40) a. Merge (H, XP) → H is the label

b. Merge (YP, XP) →
• If YP and XP share a common criterial feature, that feature is the label.
• If YP and XP share no such feature, there is no label. Either YP or XP

must raise, and the remaining category determines the label.
c. Merge (H1 , H2 ) → One of H1 or H2 is a root, the other is the label.
For our purposes, a criterial feature is any grammatical feature in which an uninter-
pretable Probe is valued.5 Crucially, theta-role assignment is not an instance of criterial
feature checking. Consider the derivation of Mary ate the apple. The verb merges with
the object DP. When a head merges with a phrase, the label is the head. To remind our-
selves, first we present the actual BPS syntagmatic representation, (41a), followed by a
more reader-friendly version, (41b). Again, it is important to keep in mind that the reader-
friendly version is a notational variant of the BPS representation.
(41) a.
eat
eat the
the apple
b.
VP
V DP
eat
the apple
In example (42) the structure has been built up to vP, at which point two phrases are
merged together, DP and vP.6 The subject DP receives a theta role. No criterial feature is
5
Chomsky (2013) was more precise than this. For him, the term criterial feature is used in the sense
of Rizzi (2006). Once a goal has satisfied a criterial feature it cannot be moved. This is important for the
notion of subject. A subject raises to SpecTP to check ϕ-features, but can subsequently raise for focus,
question, or topic movement. Thus, it is not a criterial feature. We will ignore this complication here and
simply assume that when the subject raises to SpecTP it checks a criterial feature. See (Chomsky, 2015) for
further developments.
6
Recall that V undergoes head movement to v. We come back to head movement in the next chapter.
checked, so this structure is left without a label. The symbol Ø represents the lack of a
label.
(42)
Ø
DP vP
Mary
v VP
V DP
ate
the apple
In (43) the subject DP raises, allowing Ø to be labelled as vP. The subject values the
ϕ-features on T, which we said above is a criterial feature. The feature forms the label;
however, for convenience, we notate it as the head that contains the unvalued feature.7
(43)
TP
DPi TP
Mary T vP
ϕ:3sg.f uϕ
ti vP
v
VP
ate the apple
Next we consider the issue of adjuncts. Adjuncts are traditionally considered to be

extra information that do not affect the syntactic properties of the host it modifies. This
traditional assumption is apparent from Reed-Kellogg diagrams from the 19th Century,
where the adjectives are adjoined at an angle (Kellogg and Reed, 1877).8
(44) a. The student ate the tasty apple.
student ate apple

b.
th
th
ta
e
st
y
7
Chomsky (2015) proposes specifically that TP and DP share ϕ features, so the label is <ϕ,ϕ>. See Chomsky
(2015) for more details as well as Shim (2018) and Richards (2019) for refinements.
8
Note that in traditional grammar determiners are considered adjectives.
The notion that adjuncts do not affect the syntactic status of their hosts is still typ-
ically assumed (Ernst, 2002; Chomsky, 2020). Adjuncts are assumed to undergo pair
Merge (in contrast to set Merge above). The precise mechanism of pair Merge is still under
debate. The label of the structure resulting from pair Merge is represented as an ordered
pair. Consider the following example in which the AdjP very dusty has been pair Merged
to the NP pictures of John.
(45)
<NP,NP>
AdjP NP
very dusty pictures of John
For review, the following structure shows how the complement, specifier, and adjunct
fit into an XP projection.
(46)
<XP,XP>
YP XP
adjunct ZP XP
specifier X WP
complement
Let’s look at a concrete example to see how phrase structure is built up. We will con-
struct the phrase structure for the VP cut the cake with a knife. Note that the structure
of noun phrases will be considered in detail later, so we represent them as triangles here.
Also, for now we will ignore the vP projection. First, the verb cut takes the object the cake
as a complement. Since a head, V, merges with a phrase, NP, the head projects and the
result is a VP.
(47)
VP
V DP
cut the cake
Next, the preposition with merges with the NP a knife. Again, a head merges with a
phrase, so the head projects.
(48)
PP
P DP
with
a knife
Now, the VP and the PP undergo pair-merge. The resulting phrase has the label <VP,VP>.
Observe crucially that the complement is the sibling to the verb.
(49)
<VP,VP>
VP PP
V DP P DP
with
cut the cake a knife
Key Concepts
• thematic relation - The kind of role an argument plays with respect to its predicate.
<agent>, <patient>, <theme>, <recipient>, etc.
• θ-role - The set of thematic relations assigned to an argument of a predicate. For

example, the subject of buy is assigned the θ-role that contains the two thematic
relations <agent> and <recipient>.
• theta grid - The set of θ-roles assigned by a lexical item.
• internal argument - An argument of the verb that is introduced inside the VP.
• external argument - An argument that is introduced outside VP, namely in SpecvP.
• constituency - the notion that certain phrases that behave as a unit syntactically
should be represented as a unit by being exhaustively dominated by a single node
• Bare Phrase Structure - a theory of phrase structure in which syntactic objects

are built up by merging two elements together. This operation ensures consistent
binary branching.
• set Merge - A structure building operation in which two syntactic objects are brought
together to form a new syntactic object.
• pair Merge - A structure building operation in which a syntactic object is adjoined

to the root node of an existing structure.
Further Reading
• Carnie (2008) - This monograph discusses in detail advanced techniques and dis-
cussions of constituency diagnostics. It should be accessible after a full understand-
ing of this chapter and chapter 4.
• Chomsky (1970) - This paper is where Chomsky first proposes the X-Bar theory of
phrase structure, the precursor of Bare Phrase Structure.
• Chomsky (1994) - This paper is where Chomsky outlines Bare Phrase Structure.
• Reinhart (1981) - This is one of the earliest discussions on c-command.
• Speas (1990) - This volume discusses adjuncts in detail and draws a distinction
between adjuncts adjoined to XP (as done in this textbook) and adjuncts adjoined
to intermediate X-bar projections (as done in X-Bar Theory). This source should only
be tackled once the fundamentals covered in this book have been acquired.
• Baker (1988b) - Baker proposes that θ-roles are assigned on a universal hierarchy.
For instance, <theme> is assigned before <agent>. This captures the generalization
that there are many verbs with <agent> as subject and <theme> as object, but not
the other way around.
• Chomsky (1957, 1965) - Two of Chomsky’s early works on generative grammar.

Aspects (1965) lays down much of the ground work of modern generative grammar
and includes a discussion on lexical entries.
• Pesetsky (1982) - This dissertation discusses the role of c-selection (as distinct from
s-selection) in grammar. It focuses chiefly on Russian syntax, but makes universal
claims about grammar.
• Reinhart (2002) - This paper discusses several foundational issues of thematic

roles and some problems contained therein. The discussion is complex at times,
but some of the concepts should be accessible at this point.
• Chomsky (2013) and Chomsky (2015) - These two papers discuss Labelling Theory
in more detail. Note that the version of Labelling Theory here largely aligns with
Chomsky (2013).
Chapter 3
The Architecture of Grammar
• understand the Principles and Parameters approach to generative syntax
• understand the basic architecture of the T-model of generative syntax
• understand the difference between overt and covert movement
• understand the concept of building up structure by Merge
• understand head movement and when it occurs (V-to-T and T-to-C)
• understand do-support in English.
3.1 Features
Lexical items have properties that have morphosyntactic manifestations throughout the
sentence. Consider the following examples.
(1) Gender agreement in French (fra)

a. La pomme est vert-e
the.f apple.f is green-f
‘The apple is green.’
b. Le crayon est vert
the.m pencil.m is green.m
‘The pencil is green.’
Observe that the form of the determiner and the form of the adjective change depend-
ing on the gender of the noun. The following Portuguese example illustrates agreement
in more detail.
43
44 CHAPTER 3. THE ARCHITECTURE OF GRAMMAR
(2) Portuguese, Indo-European (Kato et al., 2023, 57)

As alunas estrangeiras chegaram adiantadas.
the.f.pl student.f.pl foreign.f.pl arrive.3pl early.f.pl
‘The foreign female students arrived early.’
Consider also the following data from the Busan dialect of Korean (Barrie and Lee,
2017). Here, the form of the complementizer varies with respect to the type of clause
(polarity question or content question) and the type of predicate (verb or copula (연결동
사/BE동사)).
(3) Categorial dependencies in Busan Korean

a. 니가 책을 읽나?
ni-ka chayk-ul ilk-na?
you-nom book-acc read-comp
‘Are you reading a book?’
b. 니가 뭐를 읽노?
ni-ka mwe-lul ilk-no?
you-nom book-ACC read-COMP
‘What are you reading?’
c. 저 사람이 수민이가?
Ce salam-i Swumin-i-ka?
that person-nom Soomin-cop-comp
‘Is that person Soomin?’
d. 저 사람이 누고?
Ce salam-i nwu-Ø-ko?
that person-nom who-cop-comp
‘Who is that person?’
It is proposed that lexical items have features, which indicate its special properties
that give rise to the morpho-syntactic phenomena observed. Let’s take the French ex-
ample first. The noun pomme (‘apple’) has the gender feature [f] (feminine). That is, the
lexical entry for pomme includes the fact that it has this feature. Likewise, the noun
crayon (‘pencil’) has the gender feature [m] (masculine). There are two singular definite
determiners in French. They both have roughly the same meaning as English the; how-
ever, the form la appears with feminine nouns and the form le appears with masculine
nouns. Another way to say this is that the form of the determiner varies with the gender
of the noun it modifies. Also, the form of the adjective agrees with the gender of the noun
it predicates.
In early Minimalist frameworks (Chomsky, 1993, 1995), it was proposed that features
were either interpretable or uninterpretable. Uninterpretable features were either strong
or weak. The following notation is used to indicate these concepts.
3.1. FEATURES 45
(4) a. [iF] - interpretable feature

b. [uF] - uninterpretable weak feature
c. [uF*] - uninterpretable strong feature
Let’s see how features play a role in the syntactic derivation. Consider the following
Portuguese examples. Observe that the verb agrees with the subject in the following
data. Chomsky proposed that the person, number, and gender features of the noun (the
ϕ-features) are interpretable on nouns and uninterpretable on T. This feature system
was originally designed to capture the traditional notion that verbs agree with nouns.
Consider the following data.
(5) Portuguese, Indo-European

a. O aluno leu o livro.
the student read.pst.3sg the book
‘The student read the book.’
b. Os aluno-s leram o livro.
the.pl student-pl read.pst.3pl the book
‘The students read the book.’
The following tree illustrates these features. Note that this tree is illustrated without
any movement. We delay the discussion of movement until later. Nevertheless, observe
that the verb agrees with the subject.
(6)
CP
C TP
T vP
[uϕ:]
DP vP
o aluno
v VP
[iϕ:3sg]
V DP
leu
o livro
The uninterpretable feature, also called the Probe searches for a value in its c-command
domain. The syntactic object that contains a matching valued feature is called the Goal.
An agree relation is established between the two as follows.
(7)
CP
C TP
T vP
[uϕ:3sg]
DP vP
o aluno
v VP
[iϕ:3sg]
V DP
leu
o livro
We will have more to say about Agree in the coming discussion.
3.2 Internal Merge (Move)
The model of grammar that we are exploring here was initiated by Chomsky in the 1990’s
and is known as the Minimalist Program (Chomsky, 1995). The basic tenets of this
approach to generative syntax are reminiscent of Occam’s Razor. The components of the
grammar consist of a Lexicon, which contains the lexical items of the language. This
includes both roots and functional heads. The lexical items encode all the idiosyncratic
information about the language.
The Lexicon, together with the principles and parameters interact to form the grammar
of the language. We do not wish to make our model of grammar any more complicated than
is necessary to explain the facts about human language. Clearly, some kind of Lexicon as
described is necessary. We also need some way to put the lexical items together to form
sentences. This is the topic of the current section.
The operation of Merge described in the previous chapter is known more specifically
as External Merge (Chomsky, 2004). In the operation Merge (α, β) one or both of the
arguments comes from the Lexicon.1 That is, one or both of the arguments is external
to the tree being constructed. Of course syntactic objects can move in the tree, which is
called Internal Merge.2 Chomsky (1995) originally conceived of Merge and Move as two
distinct operations; however, given that they have similar properties, Chomsky proposed
1
In some versions of Minimalism, there is a Numeration or Workspace which holds the lexical items to be
used in a given derivation (Chomsky, 1995, 2019). We leave this mechanism aside for the time being.
2
Note that External Merge can take place either as Set Merge or Pair Merge. Internal Merge is hypothesized
to take place only as Set Merge. Why this should be so is a matter of ongoing research.
3.2. INTERNAL MERGE (MOVE) 47
they be recast as a single operation, Merge. The names Internal Merge and External Merge
are merely descriptive terms of convenience.
Merge (be it internal or external) can target only the root node of the tree in the case
of phrasal movement. Recall the definition of Merge as follows.
(8) Merge (α, β) → {λ, {α, β}}
One of the two arguments, α and β, is the root node. If the other argument comes
from the Lexicon, we refer to the operation as External Merge (for convenience). If the
other argument comes from the tree, we refer to the operation as Internal Merge (again,
for convenience). It is important to note that these two ways of performing Merge are a
single operation. Thus, we cannot make a rule that refers exclusively to either Internal
Merge or External Merge.3 The following example illustrates Internal Merge of WP to XP.
Assume for now that the label XP is projected.
(9) a.
XP
X YP
Y ZP
Z WP
b.
XP
WPi XP
X YP
Y ZP
Z ti
Recall that derivations are punctuated by phases (Chomsky, 2001). In chapter 8.5 of
Introduction to Generative Syntax the phase heads C and D were covered. Transitive and
unergative v is also a phase head.4 We will consider the vP phase later. For now, we will
concern ourselves with the CP phase. Each phase head triggers spell-out of the sister to
the phase head below it. Consider the following sample derivation, where H represents a
phase head.
3
This obviates the earlier “Merge over Move” principle from Chomsky (1995, 1998). See also Shima (2000),
Hornstein (2001), and Motut (2010) for additional discussion.
4
The set of phase heads is still under discussion. Legate (2003) proposes that all instances of v are phase
heads. It is also proposed that n is a phase head (Marantz, 2001; Marvin, 2003; Newell, 2008).
Lexicon
Overt Movement
Spell-Out
y
og
M
C em
ol
ov
ov e
ph
er nt
or
t
M
PF LF
Figure 3.1: T-Model of Syntax
(10) a. [ H1 ...XP... ...YP... ]

b. [ XPi H1 ...ti ... ...YP... ]
c. Z ... [ XPi H1 ...ti ... ...YP... ]
d. [H2 Z ... [ XPi H1 ...ti ... ...YP... ] ]
In the hypothetical example above XP raises to the specifier of H1 . Once the next higher
phase head, H2 merges in, the sister to H1 undergoes Spell-Out. We say that the specifier
to a phase head is an escape hatch as it allows material to move from one phase to the
next higher phase.
The phase-based conception of the derivation gives rise to a series of iterations of
Spell-Out, typically referred to as multiple Spell-Out (Uriagereka, 1999). Each instance
of Spell-Out is illustrated in Figure 7.1, often referred to as the T-model of syntax. Observe
importantly that movement that takes place before Spell-Out will be visible to both PF
and LF. Movement that happens in the covert portion of the grammar (LF movement or
Covert Movement) will not be visible to PF.
Feature strength was proposed to account for the difference between overt and covert
movement. Consider the following data. Recall that English has wh-movement and that
Mandarin is wh-in-situ.

a. Mary ate an apple.
b. What did Mary eat?
3.2. INTERNAL MERGE (MOVE) 49
(12) Mandarin, Sino-Tibetan
a. Zhangsan chi le pingguo.

Zhangsan eat perf apple
‘Zhangsan ate an apple.’
b. Zhangsan chi le shenme?

Zhangsan eat perf what
‘What did Zhangsan eat?’
This difference can be captured with feature strength.5 Assume that the interroga-
tive C head in English has a strong [uwh*] feature and that the interrogative C head in
Mandarin has a weak [uwh] feature, as shown in the following trees.6
(13)
CP CP
C TP C TP
[uwh*] [uwh]
DPi T’ DPi T’
Mary T vP T vP
Līsī
did
ti vP ti vP
v VP v VP
V DP V DP
eat chī-le
what shenme
[iwh] [iwh]
The strong [uwh*] feature in (13) triggers overt movement of the wh-phrase to SpecCP.
The astute reader will recall that the verb raises to v in English and that T raises to C in
many languages in questions; however, we cover head movement in the next section.
5
See Richards (1997) and Pesetsky (2000) for extensive discussions on feature strength and the variety of
wh-movement in languages around the world.
6
See Huang (1982) for persuasive arguments that a [wh] feature is necessary in languages like Mandarin,
even though wh-movement is never observed. See also Cheng (1997) for related discussion.
(14)
CP
DPj CP
what C TP
[iwh] [uwh*]
DPi TP
Mary T vP
did
ti vP
v VP
V tj
eat
Huang (1982) proposes that wh-movement takes place covertly (at LF) in Mandarin. In
the framework of feature strength being discussed here, this is accomplished by assuming
a weak [uwh] feature on C in Mandarin. Under the system developed here, then, after
Spell-Out the wh-phrase in Mandarin raises to SpecCP.
3.3 Head Movement and Grammar
Head movement involves movement of only a head (hence its name). We have previously
seen head movement used as an explanation for word order.7 For example, we know from
Larson (1988), Kratzer (1996), and Chomsky (1995) that V raises to v. When a head
moves, it can target only another head position, not the root node. Specifically, it targets
the head of the root. Consider an actual example in which the verb raises. Assume we
have reached the following stage in the derivation of the phrase see a dog. The verb see
raises from V to v leaving a trace as shown.
7
Head movement is traditionally used to explain the difference in word order in French and English, which
we review below (Pollock, 1989).
3.3. HEAD MOVEMENT AND GRAMMAR 51
(15) a.
vP
v VP
V DP
see
D N
a dog
b.
vP
v VP
V v ti DP
seei
D N
a dog
Head movement is problematic for BPS.8 Recall that the operation Merge always re-
sults in the formation of a nested set, which is interpreted as a phrase. There is simply no
way to form a complex head using Merge. Nevertheless head movement has played and
continues to plays a significant role in generative syntax. A significant domain in which
head movement is important is in the syntax-morphology interface. Within a Distributed
Morphology framework (Halle and Marantz, 1993) the units of syntax are morphemes,
not words.9 The notion that syntax assembles morphemes rather than words goes back
to at least Pollock (1989), which we review below, and to Baker (1985, 1988a). Consider
the following example. The root is followed by a verbalizer (‘-ify’) and a tense/agreement
morpheme.
(16) Italian, Indo-European

giust-ifich-eró
just-ify-fut.1sg
‘I will justify (it).’
The morphology of the verb can be accounted for by head movement. In the following
tree the arguments are left out for clarity. Observe that as the verb raises it picks up the
verbal morphology en route. The order of the morphemes in the verb is the opposite of
the order of the functional heads in the extended verbal projection. Mark Baker refers to
this phenomenon as the Mirror Principle (Baker, 1985).
8
Head movement is problematic for generative syntax in general (Fanselow, 2003; Mahajan, 2003; Harley,
2004; Koopman and Szabolcsi, 2000; Chomsky, 2000; Kayne, 2003).
9
For a good pedagogical introduction to Distributed Morphology, see Punske (2023).
(17)
CP
C TP
T vP
vi T ti VP
eró
Vj v
...tj ...
giust ifich
Thought Exercise 3.1: How do the following Finnish data illustrate the Mirror Prin-
ciple?
1 pudo-t-i-n
fall-caus-pst-1sg
‘I dropped/was dropping (something).’
2 liiku-t-i-mme
move-caus-pst-1pl
‘I moved/was moving (something).’
Below are the set theoretic and syntagmatic tree notations for example (15a) using
BPS. Recall that head movement is impossible to formulate under BPS, so an ad hoc
pairing is used.
(18) {v, { {D, {D, John} }, {v, {<v,seei >, {see, {ti , {a, {a, dog} } } } } } } }
(19)
v
D v
D John v see
Vi v ti a
see
a dog
Thought Exercise 3.2: Does head movement cause any problems for the labelling
algorithm? Recall that when two phrases merge and a label cannot be determined,
one phrase moves and the remaining phrase determines the label. Does this mean
that something that moves cannot determine the label? Does this have any effect on
head movement and labelling?
Recall from Introduction to Generative Syntax that the subject raises to SpecTP. Here,
for reference is the final structure using the easier to read structure we have been using
all along, rather than the strict BPS structure as in (19). The arrows are shown only for
clarity.
(20)
CP
C TP
DP TP
D N T vP
John will
ti vP
v VP
Vj v tj DP
see
D N
a dog
Let’s recall why the subject raises to SpecTP. Consider the following data.
(21) a. There is a book on the table.

b. There are two books on the table.
c. It seems that John likes tuna.
d. It is raining.
e. * Is a book on the table.
f. A book is on the table.
g. * Seems that John likes tuna.
h. John seems to like tuna.
i. * Is raining.
The subjects of the first four sentences are expletives. An expletive is required when
no other subject is available. This property was originally formulated as a requirement
on the part of sentences to have subjects; however, it has been observed that other XPs
may have the property of requiring some element to appear in its Specifier. This property
is called the Extended Projection Principle (EPP) (Chomsky, 1982).
EPP (Extended Projection Principle)
• If a head, X, has the EPP property, then the Specifier of XP must be filled.
• In English, T has the EPP property.
We will look at other instances of XP movement in subsequent chapters. For the re-
mainder of this chapter we consider some other instances of head movement (although
we do come back to the issue of the EPP at the end of this chapter).
Chomsky (1995) does propose that EPP effects can be captured by the notion of feature
strength. Under this proposal EPP on T reduces to a strong D feature on T. Italian, for
example, has a weak D feature on T. Consider the following examples. Observe that in
English the subject must appear at the left edge of the sentence, assumedly in SpecTP.
Italian does not have this requirement.
(22) a. The students arrived.
b. *Arrived that students.
c. Italian, Indo-European
Gli student-i sono arrivati.
the.m.pl student-m.pl are arrived
‘The students arrived.’
d. Sono arrivati gli student-i.

are arrived the.m.pl student-m.pl
‘The students arrived.’
The strong [uD*] feature on T in English requires overt movement of the closest DP
to SpecTP. However, if we assume Italian has a weak [D] feature on T, then no DP has to
move to SpecTP overtly.
Thought Exercise 3.3: Can we tease apart the notions of EPP and feature strength?
A strong feature requires an XP with a matching feature to check it off. EPP requires
any XP to occupy a Spec position. Consider the following English and German data.
Do data such as these shed light on the question? Do we need both concepts?
1 Which book did that teacher give to that student yesterday?
2 *That student did that teacher give which book to yesterday?
3 *Yesterday did that teacher give which book to that student?
German, Indo-European
1 Peter hat das Brot gestern gegessen.

Peter has the bread yesterday eaten
‘Peter ate the bread yesterday.’
2 Das Brot hat Peter gestern gegessen.

the bread has Peter yesterday eaten
3 Gestern hat Peter das Brot gegessen.

yesterday has Peter the bread eaten
3.3.1 V-to-T Movement
Recall that a verb selects its direct object by merging with it. As a result, the verb is
typically adjacent to the direct object. In English, the verb and the object are obligatorily
adjacent, as shown in the following examples.
(23) a. John often eats anchovies.

b. * John eats often anchovies.
Consider, however, the following data from French and Irish (gle) in which the verb
and its direct object are not adjacent. Note that non-specific objects in French are often
introduced in a PP headed by de (‘of’).
(24) a. French, Indo-European

Jean mange souvent des anchois.
John eats often of.the anchovies
‘John often eats anchovies.’
b. Irish, Indo-European (Carnie, 2002, 303)

Phóg Máire an lucharachán.
kissed Mary the leprechaun
‘Mary kissed the leprechaun.
We observe that elements in a sentence can be separated from their thematically

related heads. That is, the verb assigns an internal theta-role to the direct object when
it merges with it, but the verb and the direct object are separated in the surface form of
the sentence. Let’s consider first how to derive the word order for French. Compare the
French sentence above with the data below.
(25) a. Mary has often eaten apples.
b. Marie a souvent mangé des pommes. [French]

Mary has often eaten of.the apples
‘Mary has often eaten apples.’
When an auxiliary is present, we observe that French and English exhibit the same
word order. Note that adverbs of frequency adjoin to vP. Consider the following schematic
for the word order differences between English and French.
English Subject Adverb Verb Object

Subject Aux Adverb Verb Object
French Subject Verb Adverb Object
Subject Aux Adverb Verb Object
Observe that the verb appears to the left of the adverb in French only when there is no
auxiliary. To account for the difference between English and French word order, Pollock
(1989) proposed that in French the verb raises to T if no auxiliary is present. Consider
first the structure for (23a).
(26)
CP
C TP
DPi TP
John T <vP,vP>
AdvP vP
often ti vP
v VP
V v tj DP
eatsj
D N
anchovies
Now consider the structure for (24a).
(27)
CP
C TP
DPi TP
Jean T <vP,vP>
vj T AdvP vP
Vk v
souvent ti vP
mange often
tj VP
eats
tk PP
des anchois
of.the anchovies
As mentioned, the verb does not raise to T if there is already an auxiliary in T. Consider
the structure for (25b).
(28)
CP
C TP
DPi TP
Jean T <vP,vP>
a
has AdvP vP
souvent ti vP
often v VP
Vj v tj
PP
mangé
eaten des anchois
anchovies
Recall that T hosts tense and agreement features (TP = tense phrase) and that the V-v
complex hosts only the lexical verb and a light verb in some languages. In both English
and French, when an auxiliary is present under T, the auxiliary hosts the tense and
agreement morphology. Also, in French, the lexical verb raises to T and hosts the tense
and agreement morphology. There is a problem in English, though, when there is no
auxiliary. Consider again the following data.
(29) a. Nous av-ons mang-é les pommes [French]

we have-1pl.prs eat-part the apples
We have eaten the apples.
b. Nous mangi-ons les pommes [French]
we eat-1pl.prs the apples
‘We are eating the apples.’
c. John is eating an apple.
d. John eats an apple every day.
In the first three examples, the word that hosts the tense and agreement morphology
appears under the T node. Consult the trees above to convince yourself of this. In the
last sentence, the verb eats hosts tense and agreement (the /-s/ morpheme), but does
not appear under T. A more accurate representation of the structure of T is shown in the
following example for the sentence John likes tuna.
(30)
CP
C TP
DPi TP
John T vP
-s
ti vP
v VP
Vj v tj DP
like
D N
tuna
Observe in the tree above that the inflectional affix and the verb appear on different
heads. It is suggested that English undergoes affix hopping or affix lowering due to
the need of the morpheme to attach to a word (Chomsky, 1957; Skinner, 2009). This is
a poorly understood aspect of grammar and is thought to take place after the syntactic
component of the grammar has built the tree, but see Harizanov and Gribanova (2019) for
a recent discussion. We will not worry about the derivation of English affixal morphology
here.
3.3.2 T-to-C movement
Recall that C is the locus of illocutionary force. Recall also that yes/no questions in
English are formed by subject-aux inversion. When no auxiliary is present, do-insertion
takes place.
(31) a. Mary will eat an apple.
b. Will Mary eat an apple?
Let’s consider the derivation of the second sentence. When T merges with vP, the
subject raises to SpecTP. Above we argued that this movement takes place either because
of the EPP property of T in English or because of a strong [uD*] feature on T.
(32)
TP
DPi TP
Mary T vP
will
ti vP
v VP
Vj v tj DP
eat
D N
an apple
Now, the C head merges with TP. In yes/no questions, matrix C attracts the T head.
If there is nothing under T, then do-insertion takes place. (Note that T-to-C movement
does not always take place; however, we discuss the exceptions in Chapter 7. In a yes/no
question, the matrix T always raises to C.) This gives us the following structure.
(33)
CP
C TP
Tk C DPi TP
will
Mary tk vP
ti vP
v VP
Vj v tj DP
eat
D N
an apple
French does not have do-support. When there is no auxiliary the main verb raises to T,
so there is never need for a dummy auxiliary. Consider the following pair of sentences. In
(34b), the verb parlez (‘speak’) undergoes V-to-T movement, and then T-to-C movement.
Again, this happens only in formal settings in French.10 (The form in this example uses a
10
The issue subject-verb and subject-aux inversion in French is more complex than is suggested here. See
Roberts (1993) for details.
2nd person plural pronoun, which is also the polite form to address one person. Note also
that the hyphen is an orthographic convention of French and is not intended to show a
morphological break-down.)
(34) written French, Indo-European

a. Vous parlez français.
you.pl speak.2pl French
‘You (pl) speak French.’
b. Parlez-vous français?
speak.2pl-you.pl French
‘Do you speak French?’
Here is the tree for (34b).
(35)
CP
C TP
Tl C DPi TP
vk T vous tl vP
you
Vj v ti vP
parlez
tk VP
speak
tj DP
D N
français
French
3.3.3 Irish Reconsidered
We now return to the Irish facts introduced above. Consider the following data.
(36) Irish, Indo-European (Carnie, 2002, 303,309)
a. Phóg Máire an lucharachán.

kissed Mary the leprechaun
‘Mary kissed the leprechaun.’
b. Tá Máire ag-pógáil an lucharachán.
is Mary prog-kiss the leprechaun
‘Mary is kissing the leprechaun.’
c. Duirt mé gur phóg Máire an lucharachán.

said I that kissed Mary the leprechaun
‘I said that Mary kissed the leprechaun.’
As (36a) shows, Irish has VSO order. If an auxiliary is present, though, the verb ap-
pears after the subject (36b). It appears as though the verb raises to C in Irish. Consider,
however, the embedded clause in (36c). There is an overt complementizer, nevertheless,
the verb still appears to the left of the subject. The VP-Internal Subject Hypothesis pro-
vides an answer for us. Assume that Irish has V-to-T raising (as in French) and that the
subject remains in SpecvP (McCloskey, 1996; Koopman and Sportiche, 1991). This gives
us the following structures for the three Irish sentences above.
(37) a.
CP
C TP
T vP
vj T DP vP
Vi v
Máire tj VP
phóg Mary
ti DP
kissed
D N
an lucharachán
the leprechaun
b.
CP
C TP
T vP
tá
is DP vP
Máire
v VP
Mary
Vi v V DP
ag-pógáili
ti D N
prog-kiss
an lucharachán
the leprechaun
c.
CP
C TP
T vP
vj T DP vP
Vi v
mé tj VP
duirt I
ti CP
said
C TP
gur
T vP
comp
vl T DP vP
Vk v
Máire tl VP
phóg Mary
tk DP
kissed
D N
an lucharachán
the leprechaun
Recall from our discussion on labelling that the external argument must vacate SpecvP
in order for the merger of DPEA and vP to have a label. The relevant portion is shown in
the following portion of the tree.
(38)
∅
DP vP
v
EA VP
verb
McCloskey (2011) has since re-analyzed Irish clausal structures. We will only cover
brief parts of his analysis here. Consider first responsive ellipsis in the following English
examples.
(39) Did you apply for the job?

a. I did.
b. I didn’t.
Responses of this type are argued to arise from VP ellipsis.11
(40) I didn’t [VP apply for the job].
McCloskey shows that the same facts hold for Irish.
(41) Irish, Indo-European (McCloskey, 2011, 17)

a. Ar chuir tú isteach ar an phost?
inter.pst put.pst you in on the job
‘Did you apply for the job?’
b. Chuir
put.pst
‘I did.’
c. Níor chuir
neg.pst put.pst
‘I didn’t.’
The Irish data suggest that the verb raises out of the VP before VP ellipsis takes place.
It raises at least higher than the verb in English, which raises to v. Although we do
not investigate negation in detail, we cover a few points here. It has been proposed that
polarity (negative and affirmative) are encoded in a functional projection between CP and
TP, namely ΣP (Laka, 1994). McCloskey (2017) shows that in finite clauses the Σ head
is null and that negation is expressed on the C head by agreement. He also shows that
negation appears in Σ in non-finite clauses, thereby demonstrating that the Σ position
is necessary. We do not cover the relevant facts here to keep the discussion brief. We do
note that there is evidence for the subject raising out of vP in Irish, though. Consider the
following example.
(42) Irish, Indo-European (McCloskey, 2001a, ex (33b))

Ní chluinfeadh aon duine choíche arís Ciarán ag gabháil cheoil
neg hear.condit any person ever again Ciaran making music
‘No one would ever again hear Ciaran making music.’
Observe that the subject in the main clause appears to the left of the vP adjoined
adverb.
11
VP ellipsis is more accurately described as vP ellipsis; however, the term VP ellipsis was coined long
before the introduction of v. We will continue to use the traditional term VP ellipsis here.
Now, look back at the responsive ellipsis examples above and observe that the verb is
identical. This is a general property of responsive ellipsis in Irish. The following example
shows that the verb must be identical.
(43) Irish, Indo-European (McCloskey, 2011, 22)

*Níor cheannaigh mé teach ariamh, ach dhíol.
neg buy I house ever but sold
‘I never bought a house, but I sold one.’
These facts fall into place if we assume that responsive ellipsis is the result of TP
ellipsis rather than VP ellipsis. The verb raises to Σ, and the TP is elided. The subject
is in SpecTP, so is deleted when TP ellipsis takes place. If deletion only occurs under
identity, then the verb in responsive ellipsis must be the same. Here, then, is the revised
tree for (36a).
(44)
CP
C ΣP
Σ TP
Ti Σ DPl TP
vj T Máire ti vP
Vk v tl vP
phóg
tj VP
kiss
tk DP
an lucharachán
the leprechaun
3.3.4 Summary of Head Movement
To recap, while the verb in English undergoes head movement only from V to v, in French
the verb raises further to T. This movement is traditionally referred to as V-to-T move-
ment (really, we should call it V-to-v-to-T movement, but the term was coined before the
introduction of v). The position of the tensed verb with respect to adverbs of frequency
is one way to distinguish between languages with V-to-T movement (such as French)
and languages without it (such as English). There are two other common properties that
distinguish these kinds of languages. Recall that English has subject-aux inversion for
yes/no questions. If there is no auxiliary, then English has a phenomenon known as do-
support. In languages with V-to-T movement, do-support is not necessary if there is no
auxiliary. Instead the lexical verb inverts with the subject. As mentioned, this happens
only in formal varieties of French. In spoken French intonation alone is used to indicate
yes/no questions. Note that the hyphen in (46b) is a convention of French orthography
and is not intended to show morphological composition.
(45) a. John writes letters to Mary.
b. Does John write letters to Mary?
(46) written French, Indo-European
a. Elle écrit des lettres à Jean.

she writes of the letters to John
‘She writes letters to John.’
b. Écrit-elle des lettres à Jean?

writes-she of the letters to John
‘Does she write letters to John?’
Let’s consider the structure for (46b). Observe that after the verb raises from V to v to
T, it then raises to C to give rise to a polarity question.
(47)
CP
C TP
Tl C DPi TP
vk T elle tl vP
she
Vj v ti vP
écrit
tk VP
writes
PP VP
des lettres tj PP
of.the letters
P DP
à
to Jean
John
Correlates of V-to-T Movement:
• lack of do-support
• lexical verb inverts with the subject in yes/no questions
• lexical verb appears before adverbs of frequency (such as often, never, etc.)
in the absence of auxiliaries
The following chart summarizes the theoretical machinery we have developed so far to
account for the word order properties in English, French, and Irish. Note that although
we have argued that the subject raises to SpecTP in Irish, there are no expletives in the
language, so it is unclear whether the subject raises for reasons of EPP or some other
reason.
EPP/[uD*] on T V raises to...

English yes v
French yes T
Irish unclear Σ
We are now left with a theoretical question that we will not answer here. The EPP
was postulated to account for the subject appearing in SpecTP in English. Under the
notion of feature strength, EPP on T was replaced by [uD*]. The strong [uD*] feature
(or its predecessor, the EPP) also accounted for the appearance of expletives in subject
position in English. It is possible to abandon the [uD*]/EPP if we assume that the external
argument raises because of the need to establish a label at the vP level.
Thought Exercise 3.4: What arguments, either conceptual or empirical, can

you think of to decide between maintaining the EPP or dispensing with it? How
do the following English and Italian data figure in the discussion? Recall that
arrive, both in English and in Italian is unaccusative. Thus, the single argument
is merged as a sister to the verb.
(48) English
a. Some passengers arrived.
b. There arrived some passengers.
c. *Arrived some passengers.

a. Alcuni passaggeri sono arrivati.
some passengers are arrived
‘Some passengers arrived.’
b. Sono arrivati alcuni passaggeri.
are arrived some passengers
‘Some passengers arrived’
In the next section we explore one more parameter that gives rise to word order dif-
ferences.
3.4 Parameterization and Word Order
Recall the six logically possible word orders: SOV, SVO, etc. The following chart gives the
relative frequencies of these basic word orders for the world’s languages for those lan-
guages which have a dominant order (Dryer, 2011). Some languages lack a default word
order. Such languages are called discourse-configurational languages as word order
is determined by information structure rather than by grammatical relations (subject and
object) (Hale, 1983; Jelinek, 1984).
3.4. PARAMETERIZATION AND WORD ORDER 69
SVO English, Mandarin, Cantonese, Swahili 41.1%

SOV Turkish, Korean, Persian, Japanese, Lakota (p. 178) 47.6%
VSO Irish, Tagalog, Lushootseed, Welsh 8%
VOS Chol, Coeur d’Alene, Malagasy 2.1%
OVS Hixkaryana, Pari 0.9%
OSV Nadëb, Kxoe, Tobati 0.1%
In this section we will concentrate on SVO and SOV order. Object-initial languages
have received less attention in the generative literature (but see Barrie, 2013; Kalin,
2014). Let’s consider some examples of SOV languages.
(50) SOV word order

a. Korean, Koreanic (Moonhyun Sung, pc)
Minswu-ka sakwa-lul mek-ess-ta. 민수가 사과를 먹었다
Minsoo-nom apple-acc eat-pst-decl
‘Minsoo ate an apple.’
b. Japanese, Japonic (Yosuke Sato, pc)
Gakusei-ga hon-o yon-da.
student-nom book-acc read-pst
c. Turkish, Turkic (Özsoy, 2019, 3)
Yazar makale-yi bitir-di.
author article-acc finish-pst
‘The author finished the article.’
d. Lakota, Siouan (Ingham, 2003, 77)
Le Lak’ota ki ehangni S.ahiyela iwakte a-gli
dem Lakota top long ago Cheyenne in triumph they-come
‘The Lakota long ago triumphed over the Cheyenne.’
e. Tiwa, Sino-Tibetan (Muchahary, 2014, 223)
Ram lai-go pre-dom.
Ram book-acc buy-pst
‘Ram bought the book.’
Tiwa, also known as Lalung, (lax) is Sino-Tibetan language spoken in north-

eastern India. The language is endangered and is undergoing shift to Assamese
(Muchahary, 2014).
There are several well known correlates of SOV and SVO word order (Greenberg, 1963),
which Dryer (1991) streamlined into differences between OV and VO order. We will review
three commonly known correlates here and introduce some more subsequently. OV lan-
guages typically have postpositions, and VO languages typically have prepositions. Here
is a postposition in Japanese.
(51) Japanese, Japonic (Yosuke Sato, pc)

a. kuruma-to
car-with
‘with a car’
b.
PP
DP P
to
kuruma with
car
VO languages typically have post-nominal relative clauses, while OV languages typi-

cally have pre-nominal relative clauses. Here are some examples from English and Ko-
rean. The head noun is underlined and the relative clause is italicized.
(52) Relative clause placement

a. the book that Mary read
b. 영희가 읽은 책
Yenghuy-ka ilk-un chayk
Younghui-nom read-pst book
‘the book that Younghui read’
In VO languages polarity questions are formed either by Subject-Aux inversion or

Subject-Verb inversion. In OV languages we often observe sentence-final question parti-
cles. Consider the following Korean data. Note that the sentence-final affix indicates the
illocutionary force of the sentence.

a. 민수가 부산에 갔다.
Minswu-ka Pwusan-ey ka-ss-ta.
Minsoo-nom Busan-to go-pst-decl
‘Minsoo went to Busan.’
b. 민수가 부산에 갔니?
Minswu-ka Pwusan-ey ka-ss-ni?
Minsoo-nom Busan-to go-pst-int
‘Did Minsoo go to Busan?
Japanese has a sentence-final particle to indicate polarity questions, as the following

examples show.

a. Gakusei-ga hon-o yon-da.
student-nom book-acc read-pst
b. Gakusei-ga hon-o yon-da ka?
student-nom book-acc read-pst int
‘Did the student read the book?’
Some word order correlates have a one-way implication. Greenberg Universal 16 states
that SOV languages always have V-Aux order with inflected auxiliaries. However, SVO
languages have either V-Aux or Aux-V order. Note, though, that VSO languages always
have Aux-V order (Greenberg, 1963). Consider the following examples.12
(55) Korean, Koreanic

a. 민수가 앉아 있다
minswu-ka anc-a iss-ta
Minsoo-nom sit-cv be-decl
‘Minsoo is sitting.’
b. 먹어 보세요!
mek-e po-si-e-yo
eat-cv see-shon-informal-polite
‘Try this!’ (lit: See about eating this!)
(56) Tamang, Sino-Tibetan (adapted from Owen-Smith, 2015, 88)

a. ŋina kan ca-pano mula.
we.excl rice eat-prog cop.nonpst
‘We are eating.’
b. ucu mriŋkola ki:-ta ŋye ŋo:-pa mupa.
that girl one-pat I.erg tease-nlzr cop.pst
‘I teased that one girl.’
Observe that both in Korean and in Tamang the auxiliary appears after the verb.
Consider now the following data.

a. Mary is eating an apple.
b. Bill has washed the dishes.
12
See (An, 2020) for po-ta (‘see’) as an auxiliary verb in Korean.
property SOV SVO

adposition postposition preposition
N and Relative Clause RelC N N RelC
question formation sentence-final particles Subject-Aux/V inversion
V Aux order V-Aux either
Table 3.1: Correlates of OV and VO order
(58) German, Indo-European

a. Peter hat den Apfel gegessen.
Peter has the apple eaten
‘Peter ate the apple.’
b. Ich sagte, daß Peter den Apfel gegessen hat.
I said comp Peter the apple eaten has
‘I said that Peter ate the apple.’
In English, the tensed auxiliary uniformly appears before the verb. In German, how-
ever, the auxiliary can appear either before the verb or after it, depending on various
factors. Table 3.1 summarizes the correlates of SVO and SOV word order.
Let’s consider the account for SOV word order, which has been partially introduced in
previous chapters. Recall the general structure for XPs.
(59)
XP
Specifier XP
X Complement
The Headedness Parameter or the Head-Directionality Parameter proposes that the

head of an XP can be either on the left or on the right of the complement (Chom-
sky, 1981; Stowell, 1981; Travis, 1989). SOV languages such as Korean, Turkish, and
Japanese, then, have the following structure. They are referred to as right-headed lan-
guages (whereas English and French are left-headed languages).
(60)
XP
Specifier XP
Complement X
The following example illustrates the structure for a sentence in an SOV language.
(61) 민수가 사과를 먹었다.

Minswu-ka sakwa-lul mek-ess-ta
(62)
CP
TP C
-ta
DPi TP
decl
Minswu-ka vP T
Minsoo-nom -ess
ti vP
pst
VP v
DP tj Vj v
mek
sakwa-lul eat
apple-acc
Under a strict version of the Headedness Parameter all phrases have one of the two
settings. In Korean all phrases are head-final, and in English all phrases are head-initial.
(63)
left-headed right-headed
English, French, Irish, Thai Korean, Turkish, Japanese, Dakota
XP XP
X ZP ZP X
We have seen that SVO and SOV languages have correlates as shown in the chart
above. English represents a typical SVO language, and Korean represents a typical SOV
language. Not all languages fit into one of these categories so neatly. Some languages
have mixed properties, and we refer to such languages as disharmonic. Consider the
following Mandarin data.
(64) Mandarin, Sino-Tibetan (Victor Pan, pc)
a. zài Shànghǎi
in Shanghai
‘in Shanghai’
b. Lǐsì kàn de shū

Lisi read de book
‘the book that Lisi read’
c. Lǐsì kàn zhè běn shū.
Lisi read this cl book
‘Lisi is reading this book.’
d. Lǐsì kàn bù kàn zhè běn shū?
Lisi read neg read this cl book
‘Is Lisi reading this book?’
e. Lǐsì kàn zhè běn shū ma?
Lisi read this cl book int
‘Is Lisi reading this book?’
Mandarin has SVO word order and prepositions, but also has prenominal relative
clauses. Polarity questions are formed either by the V-not-V formula or with sentence-
final particles. For an insightful discussion on sentence-final particles and headedness
in Mandarin see Pan (2022), Pan and Paul (2016), and Erlewine (2017).
The strong version of the Headedness Parameter holds all phrases are either left-
headed or right-headed in a given language. A weaker version holds that some language
may have mixed headedness specifications. One language we will consider is German.
Given the diagnostics above German appears to be an SVO language. Consider the fol-
lowing data.

a. mit dem Auto
with the car
‘with the car’
b. das Buch, das Bettina gelesen hat
the book the Bettina read has
‘the book that Bettina read’
c. Peter hat das Buch gelesen.
Peter has the book read
‘Peter read the book.’
d. Hat Peter das Buch gelesen?
has Peter the book read
‘Did Peter read the book?’
Observe that German has prepositions, postnominal relative clauses, and uses Subject-
Aux inversion to form yes/no questions. Recall, however, that German has either Aux-V or
V-Aux order depending on whether we are dealing with a matrix or an embedded clause.
Consider also the following additional German data.
a. Bettina weiß, daß Peter das Brot ißt.

Bettina knows that Peter the bread eats
‘Bettina knows that Peter is eating the bread.’
b. Bettina weiß, daß Peter das Brot gegessen hat.

Bettina knows that Peter the bread eaten has
‘Bettina knows that Peter ate the bread.’
c. Bettina ißt das Brot.

Bettina eats the bread
‘Bettina is eating the bread.’
d. Bettina hat das Brot gegessen.

Bettina has the bread eaten
‘Bettina ate the bread.’
Let’s consider the embedded clauses first. Observe that they closely follow SOV order
(as in Korean, for example). The word order in German seems to fall out naturally if we
assume a mixed word order (Bach, 1962; Travis, 1984). Let’s consider the structure for
the embedded clause in (66b).
(67)
CP
C TP
daß
DPi TP
Peter vP T
hat
ti vP
VP v
DP tj Vj v
gegessen
da Brot
Specifically, V, v, and T are right-headed, but C is left-headed. Now, we return to the

main clause. It has been proposed that the auxiliary raises from T to C in German main
clauses. If there is no auxiliary, then the verb raises to T (as in French), then raises to C
in main clauses. Consider first the structure for (66d).
(68)
CP
DPi CP
Bettina C TP
Tj C ti TP
hat
vP tj
ti vP
VP v
DP tk Vk v
gegessen
das Brot
There is one final property of word order in German we must discuss. When V takes
a DP complement, VP and vP are right-headed (as in Korean); however, when V takes
a CP complement they are left-headed (as in English). This assumption is necessary to
account for the word order in the data below.13

Bettina hat gewusst, daß Peter das Brot gegessen hat.
Bettina has known that Peter the bread eaten has
‘Bettina knew that Peter ate the bread’
Observe that the matrix verb is to the left of the CP complement. For more details see
Travis (1984). We can now do the full tree for (66a).
(70)
13
The issues of headedness in German is far from uncontroversial. See Sheehan et al. (2017) for a discus-
sion largely along the lines presented here. See also Haider (2010) for a different approach.
CP
DPi CP
Bettina C TP
Tj C ti TP
vk T tj vP
Vl v ti vP
weiß
tk VP
tl CP
C TP
daß
DPm TP
Peter vP T
tm vP vn T
VP tn Vo v
ißt
DP to
das Brot
As a final example, consider now, the following data from Lakota Dida (dic), a Kru
language spoken in West Africa. These data are from the Vata dialect, which is the name
used in the original publication of these facts.
(71) Lakota Dida, Niger-Congo ((Koopman, 1984))
a. A la saka li
we have rice eat
‘We have eaten rice.’
b. A li saka
we eat rice
‘We eat rice.’
The Dida subgroup is a dialect continuum that includes Vata (dic) and other dialects.
It is spoken in Ivory Coast and is a member of the Eastern sub-branch of the Kru
branch of the Niger-Congo phylum (Sande, 2017).
Observe that the verb appears to the left of the object when there is no auxiliary
present, suggesting V-to-T movement. Note also that when the verb is not raised, its
complement, the direct object, appears to the left of the verb. Taking a cue from the
analysis for word order in German above, one possibility to account for word order in
Vata is to assume that the VP and vP are right headed, but that the TP is left-headed.
These data are also important because they show that the model for verb movement
(head movement, such as V-to-T and T-to-C), which has captured word order facts in more
familiar languages (English, French, German, and Irish) also shows promising results for
other languages around the world. If this account of word order is on the right track, we
can posit the following structures for Vata, based on Koopman (1984).
(72)
CP
C TP
DPi TP
a T vP
la
ti vP
VP v
DP tj Vj v
li
saka
(73)
CP
C TP
DPi TP
a T vP
vj T ti vP
Vk v VP tj
li
DP tk
saka
In this section we have seen that the Headedness Parameter can account for the dif-
ference between SVO languages such as English and SOV languages such as Korean. We
have also seen that there are languages with mixed headedness such as German and
Vata.
Key concepts
• generative grammar - a grammar that generates all and only the grammatical sen-
tences of a language
• principle - an invariant property of UG that underpins all human language
• parameter - A property of human language that can vary from one language to the
next.
• Pro-drop parameter - a parameter which determines whether a language requires

overt subjects or not.
• Headedness parameter - a parameter which determines the order between a head

and a complement. SVO languages are left-headed. SOV languages are right-headed
• Minimalism - a research program in which principles and parameters of grammar

are kept to a minimum. New principles and parameters are proposed only as re-
quired output conditions
• head movement - movement of a head to an immediately c-commanding head

• phrasal movement - movement of an XP to a c-commanding specifier position.
• Extended Projection Principle - also known as the EPP - This is a property of

particular heads. A head with the EPP property requires something to appear in its
Specifier. In English, T has the EPP property.
Further reading
• Adger (2003) - This textbook is an excellent introduction to the mechanics of gen-

erative syntax within the Minimalist Program. It is a recommended next step after
this textbook.
• Baker (2001) - This monograph contains a very accessible discussion on the current
status of parameters in syntactic theory.
• Chomsky (1994) - This is Chomsky’s original monograph that outlines Bare Phrase
Structure.
• Chomsky (1995) - This is Chomsky’s first most comprehensive discussion on the

Minimalist Program. Novice readers should be warned that most of the discussion
is highly technical and should only be tackled once the reader has worked through
the material in this textbook.
• Haider (2010) - This is an extensive, up-to-date monograph on the syntax of Ger-

man.
• Hyams (1986) - This is the original proposal for the Pro-drop parameter. The discus-
sion is rather technical in parts, so the reader may wish to acquire more background
in the study of L1 acquisition.
• Kayne (1994) - This monograph presents a restrictive theory of word order called
Antisymmetry. The reader is well advised to have a strong command of the concepts
in this textbook before tackling this monograph.
• Koopman (1984) - This book was one of the first in-depth studies on head movement
in a non-Indo-European language. It contains discussions on several Kru languages,
including Vata.
• Pollock (1989) - This is the original proposal that sought to derive the differences
between word order in French and English by head movement. It also includes a
discussion of infinitives, so the reader is advised to wait until chapter 9 has been
covered.
Chapter 4
Further developments of phrase

structure
By the end of this chapter you should be able to:
• understand the arguments in favour of representing nominals phrases as DPs
• understand the arguments in favour of the projections TP and CP
• understand the structure of trivalent verbs
• understand the use and function of light verbs
• be familiar with light verb constructions in other languages
• be familiar with the variety of ditransitive constructions in English
In this chapter, we will refine our understanding for nominal and clausal structure.
4.1 Nominal Structure
4.1.1 Review of DP
Recall the DP theory of nominal structure (Abney, 1987; Szabolcsi, 1983; Stowell, 1981;
Bernstein, 2008). In short, the D head takes an NP as a complement.
(1)
DP
D NP
the cow
81
82 CHAPTER 4. FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS OF PHRASE STRUCTURE
As a refresher, let’s review some evidence in favour of this structure. Recall the notion
of “possessor as subject” as evidence for the DP Hypothesis.1 Here, we will consider some
ways in which the possessor acts as a subject. Consider the following data.
(2) a. John destroyed the city.

b. John’s destruction of the city
John is an agent in both the full sentence and the nominal phrase. Now consider the
following data.
(3) a. Matt LeBlanc1 portrayed himself1/*2 .

b. Matt LeBlanc1 portrayed him*1/2 .
c. Matt LeBlanc1 ’s portrayal of himself1/*2 .
d. Matt LeBlanc1 ’s portrayal of him*1/2 .
In both the sentential and nominal forms, himself must refer to Matt LeBlanc and him
must refer to someone else. Note the use of the coreference numbers here. The asterisk
in front of the 2 indicates the coreference with anything other than 1 (where 1 = Matt
LeBlanc in these examples) is ungrammatical. The asterisk in front of the 1 indicates that
coreference with Matt LeBlanc is ungrammatical and that him must corefer to someone
else. Thus, the possessor of a nominal expression acts like the subject of a sentence with
respect to the behaviour of reflexives.
Preminger (2020), updating arguments made by Ritter (1991) presents the following
Hebrew data showing that some functional structure above NP is necessary.2 Observe
crucially that the noun is followed by the subject then by the object. Preminger refers to
this as NSO order (to parallel VSO order in the clausal domain).
(4) Hebrew, Afro-Asiatic (Preminger, 2020)

a. nic(a)xon ha-miflaga al yerive-ha
victory the-political.party.f rival.pl-3sg.f.poss
‘the victory of the political party over its rivals’
b. maxsor ha-iriya be-ovd-im
shortage the-municipal.government in-worker-pl.m
‘the municipal government’s shortage of employees’
The English data in (3) could be accommodated within a simple NP. This is actually
similar to the structure that was assumed in Jackendoff (1977). Consider the following
example.
1
For precursors of the ideas discussed here see Lees (1960) and Chomsky (1970).
2
For more information on Hebrew see page 162.
4.1. NOMINAL STRUCTURE 83
(5)
NP
NP N’
Matt LeBlanc’s N PP
portrayal
of himself
Considering the Hebrew data above, it is impossible to accommodate NSO order with
the structure in (5). As Preminger argues, another higher functional projection is neces-
sary to accommodate the word order of Hebrew. Anticipating the forthcoming discussion
let’s label this functional projection D. In Hebrew, then, the noun raises from N to D as
follows.
(6)
DP
D NP
Ni D DP N’
maxsor
ha-iriya ti PP
be-ovd-im
There is much more to the structure of derived nominals and nominals with external
arguments, but the structures above provide a start to understanding DP structure.
Moving on to the structure of possessives, consider the following paradigm. Observe
that the morphemes the and ’s (the possessive marker) are in complementary distribu-
tion. That is, only one can be present in the same DP. Let’s assume, for the moment, that
both the and ’s are D heads. If there is only one D head per DP, then only one of these
lexical items can be present in a given DP.
(7) a. John’s hat

b. the hat
c. * John’s the hat
Before we continue, let’s take a brief digression on possessives. We note that the pos-
sessor can be quite complex. In the following example, the possessor is the man I saw
yesterday. This suggests that the possessive marker ’s is not an affix on the noun but
is rather a separate syntactic head that appears to the right of the possessor DP. Let’s
assume that the possessor appears in the specifier of DP.
(8) the man I saw yesterday’s hat
Compare the trees for John’s hat and the man I saw yesterday’s hat
(9) a.
DP
DP D’
John D N
’s hat
b.
DP
DP D’
The man I saw yesterday D N

’s hat
Next, we review some cross-linguistic evidence for determiners acting like verbal in-
flection. Consider the following Central Alaska Yup’ik (esu) example. The subject of a
bivalent verb in Yup’ik appears with ergative Case (erg, see p. 171). In possessed nomi-
nals, the possessor also appears with ergative Case. Thus, possessors and subject have
something in common in Yup’ik. They both appear with the ergative case. Thus, we can
understand possessors to be the “subjects” of nouns.
(10) Central Alsaskan Yup’ik, Eskimo-Aleut (Abney, 1987, 39)
a. angate-m kiputa-a-∅
man-erg bought-obj-sub
‘The man bought it.’
b. angute-m kuga
man-erg river
‘the man’s river’
Central Alaskan Yup’ik (esu) is an Eskimo-Aleut language spoken in Alaska by

about 10,000 people. In some communities it is still being acquired as a first
language by children. A general shift to English has started in many commu-
nities, but revitalization efforts have been successful (Williams and Rearden,
2006). Central Alaskan Yup’ik is a polysynthetic language with complex suffix-
ation. Word order is largely dependent on information structure, such as new
information versus old information.
Consider, too, the following example from Cree (cre). In Cree, roughly speaking, if both
the subject and the object of the sentence are 3rd person, then the direct object typically
appears with an obviative marker (obv, see p. 133). This marker is absent in a sentence
such as I saw Mary because there is only one 3rd person. Since possessors are subjects,
too, then a noun with a 3rd person possessor triggers obviative marking on the noun.
(11) Cree, Algic (Okimasis, 2004, 147,59)
a. John wāpamaēw nāpē-wa

John he.sees.her man-obv
‘John sees the man.’
b. John o-tōtēm-a
John his-friend-obv
‘John’s friend.’
The status of the DP in languages such as Korean that lack determiners is contro-
versial (Bošković 2009; 2013; 2011).3 It has also been proposed that DP is universally
present, but may encode properties other than definiteness (Wiltschko, 2014). We will
not cover the issues here, but will simply assume for uniformity that DP is present, even
though some languages lack determiners.
4.1.2 Classifiers and Plurality
Many languages of the world divide nouns up into various classes. In most Romance
and Germanic languages (except English), these classes are based on gender and include
feminine, masculine and sometimes neuter. In Algonquian languages such as Cree, these
classes are based on animacy, and include animate and inanimate as classes. Some
languages such as Korean, Chinese, Japanese, and Thai have classifiers dividing nouns
up into several noun classes (classifier languages). Typically, classifier languages require
a classifier in order for the noun to be counted.
a. 사과 두 *(개)
sakwa twu kay
apple two cl
‘two apples’
3
For arguments that Korean has a DP projection, see Kang (2016); Park (2008); Park and Kim (2009);
Park (2020) for arguments that Korean lacks a DP projection, see Kim and Moon (2021). For related issues
in Japanese see Fukui (1995); Watanabe (2006).
b. 책 세 *(권)
chayk sey kwen
book three cl
‘three books’
We consider Cantonese in detail here. Like virtually all Sinitic languages (including
Mandarin, Wu, Hakka, etc.), nouns must appear with a classifier in certain environments,
though the precise details differ among Sinitic languages.4 The various classifiers are
provided with several examples of nouns with which they appear.
(13) Cantonese, Sino-Tibetan (Matthews and Yip, 1994)

a. yat1 zoeng1 toi2 ‘a table’
yat1 zoeng1 zi2 ‘a sheet of paper’
yat1 zoeng1 dang3 ‘a seat, bench’
b. yat1 zi1 bat1 ‘a pen’
yat1 zi1 dek2 ‘a flute’
yat1 zi1 fa1 ‘a stem of a flower’
c. yat1 lap1 lau2 ‘a button’
yat1 lap1 tong2 ‘a candy’
yat1 lap1 dau2 ‘a bean’
The classifier zoeng1 is used for horizontal, flat surfaces, zi1 is used for long cylin-
drical objects, and lap1 is used for small objects. In all, there are about 40 classifiers
in Cantonese. Classifiers appear as the head of a classifier phrase (ClP). Example (14b)
shows the tree for the DP nī bǔn syū ‘this book’, where bǔn is the classifier for books,
magazines, newspapers and other printed matter. A typical structure assumed for the
classifier is as follows (Cheng and Sybesma, 1988, 2012; Li, 1999), although we will con-
sider this in more detail later on.
(14) a. nī bǔ syū

this cl book
‘this book’
b.
DP
D ClP
nī
Cl N
dem
bǔn syū
book
4
For example, the classifier is used to show possession in Cantonese, but not in Mandarin.
Languages typically have some way of marking number in the noun phrase (Corbett,
2000). The following examples give a small idea of the range in variation in number mark-
ing. English is typically described as having obligatory number marking on the noun if a
plural interpretation is intended. Observe in (15d) that even if another marker of plurality
is present (the numeral two) plural marking is still required on the noun.
(15) Engish, Indo-European

a. the dog (singular only)
b. the dogs (plural only)
c. one dog(*s)
d. two dog*(s)
In most grammars, Korean is described as having optional number marking. Most

younger speakers allow the plural markers with numerals; however, older speakers do
not (Kim and Melchin, 2018, fn. 5). A classifier is normally obligatory with a numeral.

a. 학생
haksayng
student
‘student’ or ‘students’
b. 학생들
haksayng-tul
student-pl
‘students’
c. 학생(% 들) 두 명
%
haksayng(- tul) twu myeong
student-pl two cl
‘two students’
In Halkomelem, plural marking is optional if a numeral is present. Note that plural

marking is indicated by apophony.
(17) Halkomelem, Salish (Wiltschko, 2008, 642)

a. swíleles
boy
‘boy’
b. swóleles
boy.pl
‘boys’
c. te lhíxw swíleles
det three boy
‘the three boys’
d. te lhíxw swóleles
det three boy.pl
‘the three boys’
Finally, there are some languages like English where number marking is obligatory
for a plural interpretation. Consider the following examples.
a. one dog
b. two dog*(s)
To account for the properties of number marking, Ritter (1992, 1993) proposes that
NumP appears between DP and NP. Recall the facts from Hebrew above discussed by
Preminger. We review some of Ritter’s original data below.
(19)
DP
D NumP
Num NP
noun
Ritter presents data from Hebrew possessive constructions to argue for the presence
of NumP. The first construction is called the construct state. It is characterized by having
a bare subject genitive and noun-subject-object order.
(20) Hebrew, Afro-Asiatic (Ritter, 1992, ex.1)]
a. ahava-t dan et iSt-o

love-gen Dan acc wife-his
‘Dan’s love of his wife’
b.
DP
D NP
Ni GEN DGEN DP NP
ahava -t
Dan ti DP
et iSt-o
The construct state genitive can be derived easily by head movement from N to D,
as shown in the tree above. Consider, however, the free genitive. Consider the following
example, with the assumed underlying structure.
(21) Hebrew, Afro-Asiatic (Ritter, 1992)]
a. ha-ahava Sel Dan et iSt-o

the-love of Dan acc wife-his
‘Dan’s love of his wife’
b.
DP
D NP
ha
DP NP
Sel Dan N DP
ahava
et iSt-o
There is no space in (21b) for the noun to raise to. Ritter (1992; 1991) proposed an
additional funtional projection, a Number Phrase (NumP), that appears between DP and
NP. Here are the derivations she proposed for the construct state genitive and the free
state genitive, respectively.
(22) a.
DP
D NumP
ha
Num NP
Ni Num DP NP
ahava
Sel Dan ti DP
et iSt-o
b.
DP
D NumP
Numi GEN DGEN Dank NumP

-t
Nj Num tj NP
ahava
tk NP
ti DP
et iSt-o
As was common at the time Ritter assumed the Weak Lexicalist Hypothesis, whereby
inflectional morphology is syntactic and derivational morphology is added to the base
in the Lexicon. Shortly before Ritter’s proposal Pollock (1989) had argued for a split TP,
in which tense and agreement morphology is added syntactically by head movement.
Likewise, Ritter argued that number, which is inflectional in Hebrew, is also added by
head movement.5
Ritter (1992) also considered data from Haitian Creole in support of a number phrase.
She notes that Haitian Creole has a singular determiner and a plural determiner.
(23) Haitian Creole determiners (Ritter, 1992, ex.18)]
a. liv la
book the.sg
‘the book’
5
See Chapter 9 for more in depth discussion on the syntax-morphology interface.
b. liv yo
book the.pl
‘the books’
Ritter proposes that yo is actually a Num head, as in the following tree.
(24)
DP
NumP D
+def
NP Num
yo
liv
Lefebvre (1982) observes that la yo (in that order) is possible in some dialects of Haitian
Creole, suggesting head movement and right-adjunction.
(25)
DP
NumP D
NP ti D Numi
la yo
liv
Consider this proposal in light of the following Niuean data. In Niuean, the number
marker is a free-standing word (Massam, 2020). At the time Ritter proposed NumP, how-
ever, facts such as those in Niuean were not well known among generative linguists.
(26) Niuean, Austronesian

a. e tau tagata
abs.c pl person
‘the people’ (Massam, 2009, 676)
b. he falu a tau fuata Niue
erg some lnk pl youth Niue
‘some Nieuan youths’ (Massam, 2020)
Semantically, the Num head is thought to be responsible for making the noun count-
able. Evidence in favour of this proposal is seen the following examples.
(27) a. dog food

b. dog breath
c. food for dogs

d. two dogs
Compounds such as dog food and dog breath likely contain a bare NP dog. Note that
compounds like *dogs food and *teethbrush are ill-formed. The portion dog in a way only
refers to the notion of dog-ness, not to countable dogs. More specifically, Chierchia (1998)
and Borer (2005) propose that a bare NP has a mass interpretation.
Classifiers are traditionally described as necessary to make nouns countable, as the
following Mandarin Chinese examples show.
(28) Mandarin Chinese, Sino-Tibetan

a. yī *(běn) shū
one cl book
‘one book’
b. sān *(ge) chéngzi
three cl orange
‘three oranges’
c. xuéshēng-men
student-pl
‘students’
d. sān ge xuéshēng-(*men)
three cl student-pl
‘three students’
The observation that classifiers and plural marking are in complementary distribution
goes back to at least Greenberg (1977). Borer (2005, 94-95) proposes that classifiers and
plural markers are in complementary distribution because they fulfil the same function.
They serve to make the noun countable. She provides the following example to illustrate
the complementary distribution between classifiers and plural marking. Thus, languages
can choose between either NumP or ClP as an intermediate functional projection to make
nouns countable.6
(29) Armenian, Indo-European Borer (2005, 94-95)

a. Yergu had hovanoc uni-m.
two cl umbrella have-1sg
‘I have two umbrellas.’
b. Yergu hovanoc-ner uni-m.
two umbrella-pl have-1sg
‘I have two umbrellas.’
6
If NumP and ClP fulfil the same function, as Borer (2005) claims, one may ask if they should both have
the same label.
c. *Yergu had hovanoc-ner uni-m.

two cl umbrella-pl have-1sg
(‘I have two umbrellas.’)
Thought Exercise 4.1: How do we reconcile the proposal here that languages choose
between either NumP or ClP with the Korean facts for younger speakers, repeated
below?
1 학생들 네 명
haksayng-tul ney myeng
student-pl four cl
‘four students’
2 병원들 두 관
pyengwen-tul twu kwan
hospital-pl two cl
‘two hospitals’
We end this discussion with a brief note on where numerals appear. Let’s consider the
structure for the following Cantonese DP.
(30) Cantonese, Sino-Tibetan

sām bún syū
three cl book
‘three books’
Numerals such as three, five, twenty-seven, six hundred and seventeen are phrasal,
but we will not go into details of the structure of numerals here.7 Here is the structure
for (30).
(31)
DP
D ClP
#P ClP
sām Cl NP
bǔn
shū
There is much more to say on the topic of numeral classifiers and plural marking, but
we leave the reader to consult the further reading section.
7
See Ionin and Matushansky (2018) for an in depth discussion on the syntactic structure of numerals.
4.1.3 The structure of pronouns
Pronouns typically pattern with D rather than with N. This conclusion is based on obser-
vations originally made by Postal (1969). First, we normally think of pronouns as being
in complementary distribution with a full DP as in the following English examples.
(32) a. I saw the doctor.

b. * I saw the him.
c. I saw him.
d. I read books about linguistics.
e. * I read them about linguistics.
f. I read them.
These facts can be replicated in several languages. The French pronoun, il, replaces
the entire DP, le professeur intelligent, and not a portion thereof. The ungrammatical
example, *le il, shows that il cannot replace just professeur intelligent, and the ungram-
matical example, *il intelligent, shows that il cannot replace just le professeur.
a. Le professeur intelligent est arrivé.

the teacher intelligent is arrived
‘The intelligent teacher arrived.’
b. Il est arrivé.
he is arrived
‘He arrived.’
c. * le il
the he
d. * il intelligent
he intelligent
Likewise, in the Mandarin examples, the pronoun, tā, replaces the entire DP, nà ge
xuéshēng. The ungrammatical examples show that it cannot replace just a portion of the
DP.
a. nà ge xuéshēng chī le fàn

that cl student eat prfv rice
‘That student has eaten.’
b. tā chī le fàn
s/he eat prfv rice
‘S/he has eaten.’
c. * nà tā
dem s/he
d. * nà ge tā
dem cl s/he
These facts lead us to conclude that pronouns are minimally D heads (Postal, 1969).
Note, though, that pronouns can be morphologically complex. Consider the following
examples. Plural pronouns in Mandarin appear with a -men suffix. Third person plural
pronouns in Portuguese appear with an -s suffix. In both cases, these are the usual
plural markers found in these languages.
(35) a. Mandarin: wǒ - I; wǒ-men - we
b. Portuguese: ele - he; ela - she; ele-s they.m; ela-s - they.f
This suggests that pronouns appear with both a D head and a Num head. Pronouns,
then, are phrasal rather than a single head Déchaine and Wiltschko (2002); Ghomeshi
and Massam (2020).
(36)
DP
D Num
wǒ men
Unlike determiners, which require an NP complement, pronouns do not. In many lan-

guages, however, pronouns can optionally appear with NP complements. Here are some
examples from English, German, and Cantonese.
(37) a. wir Sprachwissenschaftler [German]

we linguists
‘we linguists’
b. 我語言學家 [Cantonese]
ngo5-dei6 yu5.yin4-hok6-gaa1
1-pl language-study-nlzr
‘we linguists’
The pronouns we, wir and ngo5dei6 can all appear with a noun following them. Based
on these facts, we assume the following structure for pronouns. Two English examples
are shown.
(38)
DP DP
D Num D NumP
we [pl] we
Num N
[pl] linguists
Thought Exercise 4.2: What problems do forms such as “we linguists” raise for
the structure of nominal phrases and pronouns discussed here? Consider also the
following Mandarin Chinese example (Victor Pan, pc).
1 wo-men laoshi-men
1.pl teacher-pl
‘we teachers’
4.2 Tense phrases–TP
Recall the following structure for TP.
(39)
TP
DP TP
T vP
Some of the evidence for separating tense and agreement from the verb (Stowell, 1981)
is found in VP ellipsis. Consider the following examples.
(40) a. Susan watered the flowers and so did Paul.

b. So did Paul what?
We have to be precise about what so refers to here. Only (41a) is a possible stand-alone
answer to (40b).
(41) a. water the flowers

b. * watered the flowers
We see that the pro-form so replaces only the verb and its arguments. Note in partic-
ular that the verb is stripped of tense and agreement. Thus, the VP alone doesn’t contain
any tense or agreement morphology. That is, tense and agreement are encoded outside
the VP. The separation of tense and the VP is shown clearly in English progressives.
4.2. TENSE PHRASES–TP 97
(42) a. Mary is eating an apple.

b. Mary was eating an apple.
Observe that tense is encoded on the auxiliary and not in the VP eating an apple. Note
also that in Mandarin certain tense/aspect particles are syntactically distinct from the
verb. Consider the following examples.

a. wǒ huì chī píngguǒ
I fut eat apple
‘I will eat an apple.’
b. wǒ zài chī píngguǒ
I prog eat apple
‘I am eating an apple.’
Consider also the following Niuean data. Observe again that the tense marker is dis-
tinct from the verb. In particular in the first example the tense marker and the verb are
separated by negation.
(44) Niuean, Austronesian (Massam, 2020, 28)

a. ne nākai fetataiaki e tua tagata pulotu...
pst neg agree abs pl person expert
‘The experts didn’t agree...’
b. To kai nakai e Moka e apala?
fut eat q erg Moka abs apple
‘Will Moka eat the apple?’
Niuean (niu) is a Polynesian language of the Austronesian family. It is spoken

by 2000 people on the island of Niue and by a few thousand others in expatriate
communities around the world. Niuean has ergative case alignment. You can
read about ergativity in chapter 7.
The TP layer can be decomposed into multiple functional categories. Consider the
following data as a preliminary example.

a. Mary is eating an apple.
b. Mary has eaten an apple.
c. Mary has been eating apples.
The current model we have to account for data of the kind above assumes that the
tensed auxiliary appears in T. Thus, with T-to-C movement, we can explain Subject-Aux
inversion.
a. Is Mary eating an apple?
b. Has Mary eaten an apple?
c. Has Mary been eating apples?
Note that the progressive be+ING involves a tensed and agreeing auxiliary in (45a),
but not in (45c). Furthermore, the perfect have auxiliary can also appear below T.
(47) Mary will have eaten an apple.
Adger (2003) has developed the following functional hierarchy to account for the facts
in English.
(48)
TP
T PerfP
Perf ProgP
Prog vP
The highest auxiliary raises to T to host tense and agreement. A currently open ques-
tion concerning verbal and auxiliary morphology in language is why only the auxiliary
raises to T in English, while the lexical verb never does. Recall that in French if no auxil-
iary is present the main verb raises to T, following the argumentation in Pollock (1989).
We will eschew a complete discussion of how to handle these mismatches. Instead,

we will make use of a rule of affix-hopping that puts the past tense affix on the verb
(Chomsky, 1957).
(49)
TP
DP TP
D N T VP
John -ed
wash DP
D N
the dishes
On the border between TP and CP is the expression of mood. We start by considering

the following pair of sentences.

a. John must be at home.
b. John must have been at home.
c. John may be at home.
d. John may have been at home.
There is a difference in interpretation in each pair of sentences. Example (50a) has

the following two meanings.
(51) a. John is required to be at home.

b. It must be the case that John is at home.
The speaker is expressing the likelihood or necessity of the proposition John is at

home. These notions are referred to as modality – the speaker’s commitment to the
truth of a proposition in light of certain facts. Mood, then, is the grammatical expression
of modality. The examples above illustrate two kinds of modality.8
(52) Kinds of modality

a. deontic modality - indicates the degree of necessity that a proposition must
be true in light of certain rules or requirements
b. epistemic modality - indicates the degree of necessity that a proposition
must be true in light of available evidence.
8
The astute reader will notice that while the modals in the plain present tense are ambiguous, the modals
in the present perfect are not. This does not generalize to all modals. For example, should is still ambiguous
in the present perfect.
Let’s take a closer look at the different aspects of modality. There are two components
that give rise to modality.
(53) Components of modality

a. modal base - the criteria upon which the validity of the proposition is
asserted
b. modal force - the degree to which the validity is asserted; usually either
necessity or possibility
Here are some examples.
(54) a. John must be at home. His car is in his driveway, and his lights and TV are on.
b. modal base
In light of the evidence about John’s house it is necessarily the case that
John is at home.
modal force
(55) a. Fred may eat the cookies if he wishes.

b. modal base
In light of the rules on eating snack Fred is permitted to eat the cookies.
modal force
Languages vary in how modality is expressed. The Korean modal marker 못 (mos ‘not
able’) expresses deontic modality only. Consider also the following the k’a marker in the
following St’át’imcets data.
(56) St’át’imcets, Salish (Rullmann et al., 2008, 321)

a. Context: You have a headache that won’t go away, so you go to the doctor. All
the tests show negative. There is nothing wrong, so it must just be tension.
nílh=k’a lh(el)=(t)=en=s=wá(7)=(a) ptinus-em-sút.
foc=infer from=det=1sg.poss=nom=impf=exis think-mid-ooc
‘It must be from my worrying.’
b. wá7=k’a séna7 qwenúxw.
impf=infer counter sick
‘He may be sick.’ (Context: Maybe that’s why he’s not here.)
epistemic deontic
possibility may
necessity must
Table 4.1: English Modals
epistemic deontic
possibility
k’a ka
necessity
Table 4.2: St’át’imcets Modals
Observe that k’a expresses only epistemic modality, but is ambiguous between a ne-
cessity and a possibility reading. Consider also the following data, focusing on ka.
(57) St’át’imcets, Salish (Rullmann et al., 2008, 328)

a. kan ka kw-en-s ulhcw?
polq deon from=det-1sg.poss-nom enter
‘Should/can/may I come in?’
b. la´n-lhkacw ka a´ts’x-en ti kwta´mts-sw-a.
already-2sg.sub deon see-dir det husband-2sg.poss-det
‘You must/can/may see your husband now.’
Observe that ka expresses only deontic modality, but, like k’a is ambiguous be-
tween a possibility reading and a necessity reading. Comparing the English facts with
the St’át’imcets, we see that the modals are not ambiguous in the same way. Table 4.1
shows how English modals are not marked for the contrast between epistemic and deontic
force. Table 4.2 shows how St’át’imcets modals are not marked for the contrast between
possibility and necessity.
In English, modals occupy the T node. Observe that modals participate in Subject-Aux
inversion in English.
(58) a. The children may eat the cookies.

b. May the children eat the cookies?
We now consider a different kind of mood. A common classification for mood is in-
dicative, which indicates a factual proposition, and the subjunctive, which indicates
an unrealized or counterfactual proposition. The classification of mood is much more
complex than this simple two-way classification, but this will suffice for now (Palmer,
2001). In Modern English, the subjunctive is quite rare, but can still be observed in
speech. Here are some examples.

a. I think that Mary eats fresh fruit. (indicative)

b. I insist that Mary eat fresh fruit. (subjunctive)
c. We think that John is in the kitchen. (indicative)
d. We require that John be in the kitchen. (subjunctive)
Consider now the following Romanian data. Observe that an indicative clause is in-
troduced by că and that a subjunctive clause is introduced by să. Note that in addition
to the subjunctive marker the verb also appears with subjunctive inflection.
(60) Romanian, Indo-European (Gabriela Alboiu, pc)

a. Ion a zis [că Maria a mâncat un măr].
Ion has said that.ind Mary has eaten an apple
‘John said that Mary ate an apple.’
b. Ion crede [că Maria a mâncat un măr].
Ion thinks that.ind Mary has eaten an apple
‘John thinks that Mary ate an apple.’
c. Ion i-a spus Mariei [să mănânce un măr].
Ion 3sg.dat-has told Mary.dat [sbjv eat.sbjv.3sg an apple
‘John told Mary to eat an apple.’
In some environments a subjunctive clause appears with both a complementizer and

a subjunctive marker. Observe that the subject cannot appear between the subjunctive
marker and the verb.
(61) a. Ion vrea [ca Maria să mănânce un măr].

Ion wants [that.sbjv Maria sbjv eat.sbjv.3sg an apple
‘John wants Mary to eat an apple.’
b. *Ion vrea [ca să Maria mănânce un măr].
Ion wants [that.sbjv sbjv Maria eat.sbjv.3sg an apple
(‘John wants Mary to eat an apple.’)
Consider further the following data. Note that the object is doubled by a pronoun that
appears between the subjunctive marker and the verb in the first example.
(62) Romanian, Indo-European (Cornilescu, 2000, 87f )

a. Creştinii să- l slãveascã pe Dumnezeu
Christians.the sbjv him glorify.sbjv.3sg obj God
‘Let the Christians glorify God.’
b. Creştinii slãveascã- l pe Dumnezeu
Christians.the glorify.sbjv.3sg him obj God
‘Let the Christians glorify God.’
These facts suggest that an additional MoodP appears between CP and TP as in (64).
Observe also in (62b) that when the subjunctive marker is absent the verb raises to Mood
(Dobrovie-Sorin, 1994; Rivero, 1994; Cornilescu, 2000).
(63)
CP
C MoodP
Mood TP
Here, then, is the structure for (61a).
(64)
CP
C MoodP
DPi MoodP
Ion Mood TP
Tj Mood tj vP
vk T ti vP
Vl v tk VP
vrea
tl CP
C MoodP
ca
DPm MoodP
TP
Maria Mood TP
T vP sa
vn T tm vP
Vo v tn VP
mănânce
to DP
un măr
Thought Exercise 4.3: Consider the following Bulgarian data (adapted from Rivero,
1994). What do these data say about verb movement? What issues do they raise for
head movement?
1 Az šte sǔm pročel knigata.

I mood have.1sg read book.the
‘I will have read the book.’
2 Az pročel sǔm knigata.

I read have.1sg book.the
‘I have read the book.’
3 *Az sǔm pročel knigata.

I have.1sg read book.the
(‘I have read the book.’)
4 Znam če az sǔm pročel knigata.

know.1sg comp I have.1sg read book.the
‘I know I have read the book.’
5 *Znam če az pročel sǔm knigata.

know.1sg comp I read have.1sg book.the
(‘I know that I have read the book.’)
4.3 CP–the complementizer phrase
We will now review the CP projection. Consider the following examples with their Korean
equivalents.
(65) a. John thinks that Mary ate an apple.

b. John wonders if Mary ate an apple.
c. 영희는 민수가 사과를 먹었다고 생각한다.
Yenghuy-nun Minswu-ka sakwa-lul mek-ess-ta-ko sayngkak-ha-n-ta
Younghui-top Minsoo-nom apple-acc eat-pst-decl-comp think-lv-prs-decl
‘Younghui thinks that Minsoo ate an apple.’
d. 영희는 민수가 사과를 먹었는지 궁금하다.
Yenghuy-nun Minswu-ka sakwa-lul mek-ess-nunci kwungkum-ha-ta
Younghui-top Minsoo-nom apple-acc eat-pst-inter wonder-lv-decl
‘Younghui wonders if Minsoo ate an apple.’
The English and the Korean data above illustrate c-selection. The verbs think and
wonder, and their Korean counterparts, select a declarative and interrogative comple-
4.3. CP–THE COMPLEMENTIZER PHRASE 105
ment, respectively. The selectional restrictions, first discussed by Grimshaw (1979) fall
into place if we adopt the same line of reasoning as above. Namely, let’s propose that
the complementizer, C, projects to CP, following the Labelling Algorithm we discussed in
Chapter 3. Since C is a head it must project when it merges with TP.
(66)
CP
decl Cdecl TP
Remember the label is merely a copy of the head. It contains the same information.
Now, let’s consider this in light of the subcategorization frames of the verbs think and
wonder.
(67) a. THINK: V, decl

b. WONDER: V, int
These facts fall into place now if we assume that CP is the highest functional projec-
tion. The verb, then, selects a CP with the appropriate feature. In the next example the
verb know selects a declarative CP as a complement. To save space we show an abbrevi-
ated structure.
(68)
CP
C TP
DP TP
D N T VP
John
V CP
knows
C TP
that
DP TP
D N T VP
Mary
V DP
ate
D N
an apple
English Korean
declarative statements that 다(고)
interrogative questions if, whether 니, 는지, 냐(고), 까
imperative commands 라(고), 오
hortative suggestions Let’s 자, 다
Table 4.3: Types of Illocutionary Force
Note that the matrix clause has a CP even though there is no overt complementizer.
We propose more specifically that the C head encodes whether the clause is a statement
or a question. This is the illocutionary force of the clause. It indicates how the speaker
intends the addressee to accept the proposition. Namely as a statement or as a question
or so forth. For simplicity, we will mention only four types of illocutionary force, shown
in Figure 4.3, and will analyze only two of them.
Here are some English and Korean examples.
(69) Examples of Illocutionary Force

a. Declarative: Mary ate an apple.
b. 영희가 사과를 먹었다.
Yenghuy-ka sakwa-lul mek-ess-ta
Younghui-nom apple-acc eat-pst-decl
‘Younghui ate an apple.’
c. Interrogative: Did Mary eat an apple?
d. 영희가 사과를 먹었니?
Yenghuy-ka sakwa-lul mek-ess-ni
Younghui-nom appleacc eat-pst-inter
‘Did Younghui eat an apple?’
e. Imperative: Eat an apple!
f. 사과를 먹어라!
sakwa-lul mek-ela
apple-acc eat-imp
‘Eat an apple!’
g. Hortative: Let’s eat an apple.
h. 사과를 먹자.
sakwa-lul mek-ca
appleacc eat-hort
‘Let’s eat an apple.’
All finite clauses have some kind of illocutionary force, so CP is always projected in
every finite clause.9 We finish off with an example of an embedded interrogative clause.
9
Recall that non-finite clauses sometimes do not have a CP. The issue of illocutionary force in non-finite
(70) a. Mary wonders if the boy ate the apple.

b.
CP
C TP
DP TP
D N T VP
Mary
V CP
wonders
C TP
if
DP TP
D N T VP
the boy
V DP
ate
D N
the apple
4.3.1 Topic and focus
Although English is an SVO language, often we also observe other word orders. Consider
the following example.10
(71) (context: You’re going through your vacation photos and are describing where you
took which photo.) This picture I took in Seoul. This picture I took in Paris. This
picture I took in Buenos Aires.
Notice that the object is at the beginning of each sentence. We say that the phrase this
picture is a topic. Topics in English typically appear at the front of the clause. There are
various kinds of topics in language. In most cases the topic expresses what the sentence is
about or indicates given information in a sentence.11 In addition to encoding illocutionary
force, CP also encodes information structure, which indicates how the elements of the
sentence relate to the discourse. Such relationships include old and new information,
indicating what the sentence is about (as just mentioned), as well as emphasizing or
focusing elements of the sentence.
clauses will not be addressed here.
10
See page 68 for more information on word order.
11
See the introduction of Cruschina (2011) for a discussion of different kinds of topic and focus.
Topics appear in the specifier of CP. Consider the tree for the sentence Beans I like.
The DP beans appears in the specifier of CP. We must remember that the DP beans is
the direct object of the verb like and still bears a <percept> θ-role. To record this fact
about the topicalized DP, we put a trace (represented by a “t”) in the position of the direct
object. Then, to remember that the DP in the complement of VP is related to the trace (t)
in object position, we co-index them with a subscript «i».
BOBBY: Basketball I can take or leave.

PEGGY: Honey, don’t you mean “I can take or leave basketball?”
BOBBY: No, Mom, Garry taught me this. It’s the cool new way people from
Arizona talk. You want I should teach you?
(King of the Hill episode KOH209 “The Unbearable Blindness of Laying”)
(72)
CP
DPi CP
D N C TP
beans
DPj TP
I T vP
tj vP
v VP
Vk v tk ti
like
Some languages mark topic and focus morphologically. Topics in Korean are typically
marked with 은/는. (-un/-nun). Note that the topic of the sentence and the subject of the
sentence are two different concepts. Consider the following examples.12

민수가 사과를 먹었다.
12
See Chapter 6 for in depth discussion on the concept of the grammatical subject.
(74) a. 민수와 영희가 뭐 먹었어?

Minswu-wa Yenghuy-ka mwe mek-ess-e?
Minsoo-and Younghui-nom what eat-pst-cv
‘What did Minsoo and Younghui eat?’
b. - 민수는 사과를 먹었어. 영희는 몰라.
-Minswu-nun sakwa-lul mek-ess-e. Yenghuy-nun moll-a
Minsoo-top apple-acc eat-pst-cv. Younghui-top neg.know-cv
‘Minsoo ate an apple. As for Younghui, I don’t know.’
(75) a. 사과와 오렌지를 누가 먹었어?

sakwa-wa olaynci-lul nwu-ka mek-ess-e
apple-and orange-acc who-nom eat-pst-cv
‘Who ate the apple and the orange?’
b. - 사과는 민수가 먹었어. 오렌지는 몰라.
-sakwa-nun Minswu-ka mek-ess-e. olaynci-nun moll-a
apple-top Minsoo-nom eat-pst-cv. orange-top neg.know-cv
‘The apple Minsoo ate. As for the orange, I don’t know.’
Example (73) is a baseline sentence showing subject and object marking. In (74a) the
first speaker brings Minsoo and Younghui into the conversation by asking a question
about them. In (74b) the second speaker refers back to Minsoo using topic marking. In
(75a) the speaker brings an apple and an orange into the conversation, again by asking
a question about them. In (75b) the second speaker refers back to the apple with topic
marking.13
Next, we discuss focus marking as it is another property encoded by C. In English,
focus marking is often indicated by stress (Chomsky and Halle, 1968; Jackendoff, 1972),
but movement is optionally available in most cases. We use capital letters to indicate
stress. Consider the following examples.
(76) a. John ate an apple.

b. JOHN ate an apple. (not Mary)
c. John ate AN APPLE. (not an orange)
When negative-marked focused items move to the front of the sentence in English,
they trigger subject-auxiliary inversion. Consider the following examples.
(77) a. Never again will I eat raw spaghetti!

b. * Never again I will eat raw spaghetti.
c. I will never again eat raw spaghetti!
13
There are several kinds of topics in languages around the world (Cruschina, 2011). Speakers of Japanese
will note that the Japanese topic marker -wa and the Korean topic marker do not have the same distribution.
Consider also the following Gungbe data. Gungbe has an obligatory focus particle
and focus movement to the left periphery. Unlike English, there is no prosodic correlate
of focus.
(78) Gungbe, Niger-Congo (Aboh, 2004, 237)

a. Sϵ́ná xìá wémà.
Sena read.prf book
‘Sena read a book.’
b. Sϵ́ná wϵ́ xìá wémà.
Sena foc read.prf book
‘SENA read a book.’
c. wémà wϵ́ Sϵ́ná xìá.
book foc Sena read.prf
‘Sena read a BOOK.’
Thus, in English a focused phrase optionally raises to SpecCP and in Gungbe a focused
phrase obligatorily raises to SpecCP.
4.3.2 Embedded topics and focus
In this section we examine how topics and focused phrases behave in embedded clauses.
The model above predicts that the topic appears before the complementizer, since the
topic is in SpecCP. If we look at the following sentence, however, we see that the prediction
fails.
(79) You know that, this behaviour, we will not tolerate.
(80)
*VP
V CP
know
DP C’
this behaviour C TP
that
we will not tolerate
There is no way to place the topic in the specifier of CP and still have it appear to the
right of the complementizer. Consider also the following data.
(81) Italian, Indo-European (adapted from Rizzi, 1997, 288)

a. Credo che loro apprezzerebbero molto il tuo libro.

believe.1sg comp they appreciate.condit.3pl much the your book
‘I believe that they would appreciate your book very much.’
b. Credo che il tuo libro loro apprezzerebbero molto.
believe.1sg comp the your book they appreciate.condit.3pl much
‘I believe that your book they would appreciate very much.’
c. * Credo il tuo libro che loro apprezzerebbero molto.
believe.1sg the your book comp they appreciate.condit.3pl much
(‘I believe that they would appreciate your book very much.’)
On the basis of these observations, it has been proposed that the CP layer must be
more finely articulated. We call this articulated CP a split CP , following work by Rizzi
(1997, 2001). The structure Rizzi proposed for the CP is as follows.
(82) CP = ForceP > (TopP) > (FocP) > FinP
The Force Phrase (ForceP) is location of illocutionary force (see Table 4.3). Recall also
that certain verbs select clauses with a specific illocutionary type. Thus, the illocutionary
force is predicted to be encoded on the highest head in the CP layer. Here are some
examples.
(83) a. I wonder what Mary ate.

b. * I wonder that Mary ate an apple.
c. I suppose that John will travel to Montreal.
d. * I suppose where John will travel.
The Finiteness Phrase (FinP) is where the finite/non-finite distinction is encoded. It is

realized in English as the prepositional complementizer for in some non-finite contexts.
Since we deal with non-finite constructions later, we put off our discussion of these con-
structions until then. For now, we will consider a few non-finite clauses to illustrate the
FinP.
(84) a. For him to win the race would be amazing.

b. I want (very much) for him to win the race.
c. I would prefer for Tracy to win the race.
For always selects a non-finite TP. Romance languages also have Finiteness heads.
They are often the equivalents of common prepositions such as to or of.

Pierre commence à manger.

Pierre start.3sg to eat.inf
‘Pierre is starting to eat.’

O João gosta de comer maçãs.
the John like.3sg of eat.inf apples
‘John likes to eat apples.’
The non-finite marker de selects an infinitive. [+Finite] Fin selects a tensed T. The
topic phrase, TopP, is optional and appears only when there is a topic in the sentence.
The topicalized XP appears in SpecTopP. The focus phrase, FocP, will be discussed in
a later chapter. Consider the following additional Italian data. Note that although the
English translation is finite, the Italian example contains an infinitive in the embedded
clause.
(87) Italian, Indo-European (adapted from Rizzi, 1997, 288)

a. Credo di apprezzare molto il tuo libro.
believe.1sg of appreciate.inf much the your book
‘I believe that I’ll appreciate your book very much.’
b. * Credo di il tuo libro apprezzare molto.
believe.1sg of the your book appreciate.inf much
(‘I believe that I’ll appreciate your book very much.’)
c. Credo il tuo libro di apprezzare molto.
believe.1sg the your book of appreciate.inf much
‘I believe that I’ll appreciate your book very much.’
Comparing these data with that in example (81), we see that the fronted topic phrase
appears after the finite complementizer che but before the non-finite marker di (‘of’).
These facts can be easily handled by assuming a TopicP that appears between ForceP
and FinP. We are now ready to draw the tree for the following sentence.
(88) You know that, this behaviour, we will punish severely.
Note that the CP is split into its components only if necessary. For convenience, we
simply use CP if only one syntactic object appears in the CP layer. This is merely a nota-
tional convenience to save space, however. It is assumed that the full split CP is always
present under the view Rizzi proposes.14 This is shown nicely in the following tree, where
the matrix CP does not need to be shown in its split form, but the embedded CP must be
split to show both the topic and the complementizer.
14
This view has evolved into a theory known as Cartography (Shlonsky, 2010; Cinque and Rizzi, 2008).
4.4. LIGHT VERB AND VP REFINED 113
(89)
CP
C TP
DPi TP
you T vP
ti vP
v VP
Vj v tj ForceP
know
Force TopP
that
TopP
DPi TopP
D N Top FinP
this behaviour
Fin TP
DPk TP
we T vP
will
tk vP
v <VP,VP>
Vl v VP AdvP
punish
tl ti severely
4.4 Light Verb and vP Refined
We begin by discussing ditransitive verbs such as give, which were challenging for syntac-
tic theory as there are two internal arguments rather than just one. In Revised Extended
Standard Theory until Government and Binding Theory it was simply assumed that the
two objects were both sisters to the verb (Oehrle, 1976).
(90) a. give Mary a book

b. 영희에게 책을 주다
Yenghuy-eykey chayk-ul cwu-ta
Younghui-to book-acc give-decl
‘give a book to Younghui’
(91) a. VP
V NP NP
give Mary a book
b. VP
PP NP V
NP P 책을 주다
영희 에게
Recall that Barss and Lasnik (1986) note various asymmetries between the first NP
and the second NP in English. Namely, the first NP appears to c-command the second
NP, but not vice versa. This observation is not captured in the tree in (91a) as both NPs
c-command each other.
(92) a. I showed John himself (in the mirror).

b. *I showed himself John (in the mirror).
Our current understanding of the structure of ditransitives is due to Larson (1988,

1990) and to Kratzer (1996). In addition to the data on reflexives above, Larson also
explored bound variable pronouns. A variable is any element whose value changes with
its context. A variable must be bound by some element that defines its value. We will
discuss the notion of binding in much more detail later, but for now we will just use
a simple definition. We say that the quantifier must bind the pronoun in order to get
the reading that matches up each student with his or her missing book. In order for a
quantifier to bind a pronoun, the quantifier must c-command it. Consider the following
examples.
(93) Every student forgot their book.

In (93), the interpretation of their varies with every student, which contains the quan-
tifier every. A more formal representation of this relationship is as follows.
(94) ∀x, x a student, x forgot x’s book. (∀ = ‘for all’)
In this representation, the relationship between the quantifier and the variable is
spelled out more clearly. Consider, now, the following data.15
(95) a. I denied each worker their paycheque.

b. *I denied its recipient each paycheque.
c. I showed every trainer their lion.
d. *I showed its trainer every lion.
Observe that one of the objects is a quantified phrase (each X ) and the other object
contains a variable. Again, the quantifier in the first object successfully binds the variable
in the second object, but not vice versa. This observation can be explained if we assume
the first object c-commands the second object, but the second object does not c-command
the first object. In other words, the first object asymmetrically c-commands the second
object.
The next set of data we will look at makes use of negative polarity items (NPIs),
such as anyone, in the upcoming example. NPIs have the interesting property that they
must be c-commanded by negation or a yes/no question operator.
(96) a. I didn’t see anyone.

b. Did you see anyone?
c. *I saw anyone. (≠ I saw no one/someone)
When we apply these facts to ditransitive constructions we observe the following:
(97) a. I gave no one anything.

b. I sent no presents to any of the children.
c. *I gave anyone nothing.
d. *I sent any of the presents to none of the children.
Observe that in the first two examples the NPIs anything and any are acceptable as
shown; however, in the last two examples they are not. Again, this leads us to conclude
that the first object asymmetrically c-commands the second object.
15
Larson’s original data set did not use singular they. However, many speakers use only they as a bound
variable, reserving he and she for definite descriptions.
From these three sets of data we see that the first object must c-command the second
object, but not vice versa. The ternary branching structure fails to predict this asymmetry.
What we need is a structure in which the first object c-commands the second object, but
not vice-versa. Larson (1988) proposed a double VP projection, the higher of which is now
known as vP. First, the two objects appear in the VP as follows.
(98)
VP
DP VP
a book V PP
give
to Mary
When v merges with the VP the verb raises to v.
(99)
vP
Subject vP
v VP
Vi v
DP VP
give
a book ti PP
to Mary
Now the first DP asymmetrically c-commands the second DP. However, the verb is
in the wrong spot. We will discuss the word order problem shortly. Larson’s proposal to
adopt a VP shell was subsequently amended according to a proposal by Kratzer (1996).
Kratzer, following Marantz (1984) suggested that the external argument is thematically
independent from the VP predicate and is introduced by a light verb.
Thought Exercise 4.4: Abbott (1976) raised the following problematic data for right-
node-raising as a constituency diagnostic. Are her claims still valid in light of the vP
structure discussed here?
1 Smith loaned, and his widow later donated, a valuable collection of manuscripts
to the library.
2 I borrowed, and my sister stole, large sums of money from the Chase Manhattan
Bank.
In verbs such as eat and sneeze, the light verb is phonologically null; however, there
are some overt light verbs (called verbalizers) in English. Here are some examples.
(100) a. -ize: verbalize, cliticize, prioritize, caramelize, criticize

b. -ify: liquefy, objectify, horrify, humidify, petrify
c. -ate: formulate, activate, liquidate, oxidate, motivate
Theories of grammar that place morphology and syntax in the same module decom-
pose these words and build them syntactically, as we will explore in Chapter 9. We show
an example here, but do not adopt this level of decomposition in this textbook. Note also
that such theories typically assume that lexical roots do not have a category. That is, they
are acategorial. They are not specified as V, N, or Adj. Rather, they are simply a bare
√
root and are labelled as .
(101) a. formulate a response

b.
vP vP
√ √
v P v P
-ate
√ √
DP i
v ti DP
formula formula -ate
D N D N
a response a response
The traditional analysis of passives involves deletion of the vP projection. Consider the
following pair of examples.
(102) a. Pat ate the apple.

b. The apple was eaten.
Under a simple theory of clausal structure, these sentences have the following struc-
tures.
(103) Active construction
CP
C TP
DPi TP
Pat T vP
ti vP
External θ-role Accusative Case Assignment
v VP
atej tj DP
the apple
v is the locus of accusative Case assignment and external θ-role assignment. These
are the two properties that are lacking in passives. Hence, a simple analysis holds that
v is absent in passives, as in the following structure. We discuss passives in much more
detail later, however.
(104) Passive Construction
CP
C TP
DPi TP
The apple T VP
was
V ti
eaten
There are some problems with this analysis, however. First, observe from (101) that v
is also considered to be the locus of verbalizing morphology, as in the following examples.
(105) verbalizing morphology in English]

a. clarify, liquify, glorify, etc.
b. pluralize, accessorize, brutalize, etc.

c. formulate, abbreviate, stipulate, etc.
Harley (2007) notes, however, that the verbalizing morphology remains in passives,
making this straightforward analysis problematic.
(106) a. The butter was clarified.

b. The noun was pluralized.
c. The conditions were clearly stipulated in the contract.
Harley (2013) adduces evidence from Hiaki (yaq, an Uto-Aztecan language spoken in
Mexico and the US) to argue for a further split as follows.
(107) VoiceP > vP > VP (or √P)
First she notes the existence of verbalizing morphology in Hiaki, akin to the English
facts in (105). A simple example follows.
(108) Hiaki, Uto-Aztecan (Harley, 2013, ex.15)

a. siki ‘red’; sikisi ‘to redden’
b. heewi ‘yes!’; heewite ‘to agree’
c. kari ‘house’; karite ‘to build a house’
(109) Santos kari-te

Santos house-vlzr
‘Santos builds a house.’
This straightforwardly translates to the following structure.
(110)
vP
NP vP
v
Santos √
kari -te
Hiaki also has productive applicatives. Harley gives the following example.
(111) Hiaki, Uto-Aztecan (Harley, 2013, ex.12b)

Inepo Jose-ta pueta-ta eta-ria-k
I Jose-acc door-acc open-appl-prfv
‘I opened the door for Jose.’
Harley provides extensive evidence that the applied object (Jose) is c-commanded by
the external argument. This translates to the following partial structure.
(112)
vP
NP vP
Inepo ApplP v
NP ApplP
Jose-ta √P Appl
-ria
NP √
ela
pueta-ta
A problem arises when we consider applicatives with the verbalizing morphology above.
Consider the following example.
(113) Hiaki, Uto-Aztecan (Harley, 2013, ex.17)

Santos Maria-ta kari-te-ria
Santos Maria-acc house-vlzr-appl
‘Santos is building a house for Maria.’
According to the structure we’ve built so far, we would expect the order root-appl-vlzr.
Harley shows that if VoiceP, rather than vP is responsible for introducing the external
argument the facts above fall into place.
(114)
VoiceP
NP VoiceP
Santos ApplP Voice
NP ApplP
Maria-ta vP Appl
-ria
√ v
kari -te
External Argument Internal Argument

introduced by Voi introduced by V
subject (in active voice) direct and indirect objects (in active voice)
Finally, we look briefly at languages that exhibit overt, free-standing light verbs. Light
verbs typically appear in many constructions and carry very little meaning, if any. Con-
sider the following Mandarin predicates.
(115) a. dǎ pēntì ‘to sneeze’

b. dǎ hāqian ‘to yawn’
c. dǎ diānhúa ‘to phone’
d. dǎ zǐ ‘to type’
The form dǎ in Mandarin is often used a light verb. When it is used alone, it is a lexical
verb meaning ‘hit’, but in the constructions above, it is a light verb, v, which carries no
meaning and serves only to introduce an external argument.
Consider now the following set of Urdu (urd) data, which shows a similar phenomenon.
(116) Urdu, Indo-European (Butt and Geuder, 2003, 295-6)

a. yaasiin-nee keek khaa lii-yaa
Yassin.textscm.erg cake.m.nom eat take-prfv.m.sg
‘Yassin ate the cake (completely, for the benefit of himself).’
b. naadyaa-nee xat likh dii-yaa
Nadya.fem-erg letter.m.nom write give-prfv.m.sg
‘Nadya wrote a letter (completely).’
c. naadyaa aab th-ii
Nadya.f.nom come sit-prfv.f.sg
‘Nadya has arrived.’
d. naadyaa gaa pa-ii
Nadya. sing fall-prfv.f.sg
‘Nadya burst into singing (fell to singing).’
e. naadyaa gir ga-yii
Nadya.f.nom fall go-prfv.f.sg
‘Nadya fell (down).
We observe here a small set of light verbs with a semantically bleached meaning
(shown in italics). Note that the main lexical verb provides the core meaning of the sen-
tence. The light verbs merely adjust the meaning slightly.
In Korean hata (하다) is the most common light verb. Other light verbs in Korean in-
clude doyta (되다) and sulepta (스럽다). In the following examples, the meanings of the
verbs are carried by the lexical roots. The light verb simply carries the inflectional mor-
phology.
(117) a. sayngkak-hata 생각하다 ‘to think’

b. chengso-hata 청소하다 ‘to clean’
c. kongpwu-hata 공부하다 ‘to study’
Key Concepts
• trivalent verb - a verb that takes three arguments
• Larsonian shell - a double VP projection that allows space for two internal argu-
ments to be projected
• tense phrase (TP) - A sentence is headed by a tense head (T), which relates the
subject to the predicate, and which is the locus of agreement. A T head projects to
a TP.
• complementizer - A complementizer introduces a subordinate clause into a sen-

tence. Complementizers often indicate the illocutionary force of a sentence.
• illocutionary force - The illocutionary force of a clause indicates whether it is a

statement (declarative), a question (interrogative) or a command (imperative). Other
types of illocutionary force include hortative, jussive, promissive, and optative.
• light verb - A functional head, v, that introduces the external argument.
• Double Object Construction (DOC) - A construction with two DP arguments. Ex.,

I gave Peter a present is a double object construction. The alternant I gave a present
to Peter is not.
Further Reading
• Déchaine and Wiltschko (2002) - This article deals with the structure of pronouns
in great detail using data from a variety of languages. This paper should only be
tackled once this textbook has been covered in detail.
• Hale and Keyser (2002) - This monograph deals with several aspects of argument
structure – how the subject, direct object and indirect object are introduced into
the clause. It covers much empirical data from English and various Aboriginal lan-
guages from North America. Some of the technical discussion is best left until after
chapter 7; however, the empirical facts are quite interesting to read through and are
clearly laid out.
• Kaufmann (2007) - This paper describes some of the general properties of the mid-
dle voice and how it differs from other transitivity alternations. It brings in data
from the Niger-Congo language, Fula, spoken in West Africa.
• Larson (1988) - This is the original proposal to handle double object constructions.
This article will be accessible after the discussion on wh-movement and anaphora.
It also presents a more detailed analysis of double object constructions than the
one presented here.
• Pollock (1989) - This article proposes splitting TP into separate functional projec-
tions: one for tense and one for agreement. It is also one of the original discussions
on capturing the difference between English and French word order by using head
movement.
• Pylkkänen (2008) - This monograph makes an interesting proposal on how benefac-

tives, causatives and other non-core arguments appear in the syntactic structure.
Although some of the details will be difficult to graph at this point, many of the
empirical facts will be accessible.
• Legate (2014) - This monograph explores the vP layer in Acehnese, an Austronesian

language, and explores different kinds of passives.
Chapter 5
Case theory and A-Movement
• understand the Case Filter
• recognize passive constructions
• draw trees for passive sentences
• be familiar with Middle Voice
• understand the basic structure of NP, VP, AdvP, AdjP and PP
• be able to draw trees for multiclausal structures
5.1 Case and the distribution of DPs
Case is responsible for keeping track of the grammatical roles of arguments in a clause.
From the Western tradition of grammar the notion of case has roots back to early Classical
studies, which look at Latin and Ancient Greek. In Asia, the earliest studies on case were
conducted on Sanskrit by Pān.ini. Recall that the subject typically has nominative case
and that the object has accusative case in languages with nominative-accusative case
alignment systems.
(1) Latin, Indo-European (Shelmerdine, 2013, 27)

amīc-us puell-ō libr-um dat.
friend-nom boy-dat book-acc gives
‘A friend give a book to the boy.’
Observe some case suffixes in Korean.
125
126 CHAPTER 5. CASE THEORY AND A-MOVEMENT

철수가 사과를 먹었다.
Celswu-ka sakwa-lul mek-ess-ta
Cheolsoo-nom apple-acc eat-pst-decl
‘Cheolsoo ate an apple.’
Although the precise details of case in Tagalog are a matter of debate, case in Taga-
log is indicated by pre-nominal particles rather than by suffixes. Consider the following
example.
(3) Tagalog, Austronesian (Kroeger, 1993, 13)

b-um-ili ang lalake ng isda sa tindahan
<prfv.av>-buy nom man acc fish at store
‘The man bought a fish at the store.’
There are numerous kinds of cases in languages around the world (Blake, 1994). We
are generally used to the subject appearing with nominative case and the direct object
appearing with accusative case as in the examples above. This simplistic description does
not work for many cases, however.
Before moving on with a discussion, we remind ourselves of the distinction between
Case and case. Recall that “case” with lower case ‘c’ refers to the morphological case
marker that is visible in many languages, such as in the Korean and Tagalog examples
above. When written with an upper case ‘C’, “Case” refers to the abstract licensing of
arguments in a clause. Thus, in the English sentence Pat ate an apple, the subject Pat
has nominative Case.
5.1.1 Nominative case
Consider the following sentences. Recall that only tensed T assigns nominative Case, as
shown by the subject of the verb eat in the following examples.
(4) a. She ate the spinach.

b. For her to eat the spinach would be surprising.
c. I would really like for her to eat the spinach.
In example (4a), the verb is tensed. In particular, it is marked with past tense. Further-
more, the subject of this sentence appears with nominative Case, as we have discussed
above. In examples (4b) and (4c), however, we still understand her to be the logical subject
of the sentence – that is, her gets the external θ-role (the subject θ-role) from the Voi that
introduces the VP containing the verb eat. However, her is marked with accusative Case.
5.1. CASE AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF DPS 127
Notice further that the verb eat in the latter two sentences are infinitives. That is, they do
not bear tense. This correlation led to the conclusion that nominative Case and tense are
intimately intertwined such that tensed T is responsible for assigning nominative Case
(Chomsky, 1980a, 1981). If there is no logical subject in a tensed clause, then an ex-
pletive appears in SpecTP. Consider the following sentences, recalling the discussion of
expletives in the previous chapter.
(5) a. It’s raining.

b. It seems that John left early.
c. John seems to have left early.
Looking first at (5a), observe that there is no meaningful subject. There is no ‘it’ that
is doing the raining. In fact, in all these sentences the word it does not contribute any
meaning to the sentence – it does not refer to anything. Since the expletive does not refer
to anything, it does not get a θ-role – only actual participants in an event or state get a
θ-role. They are also sometimes referred to as pleonastic pronouns. Compare this to a
sentence such as It’s in the kitchen as a response to a question such as Where’s my book?
Here, it does refer to something, so it bears a θ-role.
Under the assumption that tensed T assigns nominative Case, there must be a nom-
inal of some type to be assigned this Case. That’s the job of the expletive – it does not
mean anything; it’s just there for T to assign nominative Case to (and to satisfy the EPP).
5.1.2 Accusative case
In traditional grammar it is assumed that certain verbs assign accusative case to the
direct object.
(6) a. I pushed the button.

b. * I pushed.
c. I cried.
d. * I cried the sad movie.
In such descriptions of traditional grammar you may see a verb like push labelled as
a “transitive verb” and a verb like cry labelled as an “intransitive verb”. While many verbs
have tendencies to be used one way or another, there is a great deal of flexibility in what
kind of object a verb can take. Consider the following examples. For similar examples and
more discussion, see Ramchand (2008, 14).
(7) a. Mary is eating.

b. Mary is eating an apple.

c. The ant ate away at the apple.
d. The problem is eating away at Mary.
e. The ocean ate away at the coast.
In both English and Korean the verb study is comfortable appearing with or without
an object.
(8) a. Pat is studying.

b. Pat is studying physics.
c. 규민이 공부한다.
Kyumin-i kongpwu-ha-n-ta
Kyumin-nom study-lv-prs-decl
‘Kyumin is studying.’
d. 규민이 물리학을 공부한다.
Kyumin-i mwullihak-ul kongpwu-ha-n-ta
Kyumin-nom physics-acc study-lv-prs-decl
‘Kyumin is studying physics.’
Finally, there are many verbs that alternate between a transitive and intransitive use,
as we have seen above.
(9) a. Fred melted the butter.

b. The butter melted.
Consider the following Modern Hebrew (heb) data. Observe crucially, that in the tran-
sitive use the object is marked with accusative case and in the intransitive use it is not.
Under the assumption that the lexical verb assigns Case, we would have to assume there
are two verbs melt in English (and two verbs for each of break and lower in Hebrew).
(10) Modern Hebrew, Afro-Asiatic (Lev, 2016, 2)

a. Dan Savar et ha-xalon
Dan broke acc window
‘Dan broke the window.’
b. ha-xalon niSbar
window broke
‘The window broke’
c. ha-tajas hinmix et ha-matos
pilot lowered acc aircraft
‘The pilot lowered the aircraft’
5.1. CASE AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF DPS 129
d. ha-matos hinmix
aircraft lowered
‘The aircraft lowered.’
Modern Hebrew (heb) is an Afro-Asiatic language that is distantly related to

Arabic. Like other Semitic languages it makes use of triconsonantal roots. He-
brew originally became extinct sometime during Late Antiquity but was famously
revived in the 19th century (Sáenz-Badillos, 1996).
Taken together, these facts suggest that it is not the lexical verb itself, but rather by
something else. As we now know, it is the head Voi that assigns accusative Case.
5.1.3 Case assignment
Borrowing from observations made on traditional studies of Latin grammar, arguments

of a clause are considered to be assigned Case. We know Case is morphologically realized
in many languages (such as Latin), but in English, it remains only on pronouns.
(11) a. I like him.
b. He likes me.
Nevertheless, the distribution of nouns has the same properties across languages
with overt case morphology (such as Latin, Korean, and Russian) and languages with
impoverished case morphology (such as English, French, and Mandarin). A tensed T
assigns nominative Case. We have also said that Voi assigns accusative Case, but we will
come back to the role of Voi and accusative Case later on in this chapter and in chapter
7.
Nominative Case is assigned by the tensed T head.

Accusative Case is assigned by Voi.
Consider the following tree for John ate an apple. Note how Case is assigned to each
of the arguments. Specifically, tensed T and Voi assign case at a distance. That is to say,
there is no need for the direct object to be adjacent to Voi or to be in the Specifier of
VoiP in order for Voi to assign accusative Case to it. More specifically, we can say that
the Case-assigning head looks down and assigns Case to the first DP that it finds. The
subject moves to the Specifier of TP; however, this is due to the EPP.
(12)
CP
C TP
DPi TP
D N T VoiP
John
ti VoiP
Voi vP
vk Voi tk VP
Vj v tj DP
ate
D N
an apple
Before continuing, we briefly discuss prepositions. Prepositions assign Case to their
complements. From the data below we see that pronouns appear with accusative case
morphology. This is not the same kind of accusative Case that is assigned by Voi. Here
it is important to keep morphological case distinct from Case. In most languages of the
type discussed here subjects in basic sentences are inflected with nominative case and
direct objects are inflected with accusative case. The case that appears on the object of
a preposition varies idiosyncratically from one language to the next. We will not worry
about the nature of the Case assigned by prepositions. It is important for us, however,
that prepositions do assign Case. We must also remember that in English, the object of
a preposition is inflected with accusative case.
(13) a. John baked a cake for me.

b. * John baked a cake for I.
5.2 Passivization
Consider the following pair of sentences.
(14) a. Mary ate the mango.

b. The mango was eaten (by Mary).
The sentence in (14b) has undergone a process called passivization. In traditional

grammar we say that (14a) appears in the active voice and that (14b) appears in the
5.2. PASSIVIZATION 131
passive voice. Notice also that the adjunct by-phrase by Mary is optional. The hallmark
of the passive voice is that the object of the active sentence is the subject of the passive
sentence. Compare some more passive and active sentence pairs.
(15) a. John kicked the chair. → The chair was kicked (by John).
b. Susan bought the computer. → The computer was bought (by Susan).
c. The passengers boarded the airplane. → The airplane was boarded (by the
passengers).
Passive sentences in English contain the auxiliary be plus the past participle form
of the verb (which contains what is often called the passive morpheme -en). The passive
voice has two important properties. (i) The external argument is absent (or appears in an
optional by-phrase, and (ii) no accusative Case is assigned. The lack of accusative Case
assignment can be seen more easily with pronouns in English.
(16) a. Mary saw him.
b. He was seen (by Mary).
The distinction is clearer in Korean, which has overt Case marking. Observe the case
marking on ‘house’. Note crucially, that there is no accusative object in the passive sen-
tence.
(17) a. 영회가 집을 나무로 만들었다.

Yenghuy-ka cip-ul namwu-lo mandul-ess-ta.
Younghui-nom house-acc wood-instr make-pst-decl
‘Younghui made the house out of wood.’
b. 집이 나무로 만들어졌다.
Cip-i namwu-lo mandul-eci-ess-ta.
house-nom wood-instr make-pass-pst-decl
‘The house was made out of wood.’
Recall from the previous chapter that roles of the light verb have been split between
VoiP and vP. The v head is responsible for assigning verbal properties to the lexical root.
The Voi head is responsible for assigning accusative Case and introducing an external
argument. Here is the intermediate structure for The mango was eaten.
(18)
TP
T vP
was
v VP
Vi v ti DP
eaten
D nP
the
mango
Recall that finite T assigns nominative Case and, in English, has the EPP property.
The DP object needs Case; T needs to assign Case to a DP, so the object is assigned
nominative Case. Finally, the DP the mango raises to the Specifier of TP to satisfy the
EPP.
T assigns nominative case to
(19)
CP the thematic object, which be-
comes the grammatical subject.

C TP
DPj TP
V assigns a θ-role to
the mango T vP
the thematic object.
was v VP
Vi v ti tj
eaten
Legate (2021) identifies the following three properties of canonical passives, all three
of which are found in the English passives above.
(20) a. Agent demotion - The external argument is either absent or appears in a

by-phrase (or the equivalent in another language).
b. Theme promotions - An internal argument appears as the subject of the
sentence.
c. Passive morphology - The morphological marking on the verb differs between
the active voice and the passive voice.
Legate observes that there are many languages with only a subset of these properties.
We will cover two examples here. First, in some Germanic languages passives are found
5.2. PASSIVIZATION 133
without the promotion of the theme argument (the internal argument). Observe in the
following examples that intransitive verbs have been passivized, thus there is no internal
argument to promote.
(21) German, Germanic (Alexiadou and Schäfer, 2020)

a. Es wird gebellt.
it become.3sg.prs bark.pass
‘Someone barked.’
b. Es wird gepfiffen.
it become.3sg.prs whistle.pass
‘Someone whistled.’
Next we examine a passive-like construction in Algonquian. To understand this con-

struction, we must first understand two concepts: (i) obviation, and (ii) the person hierar-
chy and how it is encoded in the so-called direct/inverse system. Algonquian languages
have a constraint in that a maximum of one 3rd person nominal can be prominent within
any given stretch of discourse. Consider the following examples.
(22) Plains Cree, Algic (Ahenakew, 1987, 33f )

a. Ni-kî-wâpam-â-wak ni-mis-ak.
1-pst-see.anim-dir-3pl 1-older.sister-pl.prox
‘I saw my older sisters.’
b. Ana iskwêw kî-wâpam-êw ni-mis-a.
dem woman pst-see.anim-dir.3 1-older.sister-obv
‘That woman saw my older sister(s).’
Algic is a large language family spoken across a large portion of North America.
The Algic family is subdivided into Algonquian (which comprises the majority of
the family) and two outlier languages, Wiyot and Yurok. Well known Algic lan-
guages include Cree, Ojibwe, Blackfoot, and Cheyenne, all of which belong to the
Algonquian subgroup. Several place names in North America are derived from
various Aglic languages including Massachussetts and Saskatchewan. Various
English words derived from Algonquian languages include moose, moccasin, and
chipmunk. Properties common to all Algongquian languages include an animacy-
based nominal classification system, complex polysynthetic morphology, obvia-
tion, and the person hierarchy (direct versus inverse) as discussed in the text.
See Will Oxford’s website for extensive materials on Algonquian languages.
5.3 Other Variations on Passives
5.3.1 SE in Romance
The morpheme se is found in virtually all varieties of Romance. We will deal with this
morpheme more fully in chapter 10, but for now, we will discuss the impersonal pas-
sives, which use the se morpheme. Although Romance languages have passives that are
structurally similar to those found in English, they are not as common as the impersonal
passives found with se. The following example shows an active sentence, passive sentence
and impersonal se passive in Portuguese. Note that the hyphen here is an orthographic
convention of Portuguese and is not intended to show a morphological break down.
a. Eles comeram as toranjas.

they ate.3.pl the grapefruit.pl
‘They ate the grapefruits.’
b. As toranjas foram comidas.

the grapefruit.pl were eaten
‘The grapefruits were eaten.’
c. As toranjas comeram-se.
the grapefruit.pl ate.3.pl-se
‘The grapefuits were eaten.’
Like the standard passive construction, the impersonal passive undergoes lacks an
external argument. Morphologically, the impersonal se passive is formed with the active
form of the main verb that agrees with the promoted argument and the presence of the
se morpheme. There is no passive morphology as in English passive. In Italian, the im-
personal se passive can appear with agent-oriented adverbs, but not with by-phrases.
This is illustrated in the following examples.
(24) Italian, Indo-European (Frigeni, 2004)
a. Gli elettori si corruppero deliberatemente.

the electors se corrupted.3.pl deliberately
‘The voters were bribed deliberately.’
b. I voti si scrutinano (*da due segretari).

the votes se counted.3.pl (*by two officers)
‘The votes were counted (*by two officers).’
5.3. OTHER VARIATIONS ON PASSIVES 135
5.3.2 Synthetic Passives
Many languages form passives synthetically (morphologically) rather than analytically as

we saw above for English. In fact, outside of Indo-European, it’s the most common way
to form passives. Consider the following Korean examples.

a. 경찰이 도둑을 잡았다.
kyengchal-i totuk-ul cap-ass-ta
policenom thief-acc catch-pst-decl
‘The police caught the thief.’
b. 도둑이 잡혔다.
totwuk-i cap-hi-ess-ta
thief-nom catch-pass-pst-decl
‘The thief was caught.’
Consider, also the following Swahili examples. Passive voice is indicated morphologi-
cally with a -w suffix. As with the passive in English, the suppressed external argument
can appear in a by-phrase.
(26) Swahili, Niger-Congo (Mpiranya, 2015, 110)

a. Juma a-na-som-a hadithi
Juma 1-prs-read-fv story
‘Juma is reading a story.’
b. Hadithi i-na-som-w-a na Juma
story 9-prs-read-pass-fv by Juma
‘The story is being read by Juma.’
Often, there are differences between the morphological passive and the analytic pas-
sives, although these differ from one language to the next. Careful fieldwork must be un-
dertaken to accurately uncover the properties of passives and passive-like constructions
in different languages. We discuss one difference in Korean here. Consider the following
data.
(27) Korean, Koreanic (Yeon, 2015, 124)

a. 하수구가 (저절로) 막혔다.
haswukwu-ka (cecello) mak-hi-ess-ta
drain (by itself) block.up-pass-pst-decl
‘The drain got blocked up (by itself).’ [translation altered slightly by author]
b. 하수구가 (?저절로) 막아 졌다.
haswukwu-ka (?cecello) mak-a-ci-ess-ta
drain (?by itself) block.up-join-pass-pst-decl
‘The drain managed to be blocked up (?by itself)’
In the morphological passive in (27a), there is no sense of a hidden or suppressed

agent as it can be modified by the adverb cecello (‘by itself/spontaneously). This is not
possible in the analytical passive in (27b). The analytical passive still contains the sense
of an agent so cannot be modified with an adverb the denies the existence of an agent.
5.4 Unaccusativity
Recall that unaccusatives and passives both lack an external argument. In simpler mod-
els, this common property was accounted for by assuming they both lack a vP projection.
As we saw for passives, this simple analysis failed to account for well known properties of
the passive and for the properties of the VP layer in other languages. To remind ourselves
here are the structures for an active and passive clause.
(28) a. Pat sank the ship.

b. The ship was sunk.
(29)
CP
C TP
DPi TP
D N T vP
John
ti vP
v tj
Vj v
sneezed
In this section, we will take a critical look at several monovalent verbs and see if they
do indeed form a homogeneous class, or whether they form two distinct classes. Consider
the set of monovalent verbs in (30). These verbs can usually appear with cognate objects,
an object that is lexically related to the verb.
(30) Cognate Objects

a. I dreamed a wonderful dream.
b. I sighed a huge sigh of relief.
c. I slept the sleep of the dead.
5.4. UNACCUSATIVITY 137
d. 내가 잠을 잤다.
na-nun ca-m-ul ca-ss-ta.
I-top sleep-nlzr-acc sleep-pst-decl
‘I slept.’
e. 내가 춤을 췄다.
na-nun chwu-m-ul chw-ess-ta.
I-top dance-nlzr-acc dance-pst-decl
‘I danced.’
Now look at the set of monovalent verbs in (31). These verbs cannot appear with a
cognate object or a dummy reflexive.
(31) No Cognate Objects

a. * I arrived an exhausting arrival.
b. * The ghost appeared a frightening appearance.
Let’s turn now to Cantonese . Consider the following Cantonese verbs, which are in-
transitive in English.
(32) Cantonese, Sino-Tibetan (Tommi Leung, pc)
a. fan3 gaau3
sleep sleep
‘to sleep’
b. sik6 je5
eat stuff
‘to eat’
c. waak6 waa2
draw drawing
‘to draw’
d. coeng3 go1
sing song
‘to sing’
Some languages, such as Cantonese, have a strict transitivity requirement. That is,
the verb must have a direct object, even if the direct object is semantically vacuous or
a cognate object. Observe in the examples above that the object either has the same
meaning as the verb or simply has no meaning. In contrast to the data above observe the
following examples, in which no cognate object is found.
(33) a. heoi3
go
‘to go’
b. lei6
arrive
‘to arrive’
Another difference found with monovalent verbs in English is their ability to appear
in an expletive construction (Levin, 1993). The set of monovalent verbs in (34) can appear
with the expletive there in (34), whereas the set of monovalent verbs in (35) cannot.
(34) a. There arrived several travellers.

b. There fell some leaves from the tree.
(35) a. * There sneezed a dog.

b. * There yawned a tired traveller.
c. * There laughed several children.
We turn, now, to a phenomenon in Italian called ne-cliticization (Burzio, 1986). The

Italian partitive clitic ne represents the entity of which a sub-part is expressed. Observe
that the direct object in Italian can be indexed by the clitic ne. In the following example
the clitic ne refers to the books–the direct object.
(36) Italian, Indo-European (Roberta D’Alessandro, pc)
a. I ragazzi hanno letto tre libri.

the.m.pl boys have.3pl read.ptcp three books
‘The boys have read three books.’
b. I ragazzi ne hanno letti tre.
the boys ne have.3pl read.ptcp three
‘The boys have read three of them.’
This clitic cannot refer to the subject, as the following examples show. Note that for
independent reasons, the numeral associated with ne must be post-verbal. This will be
clear below.
a. Tre regazzi hanno letto i libri.

three boys have read the books
‘Three boys have read the books.’
b. * Ne hanno letti (tre) i libri (tre).
ne have read (three) the books (three)
(‘Three of them have read the books.’)
As expected, the subject of a monovalent verb cannot typically support the ne clitic,
as in (38).
a. Tre uomini hanno tossito.

three men have coughed
‘Three men have coughed.’
b. * Ne hanno tossito tre.
ne have couged three
(‘Three of them have coughed.’)
Observe, however, that with the arrive-class of monovalent verbs ne-cliticization is

possible. Observe, as mentioned above, that the numeral associated with ne is post-
verbal.

a. Tre uomini sono arrivati.
three men are arrived
‘Three men have arrived.’
b. Ne sono arrivati tre.
ne are arrived three
‘Three of them have arrived.’
If ne-cliticization is restricted to direct objects, then it is surprising that it is possible

with the arrive-class of verbs.
Recall the process of noun incorporation from Interchapter A. The direct object of a
verb can incorporate into the verb. This is illustrated in the Hare dialect of Slavey .
Slavey is an Dené-Yeniseian language spoken in Northern Canada. It is divided into

two sets of dialects, North Slavey (scs) and South Slavey (xls). The data shown here
are from North Slavey. North Slavey is spoken in the Northwest Territories in Canada
by about 800 people. It is a highly endangered language.
(40) Slavey, Dené-Yeniseian (Rice, 1991, 54)
a. léxudek’a
lé-xu-de-k’a
together-tooth-asp-grind
‘S/he is grinding his/her teeth together.’
b. lédek’a
lé-de-k’a
together-asp-grind
‘S/he is grinding it together.’
This process is normally restricted to direct objects, but there is a set of monovalent
verbs in which the subject can incorporate.
(41) Slavey, Dené-Yeniseian (Rice, 1991, 56)

rátakeli˛
rá-ta-ke-li˛
down-water-asp-flow
‘Water flows down.’
If noun incorporation is restricted to objects, it is again surprising that it should be

found with subjects on some monovalent verbs.
In Italian, the past participle agrees with the object, if the object has raised above
the past participle. Consider the following examples. Note that mela (‘apple’) is feminine
in Italian. When the apple is in object position, to the right of the verb, default agree-
ment (masculine) appears on the participle. When the object is passivized and becomes
the grammatical subject, feminine agreement appears on the participle (and on one of
the auxiliaries, too). The last example shows that the participle does not agree with the
subject. This lack of agreement is also shown in (38a).

a. Ho mangi-at-o la mela
have.1sg eat-ptcp-sg.m the.f apple
‘I ate the apple.’
b. La mela é stat-a mangi-at-a
the.f apple is been eat-ptcp-f
‘The apple was eaten.’
c. La ragazza ha toss-it-o
the.f girl has cough-ptcp-m
‘The girl has coughed.’
Observe, now, in the following data that the subject triggers agreement on the partici-
ple in the arrive-class of monovalent verbs. See also example (39a).
(43) Italian, Indo-European (Kayne, 1989)

a. Le ragazze sono arriv-at-e
the.f.pl girls are arrive-ptcp-f.pl
‘The girls have arrived’
b. Gli studenti sono part-it-i
the.m.pl students are leave-ptcp-m.pl
‘The students have left.’
Finally, we will look at resultatives in English. Consider the following examples with
secondary predicates. These are called object and subject complements in traditional
grammar. There are two types of secondary predicates: resultatives (as mentioned above)
and depictives. The difference between these two is important for the discussion below.
A depictive describes the state of the subject or the object in the main clause. Consider
the following examples.
(44) Depictives in English

a. John drank the tea hot.
b. Mary walked home tired.
In the first sentence hot describes the state of the tea while John was drinking it. In
the second sentence tired describes Mary’s state while she walked home. Thus, in the
first example the depictive predicates the object, and in the second sentence the depictive
predicates the subject.
Resultatives, on the other hand, describe the state of the object as a result of the
event of the main clause. While depictives can modify either the subject or the object,
resultatives can only modify the object in English, a property first discussed by Simpson
(1983).1 Consider the following examples.
(45) Resultatives in English

a. Alice pounded the metal flat.
b. * Alice pounded the metal tired. (* on resultative reading)
The first sentence means that the metal became flat as a result of Alice pounding
it. Here, the depictive flat predicates the object. In the second sentence, however, the
secondary predicate tired cannot be used to mean that Alice became tired as a result
of pounding the metal. It can only be used as a depictive, in which case it means that
Alice was tired while she pounded the metal. We say that resultatives have a direct object
restriction (Simpson, 1983).
In light of the difference between depictives and resultatives, consider the following
data.
(46) Resultatives and Dummy Reflexives in English

a. * Fred laughed silly.
b. Fred laughed himself silly.
c. * Pat cried to sleep.
1
Note that in Chinese resultatives can modify either the subject or the object (Huang, 1988).
d. Pat cried himself to sleep.

e. * John ran his shoes.
f. John ran his shoes ragged.
As expected the resultatives in (46) cannot be used to predicate the subject. Note,
though, that with laugh and cry a dummy reflexive can be used, and the resultative
now has an object. We call these reflexives dummy reflexives because the verbs are oth-
erwise used only in intransitive constructions. The verb run, usually cannot take a form
of footwear as an object. However, if a resultative is added, then the object is accept-
able. In all cases, the resultative predicates the object–either the dummy reflexive or the
non-canonical object.
Consider, finally, the last set of data on this topic. Observe that the resultative refers to
the subject of these passive constructions. Since the subject is underlyingly the object,
it is not surprising that the resultative can refer to the subject here. The direct object
restriction, then, refers to the underlying object.
(47) a. The eggs were burned black.

b. The vase was smashed into pieces.
c. The water was frozen solid by putting it in the freezer.
Consider, finally, the following data.
(48) a. The lake froze solid.

b. The mirror shattered into a thousand pieces.
c. The eggs burnt black.
Observe that the resultative predicate is able to refer to the single argument of these
verbs. These sentences are not passive, so the data in (48) are surprising in light of the
direct object restriction.
We are now in a position to understand these two classes of verbs. The arrive-class
of verbs are called unaccusative for reasons to be made clear below. The other class of
verbs (including laugh, cry, etc.) are called unergative. The following chart summarizes
the findings in this section.
With regards to ne-cliticization and participle agreement in Italian and subject incor-
poration in Slavey, what we see is that the subject of the unaccusative verbs behaves like
an object. Note also that the subject of an unaccusative in many cases has a <theme>
θ-role, which usually appears on an internal argument. This leads us to the proposal that
unaccusative verbs lack an external argument. That is, the sentence John arrived has
the following structure.
unaccusative unergative
cognate objects in English and Korean impossible possible
cognate objects in Cantonese impossible obligatory
there expletives possible impossible
ne-cliticization in Italian possible impossible
participle agreement in Italian obligatory impossible
subject incorporation in Slavey possible impossible
dummy reflexives in English not found possible
Table 5.1: Summary of Unaccusativity Diagnostics
(49)
CP
C TP
DPi TP
D N T vP
John
v VP
Vj v tj ti
arrived
Observe that the grammatical subject is underlying an internal argument, that is a

thematic object. As such, we expect it to behave as objects in some ways as just men-
tioned. Let’s see, now, how we can capture the other properties in Table 5.1. It will be
instructive to compare the tree for an unaccusative in (49) with a tree for an unergative
construction. Here is the tree for John sneezed.
(50)
CP
C TP
DPi TP
D N T VoiP
John
ti VoiP
Voi vP
v tj
Vj v
sneezed
In an unaccusative construction, the grammatical subject is the underlying object,

so there is no space for a cognate object or dummy reflexive to appear. In an unergative
construction, on the other hand, the verb does not have a complement, so it is possible
for an object to appear. Compare the following constructions for unergatives with cognate
objects.
(51) a. The child sneezed a terrible sneeze.
b. Chelswu-ka kkwu-m-ul kkw-ess-ta. 철수가 꿈을 꿨다.

Cheolsoo-nom dream-nlzr-acc dream-pst-decl
‘Cheolsoo had a dream.’
(52)
CP
C TP
DPi TP
D N T VoiP
the child
ti VoiP
Voi vP
v VP
Vj v tj
DP
sneezed
a terrible sneeze
Finally, we address there-expletive constructions. If we consider the structure we can

understand the difference between unaccusatives and unergatives with respect to there-
expletives. Let’s build the structure from the beginning. First the verb arrive selects the
DP a traveller. The verb assigns a <theme> θ-role to the internal argument.
(53)
VP
V<theme>DP
arrived
D N
a traveller
Next, v merges with VP, then T merges with vP. T has the EPP property, so something
must appear in the specifier of TP. Furthermore, there is no Voi to assign accusative Case
to the internal argument, so it must receive nominative Case from T. In the cases we have
been discussing so far, the internal argument raises to SpecTP.
(54)
TP
NOM
DPi TP
D N TEPP vP
a traveller
v VP
Vj v tj ti
arrived
<them
e>
Finally, C merges with TP to provide illocutionary force to the proposition.
(55)
CP
C TP
DPi TP
D N TEPP vP
a traveller
v VP
Vj v tj ti
arrived
Alternatively, the expletive there can be merged into SpecTP to satisfy EPP on T. T still
assigns nominative Case to the internal argument.
(56)
CP
C TP
there TP
NOM
TEPP vP
v VP
Vj v tj DPi
arrived
D N
a traveller
Some unaccusative verbs participate in the causative-inchoative alternation. Con-

sider the following examples.
(57) a. John broke the vase.

b. The vase broke.
Recall that we had to posit two lexical entries for break. Recall also that a large number
of verbs alternate in the same way (boil, shatter, melt, etc.). Many languages exhibit the
same alternation, but often with a morphological change. We saw examples of se-passives
in Romance in chapter 6. Here is another example from Italian.
(58) Italian, Indo-European (Alexiadou et al., 2015, 83)
a. Gianni ha chiuso la finestra in un secondo.

John has closed the window in one second
‘John closed the window in one second.’
b. La finestra si è chiusa in un secondo.
the window se is closed in one second
‘The window closed in one second.’
Korean and Greek both show morphological changes on the verb that correlate with
the causative-inchoative alternation.
(59) Greek, Indo-European (Alexiadou et al., 2015, 87)
a. O Janis ekapse to vivlio.

the John.nom burnt.act the book.acc
‘John burnt the book.’
b. To vivlio kaike.
the book.nom burnt.non-act
‘The book burnt.’
(60) Korean, Koreanic (Jeong, 2018, 2)

a. Alice가 문을 열었다.
Alice-ka mwun-ul yel-ess-ta
Alice-nom door-acc open-pst-decl
‘Alice opened the door.’
b. 문이 열였다.
mwun-ul yel-li-ess-ta
door-nom open-inch-pst-decl
‘The door opened.’
It would be rather unparsimonious to list all the alternating verbs in the Lexicon twice.
It would also miss the generalization that these verbs alternate in the same way. Instead
we have the following two lexical entries.
(61) a. Voi: VP, DP<agent> or <experiencer>
b. BREAK: V, DP<theme>
Thus, to derive the sentences in (57) the verb break selects the DP the vase. If no Voi
is merged with VP, then the thematic object becomes the grammatical subject as in (57b).
If Voi merges with VP, then an external argument will merge in the Specifier of VoiP. The
external argument becomes the grammatical subject as in (57a). Here are the structures
for the English sentences in (57) and the Korean sentences in (60).
(62) a.
CP
C TP
DPi TP
John T VoiP
ti VoiP
Voi vP
v VP
Vj v tj DP
broke
D N
the vase
b.
CP
C TP
DPi TP
D N T vP
the vase
v VP
Vj tj ti
broke
(63) a.
CP
TP C
-ta
DPi TP
Alice-ka VoiP T
-ess
ti VoiP
vP Voi
VP v
DP tj Vj v
yel
mwun-ul
b.
CP
TP C
-ta
DPi TP
mwun-i vP T
-ess
VP v
ti tj Vj v
yelli
Constructions that lack VoiP
• unaccusative
• passive
• seem-type verbs (seem, appear, look like, etc.)
Key concepts
• case - the morphological marker that relates a noun to its grammatical function
• Case - an abstract licensing function that relates a noun to its grammatical function
• Case Filter - a principle that states that all nominal phrases (DPs) must bear Case
• nominative - the Case borne by the grammatical subject in many languages, in-
cluding English
• accusative - the Case borne by the direct object in many languages, including En-
glish
• active voice - the form of a sentence in which the thematic arguments correspond
to their grammatical counterparts
• passive voice - the form of a sentence in which the thematic object is the gram-
matical subject
• structural Case - Case that is assigned by a functional head (finite T and Voi)
• inherent Case - Case that is assigned directly by a particular lexical item (usually
a verb)
Further Reading
• Alexiadou et al. (2015) - This monograph offers an in depth analytical discussion of

transitivity alternations from a wide variety of Indo-European languages, although
it concentrates mostly on English, German, and Greek
• Keenan (1985) - This book chapter provides an overview of passive constructions

in the world’s languages.
• Jung (2014) - This article is a theoretically advanced discussion of passives and

causatives in Korean. The empirical facts should be accessible by this point, how-
ever.
• Li (2006) - This comprehensive review offers an in depth discussion of the prop-

erties of the ba-construction in Mandarin and also gives a brief comparison with a
similar construction in Taiwanese Chinese. Much of the descriptive content should
be accessible by this point.
• Klaiman (1991) and Zúñiga and Kittilä (2019) - These two monographs discuss
cross-linguistic properties of grammatical voice.
• Wanner (2009) - This monograph provides an in depth look at the passive in En-
glish.
Chapter 6
Licensing Nominals and

Grammatical Relations
By the end of this chapter you should be able to:
• understand the notion of subjecthood
• understand how subjecthood varies cross-linguistically
• understand different voice alignment systems
• understand ergativity
• recognize antipassive constructions
• draw trees for antipassive constructions
• understand the properties of split intransitivity
6.1 Subjects and objects
The notions of subject and object are are not as straightforward as pedagogical gram-
mars and introductory textbooks suggest. Often, the subject is described as having the
following properties.
(1) Subject Properties

a. being the initiator of an action
b. having nominative case
c. controlling agreement
153
154 CHAPTER 6. LICENSING NOMINALS AND GRAMMATICAL RELATIONS
The object in turn is described as (i) being affected by the event, and (ii) having ac-
cusative case. In many cases this is true, as the following examples illustrate.

a. John is eating some apples.
b. John and Mary are eating some apples.
(3) Korean, Koreanic, (Moonhyun Sung, pc)

a. 민수가 사과를 먹었다.
Minsoo-nom apple-acc eat-
b. 선생님께서 사과를 드셨다.
sensayng-nim-kkeyse sakwa-lul tu-si-ess-ta
teacher-hon-hon.nom apple-acc eat.hon-sbj.hon-pst-decl
‘The teacher ate an apple.’
The simple picture painted above does not describe the empirical landscape of case
marking. Consider the following Icelandic data as discussed by Woolford (2006).
(4) Icelandic, Indo-European

a. Bátnum hvolfdi.
boat-dat capsized
‘The boat capsized.’ (Levin and Simpson, 1981, 1b)
b. Bátinn rak á land.
boat-acc drifted to shore
‘The boat drifted to the shore.’ (Jónsson, 2003, 66a)
c. Jóns nýtur ekki lengur við.
John-gen enjoys not longer at
‘John is no longer available.’ (Jónsson, 2003, 1c)
Observe that these sentences have only one argument. As such, it is expected that
they would bear nominative case, contrary to what is observed. This section considers a
number of situations in which the subject of the sentence has unexpected properties.
6.1.1 Quirky subjects
A quirky subject is a subject that bears something other than nominative case (Levin
and Simpson, 1981, inter alia).1 The examples in (4) illustrate typical examples of quirky
subjects. Quirky subjects have been described for a number of languages. Consider the
following Telegu examples. Observe that the subject appears with dative case.
1
We set aside ergative and absolutive case here.
6.1. SUBJECTS AND OBJECTS 155
(5) Telugu, Dravidian Subbarao and Bhaskararao (2004, 162)

a. maalati-ki bazaaru-loo endaroo kanipincee-ru
Malati.3sg.nm-dat market-in many were.visible.3.pl.h
‘Malati saw many people in the market.’
b. madhuri-ki anil-miida preema kaligin-di
Madhuri.3sg.nm-dat Anil.3sg.m-on love.3sg.nm occurred.3sg.nm
‘Madhuri fell in love with Anil.’
6.1.2 Lexical case
So far, we have discussed structural Case, which is assigned according to the structural
position of the argument. We now turn to another situation. Consider the following Ger-
man data.

a. Ich habe den Kind gesehen.
I have the.acc child seen
‘I saw the child.’
b. Der Kind wurde gesehen.
the.nom child was seen
‘The child was seen.’
c. Ich habe dem Kind geholfen
I have the.dat child helped
‘I helped the child.’
d. Dem Kind wurde geholfen.
the.dat child was helped
‘The child was helped.’
Example (6b) illustrates a canonical passive. The accusative direct object in the active
sentence appears with nominative Case in the passive sentence. In the active sentence
in (6c), however, the direct object appears with dative Case. Certain verbs in German
assign inherent Case (Chomsky, 1986b; Belletti, 1988), which remains invariant under
passivization. Thus, in the passive sentence in (6d), dative Case appears on the derived
subject, rather than nominative. It is typically assumed that verbs such as help in Ger-
man assign Case directly to the direct object (Woolford, 2006). Since the object is assigned
dative Case inherently by the verb, the absence of Voi in passives does not affect Case
assignment. It is an ongoing question, however, how nominative Case is handled. Recall
that according to the Case Filter, a DP is assigned Case once and only once (Chomsky,
1980b). One recent suggestion is that T attempts to assign nominative Case, but if it fails
to do so then it gives up, but failure to assign nominative Case does not result in un-
grammaticality (Preminger, 2014). Recall also the discussion on multiple Case checking
on page 157. One possibility is that arguments in lexical case can be assigned Case twice,
but only the lower Case is morphologically represented.
6.2 The Case Filter
Recall that only tensed T assigns nominative Case. Consider the following data, concen-
trating only on the underlined clauses.
(7) a. That John/he lost the race was devastating.

b. For John/him to lose the race would be devastating.
c. *John/him to lose the race would be devastating.
In (7a) the verb lost is inflected for past tense, so T assigns nominative Case to the
subject. In (7b), the verb lose is an infinitive. T is not tensed and so cannot assign nomi-
native Case to the subject. Instead, the subject is assigned Case from the preposition for.
Recall that the morphological realization of case assigned by prepositions in English is
accusative. If we look at (7c), we see that the sentence is unacceptable. The Theta Crite-
rion is not violated since John/him has a θ-role from Voi as the subject of the verb lose.
In this sentence, John/him lacks Case. It does not receive nominative Case, and there is
no preposition to assign Case to it. We posit the Case Filter , which states that DPs (and
pronominal Ds) must be assigned Case (Chomsky, 2000, 2001). Thus, sentence (7c) is
ungrammatical because it violates the Case Filter.
Consider, now, the following example.
(8) *Johni seems that ti likes chocolate.
Recall that seem-type verbs do not appear with a VoiP as there is no external argu-
ment. The subject of seem can be an expletive, which has no θ-role.
(9) It seems that John likes chocolate.
So, (8) does not violate the Theta Criterion. Observe, however, the subject John re-
ceives nominative Case in the lower clause, and in the higher clause. We propose, then,
that a DP can be assigned Case only once.
Case Filter : All DPs must be assigned Case once and only once.
Let’s consider the structure for (8) to see how it violates the Case Filter.
6.2. THE CASE FILTER 157
(10)
CP
C TP
DPi TP
John T VP
V CP
seems
C TP
that
ti TP
T vP
ti vP
v VP
V v tj DP
likej
D nP
chocolate
Here, the DP John receives nominative Case from the embedded finite T and raises
from the Specifier of VoiP to the specifier of the embedded TP, to satisfy EPP. In this
position, it is assigned nominative Case by the matrix finite T. Finally, the DP then raises
to the specifier of the matrix TP to satisfy EPP again. Thus, the Case Filter has been
violated. Every DP can be assigned Case once and only once, and the DP John has been
assigned Case twice.
6.2.1 Multiple Case Checking
We have seen above that Case assignment in English ensures that a DP receives Case
once and only once. This was captured in the proposed Case Filter as described above,
which prevents super-raising.
Not all languages have the same properties with respect to Case. We will see here that
in some languages Case be checked more than once; however, case is marked only once
on the DP. We call this multiple Case checking. In some languages, case can be marked
more than once on a DP, which we call case stacking. By way of introduction consider
the following example of multiple Case checking. For convenience each trace is indicated
with the Case value assigned in that position.
(11) Hungarian, Uralic (Massam, 1985, 70)2
a. Kiketi mondtad tiACC hogy szeretnél tiACC ha eljönnének tiNOM ?

who.acc you.said that you.would.like if came.3pl
‘Who did you say that you would like it if they came?’
b. * Kiki mondtad tiACC hogy szeretnél tiACC ha eljönnének tiNOM ?

who.nom you.said that you.would.like if came.3pl
‘Who did you say that you would like it if they came?’
c. Kitöl szeretned/l hogy ajándékot kapj tiABL

who.abl you.would.like that gift you.receive
‘Who would you like to receive that gift from?’
d. * Kiti szeretned/l hogy ajándékot kapj tiABL

who you.would.like that gift you.receive
‘Who would you like to receive that gift from?’
Consider the structure for (11a). Observe that kiket (‘who’) is the thematic object of
the lowest verb eljönnének (‘come’) and raises to SpecTP, where it is assigned nomina-
tive Case.3 It then raises to SpecCP, where it is assigned accusative Case from szeretnél
(‘you.would.like’). When keket (‘who’) raises to the matrix SpecCP it appears with ac-
cusative case marking. Kiss (1985) proposes that a DP that has undergone multiple case
checking surfaces with the most marked case.
(12)
2
Massam herself obtained these data from Kiss (1985).
3
It is not clear if this movement is actually necessary as Case can be assigned in situ. That is, if there is
no EPP property on T or strong [u ϕ ] on T, then movement to SpecTP is not necessary. The reader is urged to
consult the work of Katlin Kiss and others, such as Kiss (1994), for more details.
CP
DPi CP
kiket C TP
who pro l TP
T Voi/vP
Voi/v k T tl Voi/vP
Vj Voi/v tk VP
mondtad
tj CP
you.said
ti CP
C TP
hogy
that
TP
pro m TP
T Voi/vP
Voi/v o T tm Voi/vP
Vn Voi/v to VP
szeretnél
tn CP
AC
you.would.like
C
ti CP
C TP
ha
ti TP
if
T VP
NOM
Vp T tp ti
eljönnének
came.3pl
We turn now to case stacking. Recall that case stacking refers to the appearance of
more than one case marker on a nominal. It appears in a number of unrelated languages.
Consider the following (slightly amended) examples.4
(13) Korean, Koreanic (Cho, 2006, 143) and (Yoon, 1996, 110)
a. 영희에게가 돈이 많다.
Yenghuy-eykey-ka ton-i manh-ta.
Younghui-dat-nom money-nom be.plentiful-decl
‘Younghui has a lot of money.’
b. 나에게가 뱀이 무섭다.
na-eykey-ka paym-i mwusep-ta.
I-to-nom snakenom scary-decl
‘I’m afraid of snakes.’
(14) Lardil, Greater Pama–Nyungan (Richards, 2013)

a. Ngada latha karnjin-i marun-ngan-ku maarn-ku.
1sg spear wallaby-acc boy-gen-ins spear-ins
‘I speared the wallaby with the boy’s spear.’
b. Ngada kurri marun-ngan-i kantha-n.
1sg see boy-gen-acc father-acc
‘I saw the boy’s father.’
Note that case stacking in Korean is optional, while it is obligatory in Lardil. In Korean,
case stacking is generally associated with focus marking (Lee and Nie, 2022). Specifically,
they propose that the outer case marking is associated with a focus interpretation. See
also Chen (2018) for an extensive, cross-linguistic discussion on multiple Case assign-
ment.
6.2.2 Languages without Case
It is well known that not all languages manifest morphological case marking of any kind.
On the surface, Chinese languages are clear examples of languages without morpholog-
ical case, at least in traditional grammatical descriptions. Consider the following exam-
ples.

a. wǒ kān nǐ.
1 see 2
‘I see you.’
4
For more discussion on case stacking in Korean see Levin (2017).
b. nǐ kān wǒ.

2 see 1
‘You see me.’
(16) Cantonese, Sino-Tibetan

a. ngo5 gin2 lei5.
1 see 2
‘I see you.’
b. lei5 gin2 ngo5.
2 see 1
‘You see me.’
In the early days of Government and Binding Theory it was thought that Case-checking
was directional. Specifically, for Mandarin (and Chinese in general) the verb assigns ac-
cusative Case once to the right (Li, 1985, 1990).5 In fact, Mandarin has a restriction
that only one nominal can follow the verb in most circumstances. Consider the following
examples.
(17) Mandarin, Sino-Tibetan (adapted from Li, 2008)

a. Ta zai fang-li xie zi.
he at room-inside write word
‘He wrote in the room.’
b. Wo hui (mingtian) (zai xuexiao) (zixi-di) (gen Zhangsan) taolun zhe ge
I will tomorrow at school carefully with Zhangsan discuss this cl
wenti.
issue
‘I will discuss this issue (with Zhangsan) (carefully) (at school) (tomorrow).’
c. * Wo hui taolun zhe ge wenti (mingtian) (zai xuexiao) (zixi-di) (gen
I will discuss this cl issue tomorrow at school carefully with
Zhangsan).
Zhangsan
(‘I will discuss this issue (with Zhangsan) (carefully) (at school) (tomorrow).’)
As linear order is no longer available as a mechanism for Case assignment, we might

wonder if Case plays no role in Chinese grammar. Chinese languages exhibit passiviza-
tion, a phenomenon closely related to Case properties. Empirically, Li (2008) argues that
prepositions and clauses show that Case plays a role in Chinese syntax. We discuss only
PPs here. Prepositions are thought to be Case assigners. Thus, a PP does not receive
Case - the preposition heading the PP assigns Case to the DP inside the PP.6 Consider
5
For a good overview, see (Li, 2008).
6
This was known as the “Case Resistance Principle” (Stowell, 1981).
the following example. Note crucially that the PP wei ta does not appear in the position
of either the subject or the object.
(18) Mandarin, Sino-Tibetan (Li, 2008, 51)

wo wei ta kai le yi ge wuhui
I for him open LE one cl party
‘I held a party for him.’
Li also discusses the nominal marker de, adopting previous work that argues it assigns
Case. In Mandarin, nominals can take the following form.
(19) XP de NP
In (19), XP can be either an AdjP, NP (or DP, depending on one’s analysis of nominal
structure), or a clause. Crucially, it cannot be a PP. Consider the following data.
(20) Mandarin, Sino-Tibetan (Li, 2008)

a. zhuyao de na tiao daolu
main de that cl road
‘the main roads’
b. (na ge) xuesheng de (na ben) shu
(that cl) student cl that cl book
‘(that) student’s book’
c. wo gei ta de (na ben) shu
I give him cl (that cl) book
‘the book that I gave to him’
These facts fall out assuming Case is active in the grammar of Chinese. Whether Case
is univesally found in human language in general, and whether it’s found in Chinese in
particular is still a matter of ongoing research.
Bantu languages form a major sub-group of the Atlantic-Congo family, which is it-
self part of the disputed Niger-Congo super-family (Greenberg, 1955; Dimmendaal,
2008). Bantu languages are spoken across southern Africa. Nouns in Bantu lan-
guages belong to one of a large number of noun classes. In virtually all Bantu lan-
guages human noun are class one (singular) and class two (plural). The noun class
is indicated by a numeral attached to the noun in the gloss. For example, in (21a) the
noun for ‘girl’ appears with the numeral 1 in the gloss. Verbs generally agree with
the subject and (sometimes) the object. This agreement is indicated by sm and om in
the gloss.
Bantu languages in general do not display any obvious evidence of morphological case.
As such, it has been suggested that Bantu languages do not use Case in their grammar
(Diercks, 2012). Consider the following examples.
(21) Luganda, Altlantic-Congo (Diercks, 2012, 355)

a. Y-à-lábà òmùwálà.
1sm-pst-see 1.girl
‘He saw the girl.’
b. Òmùwálà y-à-mú-làbà.
1.girl 1sm-pst-1om-see
‘The girl saw him.’
Observe that the nominal òmùwálà (‘girl’) does not show any morphological evidence
of grammatical function. The forms are the same for both subject and object. Recall that
for English, a nominal cannot appear in a non-Case position. Thus, the subject of an
infinitive requires a preposition, as in the following example (Diercks, 2012, 259).
(22) a. It is possible that Mike will call Tegan.

b. It is possible *(for) Mike to call Tegan.
Diercks presents the following showing that the same constraint does not hold in
Swahili.
(23) Swahili, Altantic-Congo (Diercks, 2012, 259)

a. I-na-wezakana kwamba Maiko a-ta-m-pig-i-a Tegani simu.
9sm-prs-possible that 1.Michael 1sg-fut-beat-appl-fv 1.Tegan phone
‘It is possible that Michael will call Tegan.’
b. I-na-wezakana (*kwa) Maiko ku-m-pig-i-a Tegani simu.
9sm-prs-possible (for) 1.Michael inf-1om-beat-appl-fv 1.Tegan phone
‘It is possible for Michael to call Tegan.’
Diercks uses data as above to argue that not all languages use Case to license nouns.
For additional discussion, see Carstens and Diercks (2013) and Van Der Wal (2015).
6.2.3 Pseudo Noun Incorporation - When Case is missing
The Case Filter was proposed as a licensing mechanism for nominals in the sentence.
The idea is that a nominal phrase must somehow be licensed in order to appear in a
clause. There are instances where Case seems to be absent. Consider the following data.
Niuean is an ergative-absolutive language. In (24a), the subject appears with ergative
case and the object appears with absolutive case. Observe that the object in 24b has no
case (reduced morphology on the noun), and that the subject is marked with absolutive,
indicating reduced transitivity. Syntactically, only internal arguments undergo PNI. In
some cases the PNI object is strictly adjacent to the verb.
(24) Niuean, Austronesian (Massam, 2001)

a. Kua fakahū he ekekafo e tohi.
pvf send erg doctor abs letter
‘The doctor sent the letter.’
b. Kua fakahū tohi e ekekafo
pfv send letter abs doctor
‘The doctor sent the letter.’
Massam (2001) identifies this construction as pseudo noun incorporation (PNI). PNI
has since been found in a number of languages around the world. Objects that undergo
PNI typically lack case marking (Dayal, 2011; Massam, 2001). The PNI nominal phrase
typically does not exhibit a full extended functional projection. That is, it is usually a NP
or a NumP instead of DP.
The discussion above has suggested that Case is an indispensable mechanism for
licensing nominals. Of course, whether Case is universally responsible for such licensing
is controversial, as we saw for Chinese and Bantu above. We examine how PNI fits into the
discussion on nominal licensing. Clearly the object in (24b) has no Case. Observe further
in both Niuean and in Sakha below that the pseudo incorporated noun is adjacent to the
verb.
(25) Sakha, Turkic (Baker, 2014)

a. Masha salamaat-y türgennik sie-te
Masha.nom porridge-acc quickly eat-pst.3sg
‘Masha ate the porridge quickly.’
b. Masha türgennik salamaat sie-te
Masha.nom quickly porridge eat-pst.3sg
‘Masha ate porridge quickly.’
Based on a proposal by Baker (2014), Levin (2015, 150) proposes the following con-
straint on lexical categories.
(26) Condition on extended projection

All categories must be part of a complete extended projection.
The noun in an independent DP (one that is not pseudo incorporated) is part of a

complete extended projection, namely the DP.7 Recall that a pseudo incorporated noun
7
Actually, Levin assumes that the maximal projection in the extended nominal projection is KP (Case
Phrase), not DP; however, we do not cover this here.
6.3. DIAGNOSING SUBJECTHOOD 165
is not a full DP. Levin proposes that the noun’s adjacency with the verb makes it part of
the verb’s extended projection, i.e., part of the CP. See Levin for more details and empirical
illustrations beyond pseudo noun incorporation.
6.3 Diagnosing Subjecthood
The three diagnostics for subjecthood introduced at the beginning of the chapter are
all problematic in some way. The first diagnostic imputes being the initiator of action.
Consider the following examples. It is difficult to impute any sense of initiation of action
in (27a) and (27d). In (27b) and (27c), there is an event, but the subjects are not the
agents of the events, but rather the cause of the event.

a. The children fear monsters.
b. The lightning scared the dogs.
c. The water damaged the books.
d. It rained.
Case and agreement are problematic for various reasons. Some languages, such as
Mandarin Chinese and other Sinitic languages have neither agreement nor case. Recall
also the discussion on Bantu in Chapter 5, where it is proposed that at least some Bantu
languages do not have Case. Consider the following examples. Observe that there is no
overt case morphology nor agreement.

a. Zhangsan chi-le pingguo.
Zhangsan eat-pfv apple
‘Zhangsan ate an apple.’
b. Xuesheng-men zai kan shu.
student-pl prog see book
‘The students are reading.’
Thought Exercise 6.1: One possible way to diagnose subjecthood in Mandarin is

to use word order. Mandarin is SVO, so the DP before the verb is the subject. What
is wrong with a diagnostic like this? Explain in terms of circularity. How does this
relate to Anagnastapoulou’s discussion of subjecthood in Greek below?
6.3.1 Case Study 1: Greek
Next, consider the following Greek data. Note that Greek is an SVO language and that the
subject typically appears with nominative case and the object appears with accusative
case.
(29) Greek, Indo-European (Alexiadou and Anagnostopoulou, 2000, 174)

I Maria mu estile ena γrama. To γrama irθe simera.
the Mary.nom me sent a letter.acc the letter.nom arrived today
‘Mary sent me a letter. The letter arrived today.’
Consider, however, the following data. Observe that the argument that corresponds
to the subject in English (Peter ) bears dative case in Greek.
(30) Greek, Indo-European (Anagnostopoulou, 1999, 69)

a. Tu Petru tu aresi to krasi.
the Peter.dat cl.dat like the wine.nom
‘Peter likes the wine.’
b. To krasi tu aresi tu Petru.
the wine.nom cl.dat like the Peter.dat
‘Peter likes the wine.’
Given the Greek facts here and the data on quirky case above, it is clear that the crite-
ria in (1) cannot be used to define subjecthood. This section covers in depth discussions
of subjecthood in Greek and Tagalog.
We begin with Anagnostopoulou’s discussion on subjecthood in Greek. She notes first
that the more natural word order between the two examples above is the one in (30a),
suggesting Peter is the subject as Greek is an SVO language. (See Thought Exercise 6.1,
however.)
The next diagnostic she considers is clitic left-dislocation (CLLD). Consider first the
English example below.
(31) The old books we found in the attic, I gave them away to charity.
The topic, the old books we found in the attic, is coreferential with a pronoun inside the
clause. Accordingly many languages including Greek exhibit CLLD, in which a phrase is
moved to the left edge of the clause and is resumed by a pronominal clitic. Here are some
examples. In both examples, the left-dislocated phrase is resumed by a pronominal clitic
(shown in boldface).
(32) a. Spanish, Indo-European (Arregi, 2003)

Estos libros, Juan los leyó ayer

these books Juan them.cl read.3sg.pst yesterday
‘These books, Juan read them yesterday.’
b. Greek, Indo-European (Alexopoulou and Kolliakou, 2002, 196)
Tin parastasi ti skinothetise o Karlos Koun
the performance.f.acc 3sg.f.acc.cl directed.3sg the Karlos.nom Koun
‘Karolos Koun directed the performance.’
Now, one possible analysis for the dative marked experiencer in (30a) is that it is not a
subject but rather a clitic left-dislocated phrase. With this in mind, consider the following
contrast. Observe in the first example below that CLLD is not possible inside the relative
clause. In (33b), however, the experiencer argument can appear with a clitic. Thus, the
sentence-initial experiencer cannot be explained as CLLD. However, if the experiencer is
simply the subject, then the appearance of the clitic is not mysterious.
(33) Greek, Indo-European (Anagnostopoulou, 1999, 69)

a. # Ta vivlia pu to Jaani tu edhosa ine loghotehnika
the books that the John.dat 3sg.cl gave.1sg are literary
‘The books that I gave John are literature.’
b. Ta vivlia pu to Jaani tu aresun ine ta loghotehnika
the books that the John.dat 3sg.cl like.3pl are the literary
‘The books that John likes are literature.’
The last diagnostic we cover for Greek concerns elided subjects. Consider first the
following English data. Observe that a null subject is possible in the second clause if it is
coreferential with the subject in the first clause. Observe that if either the pronoun in the
second clause is not the subject or the antecedent in the first clause is not the subject,
then a null pronoun is not possible.

a. John1 ate some cake and he1 /e 1 drank some coffee.
b. John1 ate some cake and Mary asked him1 /*e 1 how it tasted.
c. I gave John1 some cake and he1 /*e 1 ate it.
Greek has a similar restriction. Consider the following data. Observe that the null
subject in (35a) can be coreferential with the subject in the previous clause, but not with
the object in the previous clause.
(35) Greek, Indo-European (Anagnostopoulou, 1999, 70f )

Dative Nominative Nominative Dative

experiencer agent theme recipient
word order preverbal preverbal postverbal postverbal
clitic doubling subject subject – CLLD
ellipsis yes yes no no
Table 6.1: Subject Properties of Greek Experiencers
a. O Jannis1 aghorase to vivlio2 ke e 1/*2 harike

The John bought the book and e was.pleased
‘John bought the book and was pleased’
b. * O Jannis1 aghorase to vivlio2 ke e 2 ton1 evharistise
The John bought the book and e cl pleased
(‘John bought the book and (it) pleased him’)
In this light, consider the following additional data. Observe that the null subject in
the second clause can only be referential with the dative-marked argument in the first
clause. Crucially, in (36b) it cannot be coreferential with the nominative argument. This
underscores the lack of correlation between case marking and grammatical function.
(36) Greek, Indo-European Anagnostopoulou (1999, 71)

a. Tis Marias1 tis aresun ta mathimatika ke e 1 latrevi tin
the Mary.dat cl.dat like.3sg the mathematics.nom.pl and e adore.3sg the
musiki.
music.acc.sg
‘Mary likes mathematics and adores music.’
b. Tis Marias1 tis1 aresi o Petros2 alla e 1/*2 sihenete tin
the Mary-dat cl.dat like.3pl the Peter.nom.pl but e detest.3sg the
Katerina.
Katerina.acc
‘Mary likes Peter but hates Katerina.’
The results are summarized in Table 6.1. The dative experiencer and the nominative
agent are both preverbal. They both allow doubling by a clitic in the absence of CLLD. The
dative recipient only allows CLLD in the appropriate environment. Finally only the nomi-
native agent and the dative experiencer both allow ellipsis of the subject in a subsequent
clause.
6.3.2 Case Study 2: Tagalog
We turn next to Tagalog and consider a battery of diagnostics for subjecthood. Before we
discuss Tagalog in detail, we need to become familiar with the Philippine Voice Alignment
system.8 Tagalog, like many Austronesian languages, has a voice system that makes some
element in the clause prominent. Consider the following data.
(37) Tagalog, Austronesian (Kroeger, 1993, 13f )

a. b-um-ili ang lalake ng isda sa tindahan
<pfv.av>buy nom man gen fish dat store
‘The man bought the fish at the store.’
b. b-in-ili-∅ ng lalake ang isda sa tindahan
<pfv>buy-ov gen man nom fish dat store
c. b-in-ilh-an ng lalake ng isda ang tindahan
<pfv>buy-locv gen man gen fish nom store
d. i-b-in-ili ng lalake ng isda ang bata
benv-<pfv>buy gen man gen fish nom child
‘The man bought the fish for the child.’
Note that there is much disagreement on the labels of the case markers for Tagalog
and related Austronesian languages. This discussion follows Kroeger’s terminology for
convenience. What is generally agreed upon for Tagalog is that the ang-marked nominal
(labelled nom here) is taken to be the primary argument of the clause. This is reflected
in the verbal morphology. Observe that in (37a) the agent of the sentence (‘the man’)
appears with nominative case, and the verb has an infix that indicates that the subject is
marked nominative. The abbreviation av indicates that the external argument (the actor)
is marked with nominative case. In (37b) the theme (‘the fish’) is marked with nominative
case. Observe that the verb has a suffix (ov) that indicates that the theme (or object) is
marked with nominative case. The following examples illustrate the same point with the
location and the benefactee, respectively. In all four examples, observe that the marking
on the verb indicates which nominal appears with nominative case.
The question we ask now is the following. What is the “subject” of a sentence in Taga-
log? There are two logical choices: (i) the nominative-marked nominal, or (ii) the actor
(external argument). We will consider various diagnostics in turn.
The quantifier lahat (‘all’) generally appears with the nominal it modifies (Schachter,
1976). This quantifier can also float to a position immediately to the right of the verb.
When floated, it can refer only to the nominative-marked argument. Consider the follow-
ing examples.

8
See Erlewine et al. (2017) for more details.
a. S-um-usulat lahat ang mga bata ng mga liham.

<av.impf>write all nom pl child gen pl letter
‘All the children are writing letters’ (NOT ‘The children are writing all the
letters.’)
b. S-in-usulat-∅ lahat ng mga bata ang mga liham.
<impf>write-ov all gen pl child nom pl letter
‘The children are writing all the letters’ (NOT ‘All the children are writing
letters.’)
Thus, quantifier float targets the nominative argument, regardless of its thematic re-
lation to the verb.
Next, consider the following facts about relative clauses. It is well known among many
Austronesian languages that only the nominative argument can be relativized, while in
English any argument can be relativized. Consider the English data first. Observe that
either the subject, direct object, or indirect object can be relativized.9

a. the boy [who __ gave an apple to the teacher]
b. the apple [that the boy gave __ to the teacher]
c. the teacher [who the boy gave an apple to __ ]
Turn now to the following Tagalog data. Observe that only the nominative argument
can be relativized. In (40a) observe that isda (‘fish’) has been relativized and that the verb
indicates that the thematic object bears nominative Case.
(40) Tagalog, Austronesian (Kroeger, 1993, 23f )

a. isda-ng i-b-in-igay ng lalake sa bata
fish-lnk pfv-<ov>give gen man dat child
‘the fish which was given to the child by the man’
b. bata-ng b-in-igy-an ng lalake ng isda
child-lnk <pfv>-give-datv gen man gen fish
‘the child that was given a fish by the man’
c. * isda-ng nag-bigay ang lalake sa bata
fish-lnk av-give nom man dat chilnnd
(‘the fish that the man gave to the boy’)
Consider next possessor raising (also called “possessor ascension”). The possessor of
an object can be topicalized and separated from the possessed noun. This phenomenon
is normally restricted to inalienable possessors. Here is an example.
9
Note that for most speakers the indirect object can be relativized only if it is the object of a preposition.
6.4. ERGATIVITY 171

a. Pinutol ng magsasaka ang sungay ng kalabaw
cut.ov gen farmer nom horn gen buffalo
‘The farmer cut off the buffalo’s horn.’
b. Ang kabalaw, pinutol ng magsasaka ang sungay
nom buffalo cut.obj gen farmer nom horn
‘The buffalo, the farmer cut off (its) horn.’
Only the possessor of the nominative argument can be raised. Consider the following
example.

a. Si Juan, k-in-agat ng aso ang anak
nom.pn Juan <ov>-bite gen dog nom child
‘Juan, a dog bit (his) child.’
b. * Si Juan, k-um-agat ang aso ng anak
nom.pn Juan <av>-bite nom dog gen child
(‘Juan, the dog bit (his) child.’)
In this section, we have seen three lines of evidence that the nominative marked ar-
gument in Tagalog (the ang argument) functions as the subject regardless of its thematic
role.10 Specifically, we saw that quantifier float, relativization, and possessor raising all
affect only the nominative argument.
6.4 Ergativity
Not all languages exhibit a nominative and accusative Case pattern as described above.
Many of the world’s languages exhibit an ergative/absolutive Case agreement system.
In these languages, the subject of a transitive clause (the AGENT) is assigned ergative
Case, while the object of a transitive clause (the PATIENT) and the single argument of an
intransitive clause (the SUBJECT) are assigned absolutive Case. Thus, in the sentence
John chopped the tree, John is the AGENT and the tree is the PATIENT. In the sentence
John laughed, John is the SUBJECT. Figure 6.1 shows these two patterns of case align-
ment. In nominative accusative languages, the SUBJECT (S) and the AGENT (A) both
have nominative case, while the PATIENT (P) has accusative case. In ergative languages
the AGENT (A) has ergative case, while the SUBJECT (S) and the PATIENT (P) have abso-
lutive case.
10
See Kroeger (1993) for additional argumentation.
nominative-accusative ergative-absolutive
S S
NOM ABS
ACC ERG
A P A P
Figure 6.1: Case Alignment Systems
Nominative languages are more widely known simply because the world’s more com-
monly studied languages (as L2 languages) happen to be nominative. Ergative languages,
however, are found all over the world. Let’s begin with an illustration of nominative-
accusative alignment. Here is a Korean example that illustrates the nominative-accusative
Case system. Note the case markers.
(43) Case in Korean

a. 민수가 웃었다
Minswu-ka wus-ess-ta.
Minsoo-nom laugh-pst-decl
‘Minsoo laughed.’
b. 민수가 사과를 먹었다
Minswu-ka sakwa-lul mek-ess-ta.
Now, let’s look at an example in an ergative language. The following example is from
Dyirbal (dbl). Note that in Dyirbal there is no overt marker of absolutive Case. Ergative
Case is marked with a suffix, however. In (44a), mother is the SUBJECT and has abso-
lutive Case. In (44b), mother is the AGENT and has ergative Case; father is the PATIENT
and has absolutive Case.
(44) Dyirbal, Pama-Nyungan (Dixon, 1994, 161)

a. yabu-∅ banaga-ny u
mother-abs returned-nonfut
‘Mother returned.’
b. ŋuma-∅ yabu-ŋgu bura-n
father-abs mother-erg saw-nonfut
‘Mother saw father.’
6.4. ERGATIVITY 173
Dyirbal (dbl) is a Pama–Nyungan language spoken in the Cairns rain forests on the
north east coast of Australia. It is a severely endangered language with only about
ten speakers left (Dixon, 1987).
In the first two situations above, the two different Case systems were illustrated by
differences in case marking on the nouns. Consider first the following examples from
Khanty, a nominative-accusative language. Note that the subject agreement is the same
for both the SUBJECT in (45a) and for the AGENT in (45b). (The vowel change is related to
phonological properties of Khanty and does not bear on the discussion here.) The object
agreement is shown in bold face.
(45) Khanty, Uralic (Dalrymple and Nikolaeva, 2011, 142)

a. (ma) je:l@n o:m@s-l-@m
I at.home sit-prs-1sg.sbj
‘I’m sitting at home.’
b. (ma) tam kalaN-@t we:l-s@-l-am
I these reindeer-pl kill-pst-pl.obj-1sg.sbj
‘I killed these reindeer.’
Contrast the example above with an ergative-absolutive language, Abaza. Note that
gender is neutralized in the 3rd person absolutive, but is distinguished in the ergative.
That is, there are separate forms for he and she in the ergative only.
(46) Abaza, Northwest Caucasian (Dixon, 1994, 43), citing (Allen, 1956)
a. d-θád
3sg.abs-gone
‘S/he has gone.’
b. h-θád
1pl.abs-gone
‘We have gone.’
c. h-l-bád
1pl.abs-3sg.f.erg-saw
‘She saw us.’
d. d-h-bád
3sg.abs-1pl.erg-saw
‘We saw him/her.’
These data show a clear distinction between absolutive Case and ergative Case for the
3rd person. Thus, the subject of the intransitive in (46a) (the SUBJECT) and the object of
the transitive in (46d) (the PATIENT) both have the same form /d-/. This contrasts with
the subject of the transitive (the AGENT) in (46c), /l-/. As mentioned, the 3rd person
ergative marker distinguishes gender. Thus, (46c) can only mean ‘She saw us’. The form
for ‘He saw us’ has a different morpheme. The distinction for the 1st person plural is
less clear, since both forms are /h-/ in the absolutive and the ergative. However, the
data in (46c) and (46d) show that they occupy different positions, suggesting the need to
maintain the distinction.
Warning! Do not confuse the terms ‘AGENT’ and ‘PATIENT’ with the theta-
relations of the same name!
AGENT - subject of a transitive clause
<agent> - theta-relation indicating volitional action
In a nominative-accusative language like English, the SUBJECT and the AGENT have
many properties in common. They both appear with the same morphological case (nomi-
native) in opposition to the PATIENT (which bears accusative case). The SUBJECT and the
AGENT can also serve as the ‘same subject’ in conjunction constructions. In the following
examples, the missing argument in the second conjunct is ‘John’. In the first example,
the overt ‘John’ and the empty argument are both subjects – with nominative Case. In the
second example, the overt ‘John’ is the subject (nominative), and the empty argument is
an object – in an accusative Case position. Leaving the the argument empty is possible
only when both arguments are subjects – that is when they both have nominative Case.
(47) a. John1 laughed and he1 kicked the tree.

b. John1 laughed and e 1 kicked the tree.
c. John1 laughed and Mary kicked him1 .
d. * John1 laughed and Mary kicked e 1
In ergative languages, the SUBJECT and the PATIENT share similar properties. They
both appear with the same morphological case, absolutive, in opposition to the AGENT,
which appears with ergative case. We call this phenomenon morphological ergativity.
In some cases, the SUBJECT and the PATIENT can also serve as the ‘same argument’.
This phenomenon is called syntactic ergativity. Morphological ergativity is more com-
mon than syntactic ergativity. If a language is syntactically ergative, it is also morpho-
logically ergative; however, if a language is morphologically ergative, it is not necessarily
syntactically ergative. Dyirbal is an example of a language that is both morphologically
and syntactically ergative. Consider the following example.

ŋuma-∅1 banaga-ny u e1 yabu-ŋgu bura-n
father-abs return-non.fut mother-erg see-non.fut
‘Father returned and mother saw (him).’
6.4. ERGATIVITY 175
nominative-accusative languages ergative-absolutive languages

English, Korean, Japanese Dyirbal, Abaza, Basque
Turkish, Russian, Sanskrit Niuean, Inuktitut, Tibetan
online source: WALS Case Alignment Systems
Some ergative languages have passives as discussed in the previous chapter. Some
ergative languages have another kind of construction called an antipassive. Descrip-
tively, the passive transformation demotes the subject to an oblique case (that is, a by-
phrase) or omits it altogether, and promotes the thematic object to the grammatical sub-
ject position. An antipassive demotes the absolutive object of a transitive clause to an
oblique Case or omits it altogether, and shifts the ergative subject to the absolutive sub-
ject. Consider the following data.
a. yabu-∅ ŋuma-ŋgu bura-n

mother-abs father-erg see-non.fut
‘Father saw mother.’
b. ŋuma-∅ bural-ŋg-nyu yabu-gu
father-abs see-antip-nonfut mother-dat
‘Father saw mother.’
The first sentence is transitive and has an ergative subject and absolutive object. The
second sentence is intransitive with an absolutive subject. The absolutive object has been
demoted to an oblique (dative) object, and is optional (just like the by-phrase in English).
Another illustration of the antipassive is offered by Inuktitut. Consider the following
data. In the first example, the agent is marked with ergative case, and the patient is
marked with absolutive case, as expected. This is reflected in the agreement on the verb.
In the second example, notice that the AGENT is now the SUBJECT of an intransitive
sentence, so is now absolutive. The PATIENT has been demoted to an oblique, marked by
mik.
(50) Inuktitut, Eskimo-Aleut (Spreng, 2005, 248)
a. angupti-up arnaq-∅ kunik-taa

man-erg woman-abs kiss-ptcp.3sg.3sg
‘The man kissed the woman.’
b. anguti-∅ kunik-si-vuq arna-mik
man-abs kiss-antip-ind.3sg woman-obl
‘The man kissed the woman.’
Let’s consider a final example. Consider the following Squamish (squ) data. In the
first example, we see ergative and absolutive agreement on the verb rather than case
marking on the DPs. The second example contains detransitivizing morphology (detr),
which functions similarly to the passive. Here, the PATIENT retains its status as the
absolutive argument, but the AGENT has been demoted to an oblique.
(51) Squamish, Salishan (Jacobs, 1994, 123f)

a. na ch’em’t-∅-as ta Tom ta Pita
rl bite-tr-3abs-3erg det Tom det Peter
‘Tom bit Peter’
b. s-es men lhích’-it-em-∅ tl’a T’it’ki7tsten kwetsi síten
nom-gen just cuttr-detr-3abs obl/det T.(name) det basket
‘Then T. cut the basket.’
Some languages exhibit properties of both nominative-accusative languages and ergative-

absolutive languages. Such language are said to exhibit split ergativity. Consider the
following Halkomelem data. Halkomelem exhibits typical properties of ergativity. Only
the subject of a transitive construction triggers agreement. The subject of an intransitive
construction does not trigger verbal agreement.
Halkomelem (hur) is an endangered Salishan language spoken in and around Van-

couver, Canada. In addition to split ergativity, Halkomelem also exhibits an interest-
ing constraint in which a sentence cannot have a third person object and a second
person subject. In such a situation, a passive is used (Galloway, 1993).
(52) Halkomelem, Salishan (Wiltschko, 2014, 169)
a. q’ó:y-t-es te Strang te qwá:l

kill-tr-3.erg det Strang det mosquito
‘Strang killed the mosquito.’
b. í:mex te Strang
walking det Strang
‘Strang is walking.’
Note that the examples above contain 3rd person subjects. Consider now the following
data, which contain 1st and 2nd person subjects.
(53) Halkomelem, Salishan (Wiltschko, 2003, 79)

a. máy-t-tsel
help-tr-1sg.nom
‘I help him.’
6.4. ERGATIVITY 177
b. yó:ys-tsel
work-1sg.nom
‘I work.’
c. máy-t-chexw
help-tr-2sg.nom
‘You help him.’
d. yó:ys-chexw
work-2sg.nom
‘You work.’
In contrast to the data in (52), the 1st and 2nd person subjects trigger subject agree-
ment in both transitive and intransitive verbs, suggesting nominative-accusative align-
ment. This is an instance of split ergativity, as 1st and 2nd persons trigger nominative-
accusative alignment, while 3rd person triggers ergative-absolutive alignment. In this
case, we call this a person-based split. There are other kinds of splits, which can be
found in the discussions in the references.
The analysis of ergative-absolutive languages has given rise to a huge output of re-
search (Bittner and Hale, 1996; Wiltschko, 2006; Johns, 1992; Legate, 2008; Polinsky,
2016; Coon, 2013; Baker and Bobaljik, 2017; Coon and Preminger, 2017; Marantz, 1984).
For a typological overview see Dixon (1994). For a survey of generative approaches to erga-
tivity see Aldridge (2008). The difficulty in analyzing ergativity resides in the fact that the
Case of the highest argument varies. Assuming the subject appears or receives Case from
T, in dyadic verbs, T must assign ergative Case, and in monadic verbs, T must assign ab-
solutive Case. This is nothing more than a stipulation of the facts, and such a proposal
has never been seriously entertained. Marantz (1984, 1991) proposed a novel and signif-
icantly different theory of Case assignment, which has gained much ground. Specifically,
the Dependent Theory of Case works as follows. Languages parametrically choose be-
tween how dependent Case is assigned. In nominative-accusative languages, dependent
Case is assigned to the lower argument. In ergative-absolutive languages, dependent Case
is assigned to the higher argument.
(54) 1 Nominative-Accusative Languages:
(a) If there is one DP in a Case domain, it receives nominative Case
(b) If there are two DPs in a Case domain, the lower one receives
dependent Case: accusative
2 Ergative-Absolutive Languages:
(a) If there is one DP in a Case domain, it receives absolutive Case

(b) If there are two DPs in a Case domain, the higher one receives
dependent Case: ergative
6.5 Split intransitivity
Consider the following Lakota data, paying close attention to 1st person agreement. Note
that there is no agreement for 3rd person in any of these forms.
(55) Lakota, Siouan (Mithun, 1991, 514)
a. a-wá-’u
loc-1sg.ag-bring
‘I brought it.’
b. wa-ktékte
1sg.ag-kill
‘I’ll kill him.’
c. a-má-’u
loc-1sg.pat-bring
‘He brought me.’
d. ma-ktékte
1sg.pat-kill
‘He’ll kill me.’
Lakota (lkt) is a dialect of the Sioux language, a member of the Sioux fam-
ily, spoken in central North America. The other dialects are Dakota and Nakota.
Sioux is an SOV language with agglutinating morphology. See Buechel and Man-
hart (2002) for more details. Lakota figures prominently in the film Dances With
Wolves.
From the data above we can see that /wa-/ indexes the 1st person subject, and that
/ma-/ indexes the 1st person object. In the examples shown so far, the agreement mor-
pheme with the abbreviation ag (agent) references the subject and the agreement mor-
pheme with the abbreviation pat (patient) references the object. Consider, now, the fol-
lowing intransitive forms.
(56) Lakota, Siouan (Mithun, 1991, 515)

a. wa-psíča
1sg.ag-jump
‘I jumped.
6.5. SPLIT INTRANSITIVITY 179
nominative-accusative
AG
S
PAT
AG PAT
A P
Figure 6.2: Split Intransitivity
b. wa-hí
1sg.ag-come
‘I came.’
c. ma-kh úže
1sg.pat-sick
‘I’m sick.’
d. ma-xwá
1sg.pat-sleepy
‘I’m sleepy.’
Observe with the verbs jump and come subject agreement is indexed by the agent affix,
as expected. However, with be sick and be sleepy the subject is indexed by the patient
affix. This system of agreement is called split intransitivity or active-stative alignment.
This case alignment system is shown in Figure 6.2. The terms agent and patient are
used rather than the terms for Case introduced in the previous chapter. One reason for
this is that a precise mechanism for Case assignment in split intransitive languages is
a matter of ongoing research. As such, descriptive terms from the typological literature
are used (see for example Blake, 1994). As Mithun (1991) shows, monovalent verbs that
depict a more stative or less volitional eventuality tend to take patient agreement, while
monovalent verbs that depict a more active or more volitional eventuality tend to appear
with agent agreement.
Dixon (1979, 1994) distinguishes between split-S split intransitivity and fluid-S
split intransitivity. In split-S split intransitivity monovalent verbs are divided into two
classes as described. Each member of the two classes typically behaves consistently with
respect to agreement. That is, verbs that appear with agent agreement always take agent
agreement. Verbs that appear with patient agreement always take patient agreement.
Oneida is a split-S split intransitive language. Consider the following examples.11 Note
11
The symbol ‘v’ represents the sound [2]. The apostrophe represents a glottal stop. The colon represents
vowel length and can be a morpheme in Oneida.
that there is no agreement for neuter arguments in Oneida. That is, nothing agrees with
‘it’ in these examples.
Oneida (one) is an Iroquoian language spoken in Eastern North America on the

border between Canada and the United States. It is a critically endangered lan-
guage although revitalization efforts are underway. It is a highly polysynthetic
language with extensive agreement and noun incorporation. Like all Iroquoian
languages, it lacks labial consonants other than /w/ (Lounsbury, 1953; Michel-
son and Doxtator, 2002).
(57) Oneida, Iroquoian (Michelson and Doxtator, 2002, 391,908,391,895,213,913)

a. wa’khni:nú:
wa’-k-hninu-:́
fact-1sg.ag-buy-punc
‘I bought it.’
b. vwakka:lí:
v-wak-kaly-:́
fut-1sg.pat-bite-punc
‘It will bite me.’
c. wa’ehni:nú:
wa’-ye-hninu-:́
fact-3sg.f.ag-buy-punc
‘She bought it.’
d. vyakoya’takénha’
v-yako-ya’takenha-’
fut-3sg.f.pat-help-punc
‘It will help her.’
e. waha:kv́:
wa’-ha-kv-:́
fact-3sg.m.ag-see-punc
‘He saw it.’
f. wa’tho’nikuha:lv́:
wa’-te-ho-’nikuhal-v́:
fact-duc-3sg.m.pat-bother-punc
‘It bothered him.’
In the transitive examples above, the active agreement prefix indexes the subject and
the patient agreement prefix indexes the object.
In fluid-S split intransitive languages, many monovalent verbs can appear with either
agent agreement or patient agreement. In such a case, there is a change in meaning. When
the verb appears with agent agreement, then the subject is generally more in control of
6.5. SPLIT INTRANSITIVITY 181
the event. When the verb appears with patient agreement, then the subject is generally
less in control of the event. Consider the following pair of examples from Northern Pomo.
The agreement (nominative versus accusative) correlates with the degree to which the
speaker is in control of the event.
(58) Northern Pomo, Pomoan (Deal and O’Connor, 2010, 4)

a. man c’eday-či
3sg.f.nom slide-asp
‘She slides/slid (on purpose).’
b. ma:dal c’eday-či
3sg.f.acc slide-asp
‘She slides/slid (by accident)’
Here is one final example from Tibetan. The voluntary form has agent marking on
the subject pronoun in addition to overt marking on the verb for voluntary action. The
second example lacks agent marking. Chang and Chang note that the second example
would be used if the speaker is referring to an event of going to Lhasa with their parents.
That is, the speaker is not in control of the event.
(59) Tibetan, Sino-Tibetan (Chang and Chang, 1980, 17)

a. Na-s lhasa-r p’yin-pa-yin
1-ag Lhasa-to went-pfv-voluntary
‘I went to Lhasa. (by myself)’
b. Na lhasa-r p’yin-pa-yin
1 Lhasa-to went-pfv-involuntary
‘I went to (was taken to) Lhasa.’
Key concepts
• unaccusative - A monovalent verb with no VoiP, and no external argument. The

single argument of an unaccusative is merged inside VP.
• unergative - A monovalent verb with a VoiP. The single argument of an unergative

is merged in the Specifier of VoiP.
• ergative - The case assigned to the subject of a bivalent verb in ergative-absolutive

languages.
• absolutive - The case assigned to the subject of a monovalent verb or the object of
a bivalent verb in ergative-absolutive languages
• split ergativity - A phenomenon in which a language exhibits some properties of

ergative-absolutive alignment and some properties of nominative-accusative align-
ment
• split intransitivity - A phenomenon in which the single argument of a monovalent

verb sometimes has subject-like properties and sometimes has object-like proper-
ties, especially in terms of agreement.
Further reading
• Aldridge (2008) - This paper provides a brief discussion of recent generative ap-
proaches to ergativity
• Dixon (1994) - This is one of the most comprehensive discussions on ergativity

and split ergativity from a typological perspective. Much of the discussion should be
accessible at this stage.
• Hale and Keyser (2002) - This monograph discusses the argument structure of
verbs and fleshes out the distinction between unaccusatives and unergatives in de-
tail. In particular, it deals with the problem noted at the end of this chapter. Some
of the discussion is rather advanced; however, this data rich book is strongly rec-
ommended.
• Levin and Rappaport Hovav (1994) - This monograph offers an in depth discussion
of the lexical properties of unaccusative verbs.
• McGregor (2009) - This paper provides a recent discussion on the typological im-
plications of ergativity.
• Perlmutter and Soames (1978) - This paper is the original proposal for the distinc-
tion between unaccusatives and unergatives.
Chapter 7
Wh-movement and relative clauses
• understand the basic properties of wh-movement
• be able to draw trees for various kinds of wh-questions
• understand and account for the differences between pied-piping and preposition
stranding
• understand the difference between matrix and embedded questions
• understand the notion of Attract Closest and how it relates to multiple wh-questions
• understand the structure of relative clauses and have an appreciation for the diver-
sity of relatuve clauses
• understand how wh-movement is constrained and understand the theoretical un-

derpinnings of these constraints
7.1 Review of Wh-movement
Recall that languages differ with respect to overt wh-movement. Consider the following
English and Mandarin sentences, paying attention to the position of the object.
(1) a. Alice bought an apple.

b. Míngxīng mǎi le pínggǔo.
Mingxing buy prfv apple
‘Mingxing bought an apple.’ [Mandarin Chinese]
Recall that the verb buy assigns at θ-role to the object DP an apple. We say that the
direct object is in its thematically related position.
183
184 CHAPTER 7. WH-MOVEMENT AND RELATIVE CLAUSES
(2)
VP VP
V DP V DP
buy mǎi
an apple pínggǔo
Now consider the following sentences, in which the direct object is being questioned.
(3) a. What did Alice buy?

b. Míngxīng mǎi le shénme.
Mingxing buy prfv what
What did Alice buy?’ [Mandarin Chinese]
A wh-word (or wh-phrase such as which apple) appears at the left edge of the English
sentence, and there is now a gap in the position of the direct object. In the Mandarin
question, though, the question word remains in the same position as the object in the
declarative sentence. That is, it remains in its thematically related position.
Recall also that in many languages the wh-phrase appears at the left edge of the
clause where it takes scope. Here are some examples.
a. Peter hat einen Apfel auf dem Markt gekauft

Peter has an.acc apple at the.dem market bought
‘Peter bought an apple at the market.’
b. Was hat Peter auf dem Markt gekauft?
what has Peter at the.dem market bought
‘What did Peter buy at the market?’
c. Wo hat Peter den Apfel gekauft?
Where has Peter the.acc apple bought
‘Where did Peter buy the apple?’
Onondaga has relatively free word order, so the direct object can appear anywhere
within the clause. If the direct object is questioned, however, the wh-phrase (nwade’)
must appear at the left edge of the clause.
(5) Onondaga, Iroquoian (Gloria Williams and Nora Carrier, speakers)
a. John wa-ha-hní:no˛-’ ne’ ganakda’

John fact-3sg.sbj-buy-pfv det bed
‘John bought a bed.’
7.1. REVIEW OF WH-MOVEMENT 185
b. wahahní:no˛’ ne’ ganakda’ John

he bought it det bed John
c. ne’ ganakda’ John wahahní:no˛’
det bed John he bought it
d. nwade’ John wahahní:no˛’
what John he bought it
‘What did John buy?’
e. * John wahahní:no˛’ nwade’
John he bought it what
(‘What did John buy?’)
Onondaga (ono) is an Iroquoian language spoken in eastern North America on

the border between Canada and the United States. Due to aggressive coloniza-
tion there are very few speakers of Onondaga remaining. Onondaga is a polysyn-
thetic language with extensive morphology and noun incorporation. The most
extensive grammar of Onondaga is found in Woodbury (2018).
Finally, consider the following Chamorro data. First, note that Chamorro is a verb-
initial language. (See Interchapter D for more information on verb-initial languages.) Note
that the case alignment system in Chamorro is rather complex, so case markers are
simply identified as case here.
(6) Chamorro, Austronesian (Chung, 2009, 92)
a. Ha-konfitma i kotte i intensión i Covenant Agreement.

agr-confirm the court the intension the Covenant Agreement
‘The court confirmed the intention of the Covenant Agreement.’
b. Hägas ha-läknus ennao siha na planu si Speaker Benigno R. Fitial.
long ago agr-presented that pl lk plan case Speaker Benigno R. Fitial
‘Speaker Benigno R. Fitial presented those plans long ago.’
Again, observe that the wh-phrases all appear at the left edge of the clause.
(7) Chamorro, Austronesian (Chung, 2009, 94)
a. Hayi siña luma’la’ gi $3.05 gi ora na suetdu?

who can wh.agr.live loc $3.05 loc hour one salary
‘Who can live on an hourly wage of $3.05?’
b. Pära manu guätu na un-konni’ si Rita?
to where over there comp agr-take case Rita
‘To where did you take Rita?’
c. Hafa malago’-mu?
what wh.want-agr
‘What do you want?’
Recall that wh-movement targets SpecCP, a proposal going back to Chomsky (1977).
In languages like English, German, Onondaga, and Chamorro if C has a [+wh] feature
and has the EPP property, the closest wh-phrase raises to SpecCP. Consider the following
English example.
(8)
CP
C[+wh] TP
DPi TP
Alice T VoiP
did
ti VoiP
Voi vP
v VP
Vj v tj
DP
buy
what
The following example illustrates the structure of (9).

(9)
CP
DPk CP
what thhiC[+wh] TP
Tj C DPi TP
did
Alice tj VoiP
ti VoiP
Voi vP
v VP
Vj v tj tk
buy
As with polarity questions, the auxiliary (or modal) in T raises to C. Note that, in
English, if the corresponding declarative form has no auxiliary a dummy do appears in
the interrogative form, as in the example above.
Consider, next, the following French data, paying attention to the difference between
standard French and colloquial French.1 Note that the use of the hyphen in the first
example is an orthographic convention of French. The verb and the pronoun are two
separate words.
(10) French, Indo-European (Eric Mathieu, pc)
a. Où achètes-tu du fromage?
where buy.2sg-you of the cheese
‘Where do you buy cheese?’ [Standard French]
b. Où tu achètes du fromage?
where you buy.2sg of the cheese
‘Where do you buy cheese?’ [Colloquial French]
c. Où que tu achètes du fromage?
where comp you buy.2sg of the cheese
‘Where do you buy cheese?’ [Colloquial French]
1
Note that there is a great deal of dialectal variation in varieties of spoken French around the world. The
data here are typical of some varieties heard in France and in Quebec. Note that these are also not the only
way to form questions in French. For more discussion on wh-movement in French, see Kayne (1975). See
Tailleur (2013) for the diverse range of wh-questions in various varieties of French. See also Poletto and
Pollock (2004) for discussions on wh-questions in Romance in general.
Recall that the lexical verb raises to T in French if there is no auxiliary. Following the
same line of reasoning above, we can conclude that in Standard French the verb raises
to C in questions. Thus, we can generalize and say that T raises to C in both English
and in Standard French. Note that in Colloquial French T does not raise to C; however,
a complementizer may appear. These facts suggest the following structures, with the
optional complementizer as shown.
(11) Standard French
CP
AdvPi CP
Où C TP
Tm C DP TP
n
Voil T tu tm VoiP
vk Voi tn VoiP
Vj v tl <vP,vP>
achètes
vP ti
tk VP
tj PP
du fromage
(12) Colloquial French

CP
AdvPi CP
Où C TP
(que)
DPn TP
tu T VoiP
Voil T tn VoiP
vk Voi tl <vP,vP>
Vj v vP ti
achètes
tk VP
tj PP
du fromage
Next we review embedded wh-questions. Consider the following examples.
(13) a. What does John think that Mary bought?

b. John knows what Mary bought.
c. I wonder what Mary bought.
The sentence in (13a) is a matrix question, which normally requires an answer. Exam-
ples (13b) and (13c) are both embedded questions (sometimes called indirect questions).
The sentence in (13b) is a statement that John knows the answer to the question, “What
did Mary buy?”. The sentence in (13c), however, is often used as a polite way to ask a
question. Thus, while syntactically and semantically (13c) is simply a statement about
what the speaker is wondering, it is pragmatically a question.2 Given that the following
tree is quite large, we use an abbreviated vP layer. Note that the full structure contains
VoiP > vP > VP
(14) a. Mary wonders what Susan bought.

2
Dayal (2016) discusses a number of situations where the syntactic and semantic structure of a sentence
diverges from its pragmatic use. A well known example is, “Can you pass the salt?” This is not normally a
question about the addressee’s ability, but is rather a polite request to pass the salt.
b.
CP
C TP
DPi TP
Mary T vP
ti vP
v VP
Vj v tj CP
wonders
DPk CP
what C TP
DPl TP
Susan T vP
tl vP
v VP
Vm tm tk
bought
Finally recall that wh-movement is unbounded. That is a wh-phrase can undergo

long-distance movement. Consider the following sentence where the DP which book has
moved up three clauses.
(15) Which book does Mary think that John said that Sally told us she would buy?
The unboundedness property of wh-movement has the potential to lead to ambiguity.

Recall the following sentence from the first chapter.
(16) a. Wheni did John say ti that Pat was fired?

b. When did John say that Pat was fired ti ?
The original merged position of the wh-adverb, when, is either in the matrix clause or
the embedded clause giving rise to the two following possible meanings. The first meaning
is asking when John said what he did. The second meaning is asking when Peter was
fired according to John’s statement.
Consider the sentence Who bought what? This sentence contains two wh-phrases, so
it is referred to as a multiple wh-question. In English, such constructions often trigger
what’s called a pair-list reading as follows.
(17) A - Can you tell me who bought what?

B - Well, Alice bought the oranges, Fred bought the apples, and Sally bought the
pears.
Note that with multiple wh-questions the higher of the two wh-phrases must raise.
Consider the following examples.
(18) Multiple Wh-Questions in English
a. Who bought what?
b. * What did who buy?
c. What did John give to who?
d. * Who did John give what to?
In both cases, the closer wh-phrase moves to the specifier of CP. Consider the deriva-
tion for these sentences before the wh-phrase moves to the specifier of CP. The closer of
the two wh-phrases is shown with a solid arrow and the other wh-phrase is shown with
a crossed out dashed arrow. The higher phrase raises to the specifier of CP.
(19)
CP
CP
C TP
DPi TP
who T VoiP
ti VoiP
Voi vP
X v VP
V v tj
DPi
boughtj
what
If a head needs to attract something to its specifier (because of the EPP or some other
reason), it chooses the closest element with an appropriate feature. This notion of close-
ness is referred to as Attract Closest (Chomsky, 1995; Aoun and Li, 2003). As a final
note, consider labelling. When the wh-phrase raises to SpecCP two phrases are under-
going Merge. The two phrases share a criterial feature, [wh]. The C head has the unin-
terpretable feature, [uwh], so C determines the label. The root node is CP, then.
For the final part of our review, we consider long distance wh-movement in more de-
tail. Recall that wh-movement interacts with anaphor resolution. Consider the following
sentence.
(20) [Which picture of himself1 ]i does John1 like ti ?
This sentence appears to violate the principle of anaphor binding that states that
anaphors must be c-commanded by their antecedents. In its original merged position,
however, the antecedent, John, does c-command the anaphor, himself. Thus, let’s assume
that it is necessary for the antecedent to c-command the anaphor at some point during
the derivation (Lebeaux, 1991; Fox, 1999; Lebeaux, 2009).3 We will return to binding in
chapter 10, so we will wait until then to sharpen the exact formulation of anaphor binding.
In the meantime, however, we can use this fact about anaphor binding as a diagnostic for
movement. To refresh our memories, recall that the antecedent must locally c-command
the anaphor. The following examples show this. Observe that himself can refer only to
Bill and not to John.
(21) John1 thinks that Bill2 likes this picture of himself*1/2 .
With this much in mind now, consider the following example.
(22) [Which picture of himself1/2 ]i does John1 think [CP that Bill2 likes ti ]?
Here, himself can refer to either John or Bill. As the wh-phrase moves successive-
cyclically to the specifier of the matrix CP, it can be locally c-commanded by John. We
propose that the wh-phrase moves successive cyclically through the specifier of every CP
on its way to the matrix SpecCP. Note that when the wh-phrase moves to the intermediate
CP the DP and the CP do not share a criterial feature. As such, a label cannot be formed
upon Merge.
(23)
∅
DP CP
which picture... C TP
that
Once the wh-phrase moves up to the matrix CP, only a trace remains, and the CP
provides the label. The proposed derivation for this sentence is in (24).
When the wh-phrase stops in the specifier of the intermediate CP, it is bound by John.
From this position, John c-commands the anaphor inside the wh-phrase. John and the
wh-phrase are also sufficiently close enough to license the anaphor. We assume that the
specifier of the CP is part of the superordinate clause.
When the wh-phrase is merged in its thematically related position, it is in the same
clause as Bill. The anaphor contained inside of it is also c-commanded by Bill, so the
3
Lebeaux (1991) and Fox (1999) originally proposed that the wh-phrase undergoes reconstruction at
LF. Whether the anaphor is licensed by reconstruction or derivationally, as discussed here, is a matter of on
going research that we will not discuss further here.
anaphor is licensed in this position. Again, because of the size of the tree a reduced vP
structure is shown.
(24)
CP
DPi CP
which picture C TP
of himself
Tj C DPk TP
does
John tj vP
tk vP
v VP
Vl v tl CP
think
ti CP
C TP
that
DPm TP
Bill T vP
tm vP
v VP
Vn v tn ti
likes
Recall that wh-copy constructions provide evidence for successive-cyclic movement

(McDaniel, 1986; du Plessis, 1977). Wh-copy constructions are found in many languages.
We will consider the following German data.
(25) German, Indo-European (source!)

a. Weni hat Peter ti gesehen?

who.acc has Peter seen
‘Who did Peter see?’
b. Weni denkst du, weni Peter ti gesehen hat?

who.acc think you who.acc Peter seen has
‘Who do you think Peter saw?’
c. Wo glaubst du, wo wir essen sollen?

where believe.2sg you where we eat.inf should.1pl
‘Where do you think we should eat?’
d. Wie glaubst du, wie sie das gelöst hat?

how believe you how she that solved has
‘How do you believe that she has solved that?’ (Felser, 2004, ex 6a)
e. Wen glaubst du, wen Peter meint, wen Susi heiratet?

who believe you who Peter thinks who Susi marries
’Who do you believe Peter thinks that Susi is marrying?’ (Felser, 2004, ex 12)
Notice that there are two copies of the wh-phrase wen (‘who.acc’) and wo (‘where’).
The lower copy is evidence that the wh-phrase moved through the specifier of the inter-
mediate CP. Unlike English, German has the option of spelling out the trace as a copy
of the moved element. Wh-copy constructions are found in other Germanic languages
(du Plessis, 1977; Sternefeld, 1991; Barbiers et al., 2009; Hiemstra, 1986), as well as
Romani (McDaniel, 1986) and Passamoquoddy (Bruening, 2006).
The following tree shows the derivation for the long-distance wh-question in German.
Note that VoiP and vP are combined into a single projection to save space. First, recall
that some phrases in German are right-headed. Observe that the wh-phrase leaves a
copy in the intermediate SpecCP rather than a trace as we saw for English above.
(26)
CP
DPi CP
wen C TP
Tj C DP TP
m
vk T du tj vP
Vl v tm vP
denkst
tk VP
tl CP
DPi CP
wen C TP
DPn TP
Peter vP T
tn vP hat
VP v
ti to geseheno
The next line of evidence comes from Irish. Irish complementizers agree with the illo-
cutionary force of their clauses. Of interest here are the complementizers go (declarative)
and aL (interrogative – the L indicates a phonological change on the following consonant.)
Consider the following examples. Note that the complementizers often fuse morphologi-
cally with tense morphology.
(27) Irish (McCloskey, 2001b, 67,70)
a. Deir siad gur ghoid na síogaí í

say they comp.pst stole the fairies her
‘They say that the fairies stole her away.’
b. Cá fhadi aL bhé siad fá Bhaile Átha Cliath ti ?

what length comp.int were they around Dublin
‘How long were they in Dublin?’
The first example contains a declarative complementizer (inflected for past tense),
which introduces the embedded clause. The second example contains an interrogative
complementizer as the sentence is a question. Whenever a wh-phrase appears in the
specifier of a CP in Irish, the interrogative complementizer, aL, appears in the C head
rather than the declarative complementizer, go. Consider, now, the following example of
long distance movement in Irish.
(28) Irish (McCloskey, 2001b, 94)

Cé aL dúradh léithi aL cheannódh é?
who comp.int was said with her comp.int would buy it
‘Who was she told would buy it?’
This example contains a wh-phrase cé (‘who’) that has undergone long distance move-
ment from the embedded clause. The matrix clause is interrogative and is accordingly
marked with an interrogative complementizer. The embedded clause, however, is declara-
tive. One would expect a declarative complementizer; however, we observe an interrogative
complementizer in this clause, too (shown in boldface). This fact follows from the assump-
tion that wh-movement moves through the specifier of every intermediate CP. When the
wh-phrase moves through the specifier of the embedded CP, it triggers the appearance
of the interrogative complementizer in the embedded clause.
Consider following structure for (28). Note that we have not considered passives in
Irish, so we’ll make a few assumptions about the overall structure. These assumptions
don’t affect the point made here–namely, that wh-movement proceeds successive cycli-
cally, that is through every intermediate SpecCP. As the dashed line shows, when the
wh-phrase moves through the intermediate SpecCP it triggers the interrogative form of
the complementizer (aL ) to appear on C. Again, to save space VoiP and vP are combined
into one projection.
(29)
CP
DPi CP
cé C TP
who aL
T VP
comp.int
Vj T PP VP
dúradh
léithi tj CP
was.said
with her
ti CP
C TP
aL
T vP
comp.int
vk T ti vP
Vl v tk VP
cheannódh
tl DP
would.buy
é
it
The final line of evidence come from Kikuyu (kik). Kikuyu exhibits a phonological
phenomenon known as tonal downstep in which the relative pitches of the tones become
lower. Downstep is indicated by a raised exclamation mark. In a declarative sentence,
downstep occurs at the left edge of the verb and the right edge of a major constituent,
usually the clause. In an interrogative sentence no downstep occurs. Rather, there is
a slight phonological change in the vowel of the verbal complex (on the tense marker,
specifically).
(30) Kikuyu (Sabel, 2000, 422)
a. Kariokĭ á-!tϵ́m-íre mo-tĕ!

Kariuki agr-cut-tns nc9-tree
‘Kariuki cut a tree.’
b. Nóo o-tϵm-írϵ́ mo-tĕ

who.foc agr-cut-tns nc9-tree
‘Who cut a tree?’
Kikuyu is a Bantu language of the Niger-Congo family. Kikuyu is spoken by over

8 million people in Kenya. It is an SVO language. It is also a tonal language,
meaning that pitch is contrastive on vowels.
Kikuyu also exhibits optional partial wh-movement, in which a wh-phrase moves only
as far as one of the intermediate CPs. Despite the fact that the wh-phrase only moves
as far as an embedded clause, it is not an embedded question, since the wh-phrase
is still interpreted in the matrix clause. Consider the following examples, paying close
attention to downstep and phonological changes in the verbal complex. Note that there
is no difference in meaning between these sentences.
(31) Kikuyu, Niger-Congo (Sabel, 2000, 424)

a. [CP1 Nóoi ó-γw-eciíri-a [CP2 ti Ngoγe a-úγ-írϵ [CP3 áte ti
who-foc agr-tns-think-tns Ngugi agr-say-tns that
o-on-írϵ́ Kaanakϵ ]]]
agr-see-tns Kanake
‘Who do you think Ngugi said saw Kanake?’
b. [CP1 ó-γw-!éciiri-á [CP2 Nóoi Ngóγe a-úγ-írϵ [CP3 áte ti
agr-tns-think-tns who-foc Ngugi agr-say-tns that
o-on-írϵ́ Kaanakϵ ]]]
agr-see-tns Kanake
c. [CP1 ó-γw-!éciiri-á [CP2 Ngóγe a-úγ-írϵ́ [CP3 áte Nóo o-on-írϵ́
agr-tns-think-tns Ngugi agr-say-tns that who-foc agr-see-tns
Kaanakϵ ]]]
Kanake
In (31a) the wh-phrase has raised to the matrix SpecCP. In (31b) the wh-phrase has
raised only part way. This is known as partial wh-movement. The wh-phrase appears
in an intermediate SpecCP, but is still interpreted in the matrix clause. That is, it is
still interpreted as a main question. The fact that the wh-phrase can undergo partial
movement in (31b) suggests that it passes through the intermediate SpecCP in (31a). In
(31c) the wh-phrase remains in situ, as in Mandarin and Korean. As discussed above,
wh-movement to the matrix clause causes downstep (!) to vanish. Observe that in the
2nd and 3rd examples downstep is still present. Wh-movement also causes a phonological
change on the verb. Observe the difference in the tense suffix on the verb say between
(31b) and (31c). When the wh-phrase moves to SpecCP2 it triggers this change on the
verb. Crucially now, observe in (31a) that this change is still observed, suggesting that
the wh-phrase has moved through the intermediate SpecCP.
This ends our discussion of successive-cyclicity. We have seen empirical arguments
from English, German, Irish, and Kikuyu in support of successive-cyclic wh-movement.
As noted in the references in this section, such evidence is found in a very wide number
of languages.
Successive Cyclicity: Wh-movement targets the specifier of every intermediate

phase.
We have seen that for many languages wh-phrases raise to the specifier of CP. If
there is more than one wh-phrase, then only the highest one raises. The rest remain in
their base position. In this section we will look at some other patterns of wh-movement
found cross-linguistically. First, we will take a look at wh-in-situ languages, where no
wh-movement takes place. Then we will examine some languages with multiple wh-
movement.
Before moving to the next section, let’s consider how to express the semantic scopal
relations of wh-operators in informal prose. Consider the following examples. Note that
| is read “such that”.
(32) a. What did Mary eat?

b. What is the x | Mary ate x?
(33) a. I wonder what Mary ate.

b. I wonder what the x is | Mary ate x?
(34) a. Who do you think Fred gave the book to?

b. Who is the x | you think Fred gave the book to x?
For multiple wh-questions, both wh-operators are interpreted in SpecCP. They may be
interpreted in the same SpecCP or in different SpecCPs. Consider the following examples.
(35) a. Who ate what??

b. Who is the x and what is the y | x ate y?
(36) a. Who wonders what Mary ate?

b. Who is the x | x wonders what the y is | Mary ate y?
Consider, now, the following ambiguous sentence and its interpretations.

7.2. WH-IN-SITU 201
(37) Who wonders who bought what?

a. Who is the x | x wonders who is the y is and what the z is | y bought z?
b. Who is the x and what is the y | x wonders who the z is | z bought y?
7.2 Wh-in-situ
In many languages the wh-phrase does not move to the specifier of CP. Rather, it remains
in its usual position, referred to as the in situ position. This phenomenon is often referred
to as wh-in-situ. Recall from the beginning of this chapter that Mandarin was such a
language. Consider the following additional data.4
a. Zhāngsān mǎi le shénme?

Zhangsan buy prfv what
‘What did Zhangsan buy?’
b. Zhāngsān mǎi le pínggǔo?
Zhangsan buy prfv apple
‘Zhangsan bought an apple.’
(39) Cantonese, Sino-Tibetan (Tommi Leung, pc)
a. lei5 heoi3 bin1dou6 a3?

you go where sfp
‘Where are you going?’
b. ngo5 heoi3 Hoeng1Gwong2 lo4.
I go Hong Kong sfp
‘I’m going to Hong Kong’
a. 민수가 무엇을 샀니?

Minswu-ka mwues-ul sa-ss-ni?
Minsoo-nom what-acc buy-pst-int
‘What did Minsoo buy?’
b. 민수가 사과를 샀다.
Minswu-ka sakwa-lul sa-ss-ta.
Minsoo-nom apple-acc buy-pst-decl
‘Minsoo bought an apple.’
(41) Thai, Kra-Dai (Ruangjaroon, 2005, 11)

4
The Thai data are adapted from their source and are romanized according to ISO 11940-2.
a. Nít súe: ’arai mûe:awa:nní:?

Nit buy what yesterday
‘What did Nit buy yesterday?’
b. Nít súe: naengsûe: mûe:awa:nní:?
Nit buy book yesterday
‘Nit bought a book yesterday.’
a. Taro-wa nani-o tabe-mashi-ta-ka?

Taro-top what-acc eat-polite-pst-int
‘What did Taro eat?’
b. Taro-wa ringo-o tabe-mashi-ta.
Taro-top apple-acc eat-polite-pst
‘Taro ate an apple.’
(43) Tuvaluan, Austronesian (Besnier, 2002, 18,132)
a. Ne nofo a ai i loto i te fale?

pst stay abs who in inside in the house
‘Who stayed inside the house?’
b. Ne ffuti nee Niu te atu teelaa.
pst pull erg Niu the bonito that
‘Niu landed that bonito.’
(44) Babine-Witsuwit’en, Dené-Yeniseian (Denham, 2000, 201, 204)

a. Lilian ndu yunkët
Lilian what 3sg.bought.3sg
‘What did Lilian buy?’
b. George Lillian ndïtnï book yik’iyelhdic yilhnï?
George Lillian which book 3sg.read.opt.3sg 3sg.told.3sg
‘Which book did George tell Lillian to read?’
Tuvaluan is a Polynesian language of the Austronesian family. It is spoken on

the island of Tuvalu. Like most Austronesian languages, it is verb initial (see In-
terchapter D) although it does allow a wide range of word orders. It has ergative-
absolutive case alignment.
Notice that in every case, the wh-phrase occupies the same position as a non-wh-
phrase. In other words, there is no overt wh-movement. As a typological fact, note that
SOV are typically wh-in situ and SVO languages (along with verb-initial languages) typi-
cally have wh-movement. Chinese languages and Thai are exceptions to this generaliza-
tion.
7.2. WH-IN-SITU 203
We now consider the analysis of wh-in-situ. Let’s start by considering the following two
English questions.
(45) a. Which book did Mary say that John read?

b. Mary said which book John read.
In both of these sentences the wh-phrase which book is the object of the verb read. In
the first sentence it is interpreted as a matrix question and raises to the matrix SpecCP.
In the second sentence it is interpreted as an embedded question and raises to the inter-
mediate SpecCP. In both cases it raises to the CP where it is interpreted.
Consider, now, the following Korean data.5

a. 영희는 민수가 무엇을 먹었다고 말했니?
Yenghuy-nun Minswu-ka mwues-ul mek-ess-ta-ko mal-ha-yess-ni?
Younghui-top Minsoo-nom what-acc eat-pst-decl-comp word-do-pst-int
‘What did Younghui say that Minsoo ate?’
b. 영희는 민수가 무엇을 먹었는지 말했다.
Yenghuy-nun Minswu-ka mwues-ul mek-ess-nunci mal-ha-yess-ta.
Younghui-top Minsoo-nom what-acc eat-pst-int word-do-pst-decl
‘Younghui said what Minsoo ate.’
The wh-phrase mwues-ul (‘what’) is interpreted in the matrix CP in the first example
and in the lower CP in the second example. In the case of Korean, the verbal morphology
help us. The interrogative suffix (int) on the verb tells us that the wh-phrase is interpreted
in that clause.
Consider lastly the following Mandarin data.

a. Míngměi gàosù-le Lǐsì Zhāngsān qù-le nǎlǐ?
Mingmei tell-prfv Lisi Zhangsan go-prfv where
‘Where did Mingmei tell Lisi that Zhangsan went?’
b. Míngměi gàosù-le Lǐsì Zhāngsān qù-le nǎlǐ.
‘Mingmei told Lisi where Zhangsan went.’
The Mandarin example is ambiguous the same way the Korean example is. This time,
however, there is no verbal morphology to disambiguate the sentence. Our understanding
5
Korean speakers will note that these sentences have other meanings in addition to the ones given here.
The different meanings can be detected by changing the intonation of the sentence. For the purposes of this
discussion, please consider only the meanings given here. For some recent investigations, see Yun (2023),
Yun (2008), and Hwang (2011).
of wh-in-situ will depend partly on resolving this ambiguity. First, however, let’s consider
the syntax of wh-in-situ. Consider the structures for the following two examples. Note
that we have not investigated verb movement in Chinese nor the syntax of the perfective
marker (-le). We simply attach it as an affix to the verb.6
(48) a. 영희가 무엇을 먹었니?

Yenghuy-ka mwues-ul mek-ess-ni?
Younghui-nom what-acc eat-pst-decl
‘What did Younghui eat?’ [Korean]
b. Míngměi chī-le shénme?

Mingmei eat-prfv what
‘What did Mingmei eat?’ [Mandarin]
(49) Structures for wh-in-situ
a.
CP
TP C[wh]
-ni
DPi TP
Yenghuy-ka VoiP T
-ess
ti VoiP
vP Voi
VP v
DP tj Vj v
mek
mwues-ul
6
For details, see Huang (1994), Soh (2014), and Yang (1995).
7.2. WH-IN-SITU 205
b.
CP
C[wh] TP
DPi TP
Mingmei T VoiP
ti VoiP
Voi vP
v VP
Vj v tj
DP
chi-le
shenme
We saw above that for English the C[wh] head has the EPP property. We propose, then,
that in wh-in-situ languages the C[wh] head lacks the EPP property. As such, the wh-
phrase remains in situ.
We have yet to explain how the different meanings of the wh-in-situ examples arise.
We need a way to represent meaning, the same way we have been representing structure
up until now. The idea that thought or meaning could be represented formally descends
from work on the philosophy of language (Frege, 1891; Russell, 1914). Logical Form
(LF) refers to the level of representation that encodes meaning (Montague, 1970; May,
1985). Chomsky (1995) postulated further a level of phonological form (PF), which is
responsible for converting the syntactic structure to a speech signal. PF and LF are the
two interfaces. LF interfaces with the meaning and thought centres of the brain. PF
interfaces with the speech and motor control centres of the brain. The model Chomsky
proposed is shown in Figure 7.1.
Let’s consider this model before getting back to the analysis of wh-in-situ. Lexical items
are drawn from the Lexicon and put together by Merge. At some point, the structure
reaches a point called Spell-Out, and the structure is transferred to LF (for interpre-
tation) and to PF (for externalization - that is to be given a set of motor commands for
speech or signing). After Spell-Out on the path to LF further movement operations can
take place; however, this will be covert movement as such movement will not be de-
tectable by PF. Movement prior to Spell-Out is detectable by PF, so we refer to it as overt
movement. On the path from Spell-Out to PF varoius morphological and phonological
operations take place, but these do not concern us here. Let’s take an abstract example.
Lexicon
Overt Movement
Spell-Out
y
og
M
C em
ol
ov
ov e
ph
er nt
or
t
M
PF LF
Figure 7.1: T-Model of Syntax
Assume the following structure has been built by overt movement.
(50)
XP
X YP
Y ZP
ZQW
This structure undergoes Spell-Out is is transfered to the two interfaces, PF and LF.
PF LF
XP XP
X YP X YP
(51)
Y ZP Y ZP
ZQW ZQW
PF converts this into a linear signal for speech or signing. Let’s say a covert movement
operation takes place, however, as shown. ZP raises to SpecXP; however, PF does not
know this covert movement has taken place.
7.2. WH-IN-SITU 207
PF LF
XYZQW XP
(52) ZPi XP
ZQW X YP
Y ti
The entire path from drawing lexical items from the Lexicon to the final stages of the
interfaces is called the derivation. The derivation includes overt movement, covert move-
ment, and the morphological and phonological operations at PF. As mentioned, however,
we will not be concerned with PF operations here.
Let’s consider the ambiguous Mandarin sentence. The wh-phrase nǎlǐ (‘where’) is in-
terpreted in the matrix SpecCP for a matrix question. For the embedded question it is
interpreted in the lower SpecCP. The wh-phrase must appear in one of these positions
at LF. Since the C[wh] head in Mandarin does not have the EPP property, the wh-phrase
does not move overtly. Thus, it must move covertly.
(53) [CP Míngměi gàosù-le Lǐsì [CP Zhāngsān qù-le nǎlǐ ]]

‘Where did Mingmei tell Lisi that Zhangsan went’ OR ‘Mingmei told Lisi where
Zhangsan went.’
We are now ready to consider the full derivations for these two sentences. We repeat
the two examples here for convenience.
a. Míngměi gàosù-le Lǐsì Zhāngsān qù-le nǎlǐ?

‘Where did Mingmei tell Lisi that Zhangsan went?’
b. Míngměi gàosù-le Lǐsì Zhāngsān qù-le nǎlǐ.
‘Mingmei told Lisi where Zhangsan went.’
The matrix C head bears a [wh] feature but does not have the EPP property. Thus, the
wh-phrase remains in situ. The derivation thus far undergoes Spell-Out. PF receive this
structure and produced the linear order shown in (54a).
Meanwhile, at LF, the wh-phrase must be interpreted in the matrix SpecCP, so it
moves covertly to the matrix SpecCP. This is shown with a dashed line, a convention we
will use in the remainder of this text. Note that this covert movement is shown as taking
place in one fell swoop. Whether covert movement takes place successive-cyclically or not
is an advanced topic of research, which we will not consider here.
(55) Spell-Out and LF structures for (54a)
a.
Spell-Out Structure
CP
C[wh] TP
DPi TP
Mingmei T VoiP
ti VoiP
Voi vP
v VP
Vj v
DP VP
gàosù-le
Lisi tj CP
tell-prfv
C TP
DPk TP
Zhangsan T <vP,vP>
vP AdvP
v VP
nǎlǐ
Vl v tl tk where
qù
go
b.
7.3. MULTIPLE WH-MOVEMENT 209
LF Structure
CP
AdvPm CP
C[wh] TP
nǎlǐ
where TP
DPi
Mingmei T VoiP
ti VoiP
Voi vP
v VP
Vj v
DP VP
gàosù-le
Lisi tj CP
tell-prfv
C TP
DPk TP
Zhangsan T <vP,vP>
vP tm
v VP
Vl v tl tk
qù
go
7.3 Multiple wh-movement
Recall that if the specifier of CP is already filled with a wh-phrase, other wh-phrases
must remain in situ in English.
(56) a. Who bought what?

b. * Who what bought?
Some languages allow several wh-phrases to appear at the left edge of the clause.
Consider the following data.
(57) Balkan Sprachbund (Rudin, 1988, 449)
a. Koj kogo vižda? [Bulgarian]

who whom sees
‘Who sees whom?
b. Cine cu ce merge? [Romanian]
who with what goes
‘Who goes by what (means of transportation)?’
c. Ko koga vidi? [Serbo-Croatian]
who whom sees
‘Who sees whom?’
These languages exhibit multiple wh-movement. The majority of Slavic languages

as well as the languages of the Balkan Sprachbund exhibit multiple wh-movement. One
account of multiple wh-constructions is to assume that CP can have multiple specifiers
in some multiple wh-fronting languages (Rudin, 1988; Richards, 1999, 2001; Pesetsky,
2000).
(58)
CP
DP
wh1 DP CP
wh2 C TP
Rudin (1988) identifies two types of multiple wh-fronting languages. In the first type,
when more than one wh-phrase moves to the specifier of CP, the order of the wh-phrases
reflects the c-command relations of their base positions. This restriction on movement
is referred to as superiority. We say that wh-movement respects superiority. Bulgarian
and Romanian are of this type. In the second type, superiority need not be obeyed. Serbo-
Croatian is of this type.7 For the remainder of this discussion we will consider only the
first type. Consider the following examples.
(59) Bulgarian, Indo-European (Boeckx and Grohmann, 2003, 3)
a. Kogo kakvo e pital Ivan?

who what is asked Ivan
‘Who did Ivan ask what?’
7
Serbo-Croatian is part of a dialect continuum, sometimes called Bosnian-Croatian-Montenegrin-Serbian.
See Kramer (2006) for a discussion on the name Serbo-Croatian.
7.3. MULTIPLE WH-MOVEMENT 211
b. *Kakvo kogo e pital Ivan?

what who is asked Ivan
‘Who did Ivan ask what?’
Consider, now, the structure for (59a). The auxiliary is a second position clitic (see
Interchapter F), which appears in C. Bulgarian has V-to-T movement. For simplicity, we
assume the subject remains in SpecvP.8 Observe that the c-command relations between
the two wh-phrases remains unchanged. That is, multiple wh-movement obeys superi-
ority.
(60)
CP
DPi
kogo DPj CP
who
kakvo C TP
what e
T VoiP
is
Voik T DP VoiP
vl Voi Ivan tk vP
Vm v tl VP
pital
ti VP
asked
tm tj
To summarize this section, we have seen three types of languages with regard to wh-
movement. The languages mentioned in this section are included in Table 7.1.9 It is
important to note that in all cases, the wh-phrases start in their base positions. In the
case of arguments, they are merged into a θ-position, and in some languages the gram-
matical subject raises to SpecTP. By LF, all wh-phrases appear in SpecCP. The variation
observed here is how many wh-phrases move overtly. In Korean, for example, none of
the wh-phrases moves overtly. They all move covertly. In English, one of the wh-phrases
8
The astute reader will notice that if the auxiliary raises to C from T, then it is impossible for the verb to
raise to T. There is evidence for a more articulated structure to the clause than is shown here (for example
Giorgi and Pianesi, 1997). The additional structure will provide enough room to account for the surface word
order in Bulgarian.
9
Although it was not discussed here, French has optional wh-in-situ in matrix clauses (Rowlett, 2007).
Type Examples
Wh-in-situ Korean, Mandarin, Cantonese,
Thai, Japanese, Tuvaluan
Single wh-movement English, (French), German, Onondaga,
Chamorro, Irish, Kikuyu
Multiple wh-movement Bulgarian, Romanian, Serbo-Croatian
Table 7.1: Typology of wh-movement
move overtly, the rest move covertly. In Bulgarian, all of the wh-phrases move overtly,
none move covertly.
7.4 Relative clauses
Recall that a relative clause modifies the noun. It does so by creating a set to compare
to the set denoted by the noun which the relative clause modifies. Consider the following
example.
(61) the book which Mary read
The relative clause refers to the set of things that Mary read. It is the relative pro-
noun that allows the CP to be interpreted as a set. The higher NP, then, represents the
intersection of these two sets–namely, the set of books that Mary read.
We can represent these two sets with a Venn diagram as in Figure (7.2). The set on the
left is NP1 , and the dots labelled ‘B’ represent members of this set. The set on the right
is CP, and the dots labelled ‘RC’ represent members of this set. The intersection of these
two sets is NP2 (NP1 ∩ CP = NP2 ). If NP1 is the set of books and CP is the set of things
which Mary read, then NP2 is the set of books which Mary read. If this set contains one
entity (as it does in Figure (7.2), then we can use the determiner the to head the entire
DP.
(62)
DP
D <NP,NP>
the
NP CP
N which Mary read

book
Different languages have different strategies for forming relative clauses. Relative clauses
in English can also be formed with the complementizer that rather than with a relative
7.4. RELATIVE CLAUSES 213
B
RC
B
B B B/RC RC RC
B
RC
B
NP1 CP
Figure 7.2: Venn diagram representing a relative clause
pronoun or can simply be bare, with no complementizer or relative pronoun. In these

situations, we assume that there is a phonologically null I (Op) that raises from the ex-
traction site to the specifier of the CP of the relative clause, just as we saw for the relative
pronouns above (Chomsky, 1982, footnote 11). The operator does the same job as the
relative pronoun. It receives a θ-role in its base position and raises to SpecCP to allow the
CP to be interpreted as a set. Consider the following examples.
(63) a. the book whichi Mary read ti
b. the book Op i that Mary read ti
c. the book Op i Mary read ti
Here is the structure for a that-relative clause.

(64)
DP
D <NP,NP>
the
NP CP
N Op i CP
book
C TP
that
DPj TP
Mary T VoiP
tj VoiP
Voi vP
v VP
Vk v tk ti
read
We now discuss a few idiosyncracies of English relative clauses. Relative clauses intro-
duced by an overt relative pronoun can participate in pied piping or preposition stranding.
Bare and that-relative clauses must use preposition stranding. Here are some examples.
(65) a. the student who Mary was talking to

b. the student to whom Mary was talking
c. the student that Mary was talking to
d. * the student to that Mary was talking
e. the student Mary was talking to
f. * the student to Mary was talking
Also, in standard English, subject relative clauses cannot be bare.
(66) a. I gave the book to the student who is studying in the library.
b. I gave the book to the student that is studying in the library.
c. * I gave the book to the student is studying in the library.
Note, however, that under certain (poorly understood) circumstances, some speakers
can use bare subject relatives. Here are some examples from film and television.
(67) a. It was beauty killed the beast. [King Kong]

b. I’m the kind of man likes to know who’s buying his drinks. [The Shining]
c. And Charlie. There’s not a day goes by I don’t think of him [Rose Nylund from
The Golden Girls (s1ep16)]
We now examine the structure of pre-nominal relative clauses in an SOV language,

Korean. Let’s start by considering the structure of (??), repeated here. Korean does not
have overt relative pronouns. Instead Korean uses a relative operator to form relative
clauses.
(68) 영희가 읽은 책
(69)
DP
<NP,NP> D
CP NP
Op i CP N
chayk
TP C
DPj TP
Yenghuy-ka VoiP T
tj VoiP -un
vP Voi
VP v
ti tk Vk v
ilk
Recall that one of the correlates of SVO versus SOV word order is the placement of
relative clauses with respect to the head noun. Japanese, for example, is SOV and thus
exhibits pre-nominal relative clauses.

Peter-ga yon-da hon

Peter-nom read-pst book
‘the book that Peter read’
Recall also that Mandarin and Sinitic languages in general are disharmonic in that
they have SVO word order but also have prenominal relative clauses. Here is an example.
Note that in Mandarin the relative clause is introduced by de (的).
(71) shuō yīngyǔ de xuésheng

speak English de student
‘the student who speaks English’
7.4.1 Accessibility Hierarchy
Languages differ in terms of what elements in the clause are available for relativization.
There is a hierarchy of types of elements that can be relativized called the accessibility
hierarchy (Comrie, 1989; Keenan and Comrie, 1977; Comrie and Keenan, 1979). All
languages, so far as is known, can relativize the first item on the list – the subject. Most
can relativize the second – the object. Of those, some can relativize the third – indirect
object. Of those, some can relativize the fourth, and so forth. Languages, in general,
start at the top of the list and move down. Thus, if a given language can relativize any
given element on the hierarchy, it can relativize anything higher in the hierarchy. There
are some exceptions to this generalization, however, so the accessibility hierarchy is not
a true universal, but rather a strong tendency (Joseph, 1983; Chung and Seiter, 1980;
Cinque, 1981). Here is the order of the hierarchy, with some English examples provided.10
(72) Subject relative clauses

a. the boy who cried
b. the teacher who saw Peter
c. the student who read a book
d. the person who John thinks ate his apple.
(73) Object relative clauses

a. the boy who Peter saw
b. the book that the student read
c. the apple that John thinks Mary ate
10
In standard English the genitive relative clause must pied pipe the possessum. In casual speech, however,
one can hear examples such as the following, in which a resumptive pronoun resumes the the extracted
operator: the author that everyone is saying we should read their new novel
(74) Indirect object relative clauses

a. the boy who Peter gave a book to
b. % the boy who Peter gave a book
c. the student who the teacher denied the opportunity to re-take the exam
(75) Oblique object relative clause

a. the fork Peter ate with
b. the person Pat went to the movies with
(76) Genitive relative clause

a. the boy whose book the teacher gave to the student
b. the doctor whose patient the nurse gave medicine to
(77) Object of comparative relative clause

a. the boy that Susan is taller than
b. the city that Busan is smaller than
As the data above show, English is quite flexible in terms of its ability to relativize
almost anything. Malagasy, on the other hand, can relativize only subjects. Observe in
the first example that Malagasy is a VOS language. The following two examples show that
a subject relative clause is possible but a direct object relative clause is not.
(78) Malagasy (Keenan and Comrie, 1977, 70)
a. Nahita ny vehivavy ny mpianatra

saw the woman the student
‘The student saw the woman.’
b. ny mpianatra [Opi izay nahita ny vehivavy ti ]
the student [ that saw the woman ]
‘the student who saw the woman’
c. *ny mpianatra [Opi izay nahita ti ny vehivavy ]
the student [ that saw the woman ]
(the student who the woman saw)’
7.4.2 Internally-headed relative clauses
Until now, we have been looking at externally-headed relative clauses, where the rel-
ativized noun (shown in italics) is outside of the relative clause.
(79) the book [ that Peter read]

Some languages exhibit internally-headed relative clauses, where the head noun
appears inside the relative clause. Conceptually, we can think of this as shown in the
following example. The relative clause is enclosed in a square. Observe that the head noun
is located inside the internally-headed relative clause. Notice also that the externally-
headed relative clauses are adjoined to NP as explained above and that the internally-
headed relative clauses are the complement to D (Cole, 1987; Basilico, 1996; Hanink,
2020).
(80)
externally-headed relative clause internally-headed relative clause
DP DP
D <NP,NP> D CP
NP CP C TP
N Op i CP ... head...
head
C TP
... ti ...
In the following examples the relative clause is enclosed in square brackets and the
head noun is italicized. As the structure in (80) shows, internally-headed relative clauses
are headed by a determiner. When the determiner is overt in the following examples it is
coloured blue for easy identification.
Let’s consider first internally-headed relative clauses in Mooré (mos), which conve-
niently marks the head with the morpheme ninga. This will help us understand the
structure better.
(81) Mooré (Tellier, 2019, 301,311)

a. m̀ m´ĩĩ [ ráwã́ sèn ség biíg níngà ] wã́
I know man rel meet child ninga det
‘I know the child that the man met.’
b. m̀ yã́ã [ á Màarí sèn tóol sébr nìngá kwásã́ záamé ] wã́
I see Mary rel send book ninga vendor yesterday det
‘I saw the book that Mary sent to the salesman yesterday.’
Mooré (mos) also known as Mossi, is a Niger-Congo language spoken in Burkina

Faso.
7.5. RESTRICTIONS ON WH-MOVEMENT 219
Next, consider the following Lakota example (see p. 178 for more information on
Lakota). Note that both a demonstrative and a determiner introduce the relative clause.
(82) Lakota (Williamson, 1984; Ingham, 2003, 171) and (Ingham, 2003, 85)
a. Mary owi˛žą wa kaǧe ki he ophewathu

Mary quilt a make the dem I buy
‘I bought the quilt that Mary made.’
b. tona t’ewic’ahila-pi s.ni ki hena wis’aha-pi

the ones love them-pl neg the dem bury them-pl
‘Those they did not love, they buried.’
A construction similar to internally-headed relative clauses are also found in Korean

and Japanese (Shimoyama, 1999; Kim, 2007). Consider the following Korean example
(Kim, 1999, 259).
(83) 존은 사과가 쟁반의에 있는 것을 먹었다

John-un [ sakwa-ka cayngpanuy-ey iss-nun kes ] -ul mek-ess-ta.
John-top apple-nom plate-on be-prs nlzr -acc eat-pst-decl
‘John ate the apple that was on the plate.’
In Korean, such constructions are introduced by the nominalizer kes (grammaticalized

from the lexical noun ‘thing’). Korean does not have determiners, so there is no overt D
head as we saw in the examples above. The properties of these constructions in Korean
and Japanese differ in several ways from the internally-headed discussed above. See the
references above for discussion.
7.5 Restrictions on wh-movement
Recall that wh-movement is unbounded.
(84) Which hat did John say Susan thought Mary should persuade Peter to buy?
Wh-movement, however, is not a free-for-all. There are constraints on movement. Re-

call, for instance, that the successive cyclic nature of wh-movement requires it to target
the specifier of every CP on its way to surface position. Thus, if there is another wh-phrase
in the way, movement is blocked. In the early influential work, Ross (1967) deduced sev-
eral independent conditions on movement. We examine these conditions as they apply to
wh-movement. In each case, the relevant structure is in italics.
7.5.1 Complex DP constraint
This constraint states that extraction cannot take place from inside a complex DP.11 A
complex DP is one that contains an embedded clause or a definite determiner, but not
an indefinite determiner. Consider the following examples.
(85) a. * Whoi did you read [DP the book that Mary gave to ti ]?
b. Whoi did you see [DP a picture of ti ]?
c. * Whati did you make [DP the claim that Mary stole ti ]?
d. * Whoi did you see [DP the picture of ti ]?
e. Whati did you claim [CP that Mary stole ti ]?
As these data show, extraction from a complement clause (85e) or from an indefinite
DP (85b) is grammatical. Extraction from a relative clause inside a DP (85a), a clausal
complement to a noun (85c), or from a definite DP (85d) is ungrammatical.
7.5.2 Subject constraint
This constraint states that extraction out of a subject is not possible (Huang, 1982). The
following data show several examples where extraction out of a subject is barred. The
first example again shows that extraction out of a DP object is fine.
(86) a. John put a picture of Dracula on the wall.

b. Whoi did John put a picture of ti on the wall?
The following two examples both show that extraction out of a subject (shown in square
brackets) leads to ungrammaticality.
(87) a. [A picture of Dracula] frightened the children.

b. * Whoi did [a picture of ti ] frighten the children?
c. [For Alex to move to Buenos Aires] would be exciting.
d. * Wherei would [for Alex to move to ti ] be exciting?
Note, however, that if the subject is extraposed as in (88), then extraction is once again
acceptable.
(88) a. It would be exciting for Alex to move to Buenos Aires.

b. Where would it be exciting for Alex to move to ti ?
11
This constraint was originally known as the Complex NP Constraint, as it was formulated before the
postulation of DP.
7.5. RESTRICTIONS ON WH-MOVEMENT 221
In subsequent sections we will discuss some of the subject island violations and pro-
pose an analysis for them.
7.5.3 Coordinate Structure Constraint
This constraint holds that extraction from a conjoined phrase is not permitted. Consider
the following examples.
(89) a. Pat bought [an apple and an orange].

b. * Whati did Pat buy [an apple and ti ]?
c. * Whati did Pat buy [ti and an orange]?
d. Pat bought a book and Alex read a magazine.
e. * Which booki did [[Pat buy ti ] and [Alex read a magazine]]?
A curious exception to the Coordinate Structure Constraint is Accros-the-Board

Movement (ATB Movement) (Ross, 1967; Williams, 1977). In the examples above we saw
that extraction out of one conjunct is ungrammatical. If a phrase is extracted out of both
conjuncts, then the result is grammatical. Consider the following example.
(90) Which booki did [[Pat buy ti ] and [Alex read ti ]]?
Observe that the phrase which book has been extracted out of both conjuncts. Unlike
the other constraints we discuss here, we will not attempt to explain why this constraint
exists nor why ATB Movement is possible. We merely note this as a constraint on wh-
movement. It thus serves as a way to diagnose other kinds of movement that are similar
to wh-movement or to diagnose wh-movement in other languages.
7.5.4 Wh-island constraint
A wh-phrase cannot cross another wh-phrase. Consider the following examples.
(91) a. John wonders where Mary bought the apple.

b. * Whati does John wonder where Mary bought ti ?
In the first example the wh-phrase where occupies the embedded SpecCP. In the sec-
ond example, the object of buy attempts to undergo wh-movement to the matrix clause,
but is stopped by the intervening wh-phrase where.
(92) [CP John wonders [CP where Mary bought what]]

7.5.5 Resumptive pronouns
In spoken English, many speakers often insert a resumptive pronoun to rescue island
violations (Ross, 1967). Consider the following examples. In each case the path between
the wh-phrase and the co-indexed resumptive pronoun crosses an island: a complex DP
island, a subject island, and a wh-island, respectively.
(93) a. Where are those files Op1 that I never remember where I put them1 ?
b. Which car1 did the police say the driver of it1 caused an accident?
c. Which patient1 do you wonder whether the doctor will release them1 ?
Observe that the same examples are ungrammatical without the resumptive pronoun.
(94) a. * Where are those files Op1 that I never remember where I put t1 ?
b. * Which car1 did the police say the driver of t1 caused an accident?
c. * Which patient1 do you wonder whether the doctor will release t1 ?
We can generalize these facts as shown here, where RP represents ‘resumptive pro-
noun’.
(95) a. * Wh-XPi ... [island ... ti ... ]

b. Wh-XPi ... [island ... RPi ... ]
We will not consider the derivation of resumptive pronoun constructions here (Za-
enen et al., 1981; Sells, 1984). Resumptive pronouns in English are rather unstable,
and speakers’ intuitions on them are quite variable. As such, it has been argued that in
English they arise as a result of processing (McKee and McDaniel, 2001).
Note, however, that in some languages resumptive pronouns are not marginal but are
active and integral properties of the grammar. Consider the following data from Lebanese
Arabic. Local wh-movement in Lebanese Arabic leaves an optional resumptive pronoun
(-uu), which surfaces as a clitic. (See Interchapter G on pronominal clitics in Romance.)
(96) Lebanese Arabic (Aoun and Li, 2003, 1)
a. Payya mmasil š@ft b@-l-mat.Qam

which actor saw.2ms in-the-restaurant
‘Which actor did you see in the restaurant?’
b. Payya mmasil š@ft-uu b@-l-mat.Qam
which actor saw.2m.sg-him in-the-restaurant
‘Which actor did you see in the restaurant?’
7.6. PHASES AND CONSTRAINING WH-MOVEMENT 223
The following data shows that resumptive pronouns are obligatory in relative clauses
in Palestinian Arabic. Observe the resumptive pronoun (-ha) attached to the verb.
(97) Palestinian ArabicAfro-Asiatic(Shlonsky, 1992, 445)
a. l-blint Pilli šufti-ha

the-girl that saw.2f.sg-her
‘the girl that you saw’
b. * l-blint Pilli šufti
the-girl that saw.2f.sg
(‘the girl that you saw)’
This section has introduced several constraints on wh-movement. In the next section
we explain how capture the constraints discussed above.
7.6 Phases and constraining wh-movement
The previous sections provides a shortened list of all the constraints that Ross originally
discussed. Since Ross’ seminal discussion on the constraints of movement, linguists have
been trying to formulate a unified explanation for the various constraints. Since this is
still a matter of ongoing research, we will only consider the issues in brief detail and leave
some points unresolved. One influential proposal to capture island effects is to postulate
a set of phase heads, C, D. Once a phase head is reached, any element that wishes to
escape the phase must move the edge of the phase – the specifier of CP or DP (in the case
of head movement, [C] and D). Once movement is complete, the sister to the phase head
undergoes Spell-Out and is sent to PF and LF, respectively.
(98)
CP
XPi CP
C TP
DP TP
T ...ti
The CP at the top of the derivation continues to participate in further operations. For
instance, it can merge with another verb that takes a clausal complement and the XP
can continue to raise to the next CP. If there are no more operations and the derivation
is finished, then the remainder of the tree simply undergoes Spell-Out and is sent to PF
and LF. For now, we will consider only the C phase head.
Consider the derivation for Who do you think that Peter saw? First, the wh-phrase
moves to the embedded SpecCP–the edge of the lower C phase head. Then the lower TP is
Spelled-Out and is sent to PF and LF. Next, the wh-phrase moves to the matrix SpecCP–
the edge of the matrix C phase head. The matrix TP is then Spelled-Out and transferred
to PF and LF. With no more operations, the remainder of the tree is Spelled-Out.
(99)
CP
DPi CP
who C TP
Tj C DPk TP
do
you tj VoiP
tk VoiP
Voi vP
v VP
Vl v tl CP
think
ti CP
C TP
that
DPm TP
Peter T VoiP
tm VoiP
Voi vP
v VP
Vn v tn ti
saw
Phase theory gives us a way of understanding how successive-cyclic movement is

ensured. It gives an explanation for wh-islands. Consider again the following wh-island
violation.
(100) *What does John wonder where Mary bought?
Consider the derivation starting from the embedded TP.
(101) [TP Mary bought what where ]
The C head merges with TP, and the wh-adjunct where raises to SpecCP.
(102) [CP wherei [TP Mary bought what ti ] ]
Now, the sister to the C phase head, the TP, undergoes Spell-Out and is transferred
to PF and LF. The tranferred portion is shown in grey and is no longer accessible to the
derivation.
(103) [CP wherei [TP Mary bought what ti ] ]
When the matrix CP is constructed, the [wh] feature on [C] cannot find a wh-phrase
to agree with. The only wh-phrase, what, is trapped in the lower phase. Note that the
matrix [C] cannot agree with where as this wh-phrase is interpreted in the lower phase.
(104) [CP C[wh] John does wonder [CP wherei [TP Mary bought what ti ] ]
Let’s consider now DP islands. This will require us to consider the D phase head. Recall
that extraction out of a definite DP is ungrammatical. Consider the following example.
(105) *Whoi did John see the picture of ti .
Since D is a phase head, the sister to D undergoes Spell-Out and is transferred to the
interfaces. When wh-movement crosses several clauses, it travels through each SpecCP
on its way to it surface position. We say that the intermediate SpecCP positions act as
an escape hatch. One possibility is that SpecDP is not available as an escape hatch for
some reason.
(106)
CP
XPi CP
...
C
v VP
V CP
escape hatch→ti CP
... ti ...
(107)
CP
C TP
...
Subj
v VP
V DP
no escape hatch→
D NP
... XP...
If SpecDP is not available to movement, then the DP island in (105) has an explanation.
Consider the structure for this sentence.
(108)
CP
C TP
Ti C DPj TP
did
John ti VoiP
tj VoiP
Voi vP
v VP
Vk v tk DP
see
D NP
the
N PP
picture
P DP
of
who
The wh-phrase who is trapped in the DP phase. We have hypothesized that SpecDP
cannot be used as an escape hatch, thus the wh-phrase cannot raise to SpecCP.
Not all DPs are islands, of course. Recall that extraction from an indefinite nominal is
grammatical in English. Consider the following example.
(109) Who did John see a picture of?
We could argue that indefinite DPs allow subextraction. That is, we would have to say
that SpecDP is an escape hatch in indefinite DPs only. One piece of evidence for this is
DP-internal wh-movement. Consider the following contrast.
(110) a. a very big house

b. how big a house
c. the very big house
d. * how big the house
The wh-phrase how big can move to the left edge of an indefinite DP only. This expla-
nation would work for the data considered so far, but we have one more island to account
for–namely subject islands. Recall that subjects are islands for extraction regardless of
the definiteness of the subject DP.
(111) a. * Whoi did [a picture of ti ] frighten the children?

b. * Whoi did [the picture of ti ] frighten the children?
Another possible solution lies in the difference between definite and indefinite DPs
(Davies and Dubinsky, 2003). In particular, we will consider the identity of the indefinite
determiner a. Note that in many languages, the indefinite determiner is identical to the
number one. Historically, English a/an derived from the numeral one. In both German
and French the words for ‘one’ and ‘a’ are the same. In Uzbek, if the numeral one appears
with a classifier, then it has the cardinal reading (note the /r/→[t] assimilation). If the
numeral one appears without a classifier, then it has an indefinite reading.
(112) a. ein Buch [German]

a/one book
‘a/one book’
b. un livre [French]
a/one book
‘a/one book’
c. bit-ta olma [Uzbek]
a/one-cl apple
‘one apple’
d. bir olma
one apple
‘an apple’
Recall from earlier that Ritter (1991, 1992) propose a number phrase (NumP) between
DP and NP. We will run through one line of evidence that a and the do not occupy the
same spot in the tree (Epstein, 1999). Consider the following examples.
(113) a. I bought the two books.

b. I bought two such books.
c. I bought the two such books.
d. I bought bought such a book.
e. * I bought such the book.
Epstein observes that the precedes two and such. She also observes that such pre-
cedes a. By transitivity, the determiner the and the article a cannot occupy the same
position. Given the observations above, we assume that the indefinite article a occupies
the Num head.
(114)
DP
D NumP
Num NP
... N...
Let’s propose, following Davies and Dubinsky (2003), that an indefinite nominal phrase
can be a bare NumP. The structure of (109), then, is as follows.
(115)
CP
DPi CP
who C TP
Tj C DPk TP
did
John tj VoiP
tk VoiP
Voi vP
v VP
Vl v tl NumP
see
Num NP
a
N PP
picture
P ti
of
Since the object contains no DP there is no phase boundary between the verb and the
object. The DP who is free to move to SpecCP. After who moves to SpecCP, then the sister
to the C head undergoes Spell-Out.
We now come back to subject islands. Recall that in English T has the EPP property.
Chomsky (1995) has suggested that the EPP property on T is due to a D feature on T
that can be satisfied only by a DP. In other words, the subject must be a DP, even if it is
indefinite. Let’s consider again the following subject island violation.
(116) *Who did a picture of frighten the children?
The subject a picture of who, while indefinite, must be a full DP to satisfy EPP on T.
Consider the following structure.
(117)
CP
C TP
EPP TEPPi C DPj TP

did
D NumP ti VoiP
Num NP tj Voip
a
N PP Voi vP
picture
P DP
v VP
of
Vk v tk DP
who
frighten
D NumP
the
Num N
children
Phase Heads
C - escape hatch available
D - no escape hatch available
7.6.1 Relative clauses and islands
We can now return to some evidence that relative clauses involve wh-movement of a
relative pronoun or an operator. Let’s start by looking at some relative clauses.
(118) a. the book which Mary read

b. the book that Mary read
c. the book Mary read
d. 영희가 읽은 책
Ross (1967) noticed that wh-movement and relative clauses are both subject to the
same kinds of constraints. Consider the following data.
(119) wh-Islands
a. Mary knows when Susan ate the apple.
b. * Whati does Mary know [when Susan ate ti ]?
c. * the apple that Mary knows when Susan ate
(120) Coordinate Structure Constraint

a. Pat ate an apple and an orange.
b. * What did Pat eat an apple and?
c. * the orange that Pat ate an apple and
(121) Complex NP Constraint

a. Pat read the book that Mary wrote on her sabbatical.
b. * Wheni did Pat read [the book that Mary wrote ti ]?
c. * the sabbatical that Pat read the book that Mary wrote on
(122) Subject Island Constraint

a. That Bill ate the last piece of cake angered John.
b. * What did that Bill ate anger John?
c. * the cake [that [that Bill ate t] angered John]
The facts above led Ross to propose that both wh-questions and relative clauses have
the same kind of movement. Such a proposal simplifies the grammar. Semantic similar-
ities between wh-questions and relative clauses also suggest that they have the same
analysis. As mentioned above, though, this still leaves the Coordinate Structure Con-
straint unexplained.
7.6.2 Cross-over effects
We will now look at some interactions between wh-phrases and bound pronouns. A bound
pronoun is one that co-refers to a DP that c-commands it. We can define binding more
formally as follows.
(123) A binds B iff:
1 A c-commands B, and
2 A and B are coreferential.
We indicate co-reference by use of superscripts. We use numbers here to keep them

distinct from the subscripted indices that show movement. Consider first the following
example.
(124) a. John1 thinks that he1/2 is a genius.
b. John1 saw himself1 in the mirror.
In (124a), he refers either to John (indicated by the superscript 1) or to any other

human male (indicated by the superscript 2). In (124b), himself must refer to John –
again as indicated by the superscript.
Pronouns can also be coreferential with a wh-expression. (In this case, the pronouns
are referred to as bound variables, which we saw in chapter 4 in the discussion on
ditransitive constructions. See also page ?? for a discussion on singular they, which is
found in the following examples.)
(125) a. Who1 i ti loves their1 mother?
b. Who1 i ti loves themself1 ?
These sentences can be schematized as follows: Who is the ‘x’ such that x loves x’s
mother? and Who is the ‘x’ such that x loves x? If you think of x as a variable (as in algebra),
then we see why the pronouns here are called bound variables. A possible answer for the
first question is: John loves his mother, Mary loves her mother, and Susan loves her mother.
Now consider the following data.
(126) a. * Who1 i do they1 love ti ?
b. ? Who1 i does their1 mother love ti ?
In contrast to the previous examples, (126a) is sharply ungrammatical and (126b) is

mildly ungrammatical. In (126a), the wh-phrase has raised past a coreferential pronoun
(i.e., a bound variable) that c-commands the trace, and in (126a), the wh-phrase has
raised past a coreferential pronoun that does not c-command the trace. This is shown
in the following trees. The first sentence is an example of Strong Cross Over (SCO)
and is so called because the ungrammaticality is felt strongly by most speakers. The
second sentence is an example of Weak Cross Over (WCO) and is so called because the
ungrammaticality is felt more weakly (Postal, 1971).
(127)
CP
CP
DP1 i
who C TP
Tj C TP
DP1 k
do
they tj VoiP
tk VoiP
Voi vP
v VP
Vl v tl ti
love
(128)
CP
CP
DP1 i
who C TP
T C DPk TP
doesj
DP tj VoiP
DP1
their D N tk VoiP
mother
Voi vP
v VP
V v tl ti
lovel
The notions of SCO and WCO have been used to adduce support for LF movement of
wh-phrases in wh-in-situ languages (Huang, 1982).12 Consider the following Mandarin
data.
(129) * Xihuan ta1 de ren kandao shei1 ?

likes him de person see who
(‘Who1 did the person who likes him1 see?’)
Consider the structure for the sentence above. For convenience, the morpheme de
has been analyzed as a right-headed [C] that introduces a relative clause.13
(130)
12
Although see Aoun and Li (1993) for an alternative proposal.
13
For more discussion on Mandarin de see Cheng and Sybesma (2014) and Rubin (2003).
CP
C TP
DPi TP
D <NP,NP> T VoiP
CP NP ti VoiP
Opi CP N Voi vP
ren
TP C v VP
de
tj TP Vl v tl
DP1
kandao
T VoiP shei
tj VoiP
Voi vP
v VP
Vk v tk
DP1
xihuan
ta
Observe that the wh-phrase shei (‘who’) is in-situ. Following Huang (1982) the wh-
phrase raises to SpecCP at LF. In the example here, the wh-phrase raises past a co-
referential pronoun and gives rise to a WCO violation, thereby giving additional evidence
for the LF raising analysis of in-situ wh-phrases.
Key concepts
• wh-in-situ - a phenomenon in which wh-phrases do not raise to SpecCP in the

overt syntax
• multiple wh-movement - a phenomenon in which all wh-phrases move to the left

edge of the clause
• island - a syntactic phrase out of which movement cannot take place
• phase head - The phase heads are [C] and D. The sister of a phase head undergoes
Spell-Out and is not longer accessible to the derivation.
• Strong Cross Over - a phenomenon in which wh-movement over a c-commanding

coreferential pronoun results in ungrammaticality
• Weak Cross Over - a phenomenon in which wh-movement over a non-c-commanding

coreferential pronoun results in mild ungrammaticality
Further Reading
• Chomsky and Lasnik (1977) - This paper lays the groundwork for our current
understanding of wh-movement.
• Davies and Dubinsky (2003) - This paper is the foundation for our understanding
of definite DP islands in this textbook.
• Cheng (1991) - This dissertation attempts to provide a universal explanation of the

diversity of wh-constructions.
• Huang (1982) - This dissertation is the original proposal for LF movement of wh-
in-situ.
• McDaniel (1989) - This paper contains an in depth discussion on various aspects of

German and Romani wh-questions, including partial movement briefly discussed
here. Although the analysis is quite technical, the empirical facts are clearly laid
out and the discussion should be accessible once the concepts in this chapter are
mastered.
• Rizzi (1990) - This is an in depth monograph dealing with constraints both on wh-
movement and other kinds of movement. Many of the issues discussed here still
form the foundation of current syntactic theory.
• Ross (1967) - This dissertation is the source of many of constraints on movement

that are still discussed today.
• Rudin (1988) - This article discusses the syntax of multiple wh-movement lan-
guages.
Abbreviations
1 - 1st person juss - jussive

2 - 2nd person lnk - linker
3 - 3rd person locv - locative voice
acc - accusative m - masculine
anim - animate mid - middle voice
appl - applicative n - neuter
av - actor voice neg - negative
benv - benefactive voice nom - nominative
c - common noun nonpst - non-past
cl - classifier obj - object
comp - complementizer ooc - out of control
condit - conditional ov - object voice
cop - copula pfv - perfective
cv - connecting vowel pl - plural
decl - declarative polq - polarity question
dem - demonstrative prox - proximate
deon - deontic prs - present
deon - deontic pst - past
erg - ergative ptcp - participle
f - feminine refl - reflexive
fact - factive sbj - subject
fv - final vowel sg - singular
impf - imperfective shon - subject honorific
inan - inanimate top - topic
infer - inferential epistemic tr - transitive
int - interrogative
239
Calligraphy of tree drawing
Syntactic trees convey a great deal of information to the reader; however, they can only do
so effectively if they are drawn clearly. Consider the examples below that contain several
common errors made by introductory students of syntax. The two branches dropping
down from a node should connect at the top, and the point where the two branches
connect should be centred underneath the dominating node. The bottom of each branch
should be centred above the daughter nodes. This is illustrated in the tree below.
VP
lines connect at a single point
V CP ,
In the following tree, the lines do not connect at a single point under the mother node.
This makes the tree difficult to read.
VP
lines do not connect
V CP /
The following tree is particularly difficult to read as it’s difficult to tell which is the
parent node and which are the offspring nodes.
VP
V CP /
Sibling nodes should ideally be written at the same level, V and CP in the first tree in
the section. The following tree also shows sibling nodes on the same level.
241
242
VP
V DP ,
D NP
Now consider the following two trees. Observe that the sibling nodes do not appear at
the same level.
VP
DP /
V D
NP
VP
V /
DP
NP
D
Often, very large trees do not fit easily on one page. Do not squish or bend the tree out
243
of shape to make it fit on one page. The following tree squishes the tree into the bottom
right corner of the page. This should be avoided.
vP
v VP /
V DP
N PP
NP
D
If there is empty space on the same page you can draw an arrow from the last node
at the bottom to the top of where the tree continues. In this case, you should repeat the
node label for clarity. In the following example, the DP node is at the bottom right hand
corner of the page, and there is no space left to continue. Repeat the DP label in an empty
spot on the page and connect the two nodes with an arrow. Then you can continue to
draw the rest of the tree. You should ideally only do this once per page and only if the
result is not cluttered and easy to read.
DP
D NP
N PP
vP
v VP
V DP
If the remainder of the tree cannot fit comfortably on the same page without affecting
clarity, then the tree should be continued on the next page. In this case, simply draw an
244
arrow down with a note saying, “continued on next page”.

vP
v VP
V DP
continued on next page
continued from previous page
DP
D NP
N PP
Alphabetical Index
Abaza, 173 clitic, 138

ablative, 158 clitic left-dislocation, 166
affix hopping, 59, 98 Coeurdoux, 9
agent-patient marking, 178 cognate object, 136
Agree, 44 complementizer, 44
agreement, 43 coordination, 30
Algic, 133 Cree, 85, 133
Algonquian, 133
depictive, 141
anaphor, 18, 35
do-support, 66
antipassive, 175
dummy reflexive, 142
Arabic, 222
Dyirbal, 172, 175
Attract Closest, 192
EPP, 54
Babine-Witsuwit’en, 202
Bantu, 163 ergativity, 84, 171
Bare Phrase Structure, 36, 40, 41 escape hatch, 225
Blackfoot, 14 expletive, 54
Bloomfield, Leonard, 9 external argument, 116, 121
Bulgarian, 210
free word order, 68
Cantonese, 86, 95, 137, 160, 201 French, 29, 43, 55, 94, 112, 187, 228
cartography, 112 written, 66
Case Filter, 156, 156

German, 13, 33, 34, 74, 76, 95,
Cayuga, 19
passive133, 194, 228
Central Alaska Yup’ik, 84
Greek, 166
Central Alaskan Yup’ik, 84
clitic left-dislocation, 167
Chamorro, 185
Gungbe, 110
Chomsky, Noam, 9, 16, 21, 41, 205
clefting, 30, 31 Haitian Creole, 90
245
246 ALPHABETICAL INDEX
Halkomelem, 87, 176 lexical entry, 23, 147

Harley, Heidi, 119 Luganda, 163
Headedness Parameter, 72
Malagasy, 217
Hebrew, 82, 88, 129, 162
Mandarin, 73, 94, 97, 121, 160, 161,
Hiaki, 119
183, 201, 203, 207, 216
hortative, 106
Massam, Diane, 91
Hungarian, 158
mental lexicon, 23
Icelandic, 154 Merge, 37
illocutionary force, 106 mixed headedness, 76
impersonal passive, 133 Mooré, 218
Inuktitut, 175 multiple wh-question, 191
Irish, 55, 61, 64, 196 Multiple Case Checking, 158
Italian, 54, 110, 112, 134
negative polarity item, 115
unaccusativity in, 138
Niuean, 91, 97, 97
Japanese, 70, 71, 109, 202, 215 Northern Pomo, 181
Jones, Sir William, 9 noun incorporation, 139
Khanty, 173 obviation, 85

Kikuyu, 198, 199 Oneida, 180
Korean, 18, 29, 33, 87, 100, 104, 125, Onondaga, 184
128, 160, 172
Pān.ini, 9, 125
wh-in-situ, 203
partial wh-movement, 199
Busan, 44
passive, 32, 118
cognate objects, 137
impersonal, 134
illocutionary force, 106
patient marking, see agent-patient
light verb, 122
marking
passive, 131
phase, 48
pro-forms, 29
pied-piping, 214
pseudoclefting, 32
Plains Cree, 133
relative clauses, 215
Plato’s problem, 10
Romanization of, 13
Portuguese, 13, 45, 112, 134
topic marking, 108
Poverty of Stimulus, 16
label, 37 preposition stranding, 15, 214
Lakota, 178, 219 pro-form, 28
Lakota Dida, 77 Pseudo Noun Incorporation, 163
Lardil, 160 pseudoclefting, 31
ALPHABETICAL INDEX 247
quantifier float, 20, 169 St’át’imcets, 100

quirky case, 154
Tagalog, 126
reflexive, 18 Tamang, 25
resultative, 141 Telugu, 155
resumptive pronoun, 222 Thai, 201
right node raising, 34 Theta Criterion, 24

theta grid, 26
Rizzi, Luigi, 37
Tibetan, 181
Romanian, 102, 210
Tiwa, 69
Sakha, 164 topic, 32
scrambling, 33 Tuvaluan, 202
secondary predicate, 141
Universal Grammar, 16
selection, 24
Uzbek, 228
Serbo-Croatian, 210
singular they, 15, 233 variable binding, 114
Slavey, 139 VP fronting, 33
Spanish, 166
Weak Cross Over, 233
spell-out, 48
wh-copy construction, 194
split CP, 111
Strong Cross Over, 233 X-Bar Theory, 36, 41
248 ALPHABETICAL INDEX
Bibliography
Abbott, Barbara (1976). ‘Right Node Raising as a Test for Constituenthood’, Linguistic
Inquiry 7 (4): 639–642.
Abney, Stephen (1987). The English Noun Phrase and its Sentential Aspect, Ph.D. Disser-
tation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Aboh, Enoch (2004). The Morphosyntax of Complement-Head Sequences: Clause Structure

and Word Order Patterns in Kwa, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Adger, David (2003). Core syntax: A minimalist approach, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ahenakew, Freda (1987). Cree Language Structures: A Cree Approach, Winnipeg, MB: Pem-
mican Publications.
Aldridge, Edith (2008). ‘Generative Approaches to Ergativity’, Language and Linguistics

Compass 2 (5): 966–995, URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00075.x.
Alexiadou, Artemis and Elena Anagnostopoulou (2000). ‘Review article:Greek syntax: A

principles and parameters perspective’, Journal of Greek Linguistics 1 (1): 171 – 222,
URL https://brill.com/view/journals/jgl/1/1/article-p171_7.xml. Place: Leiden, The
Netherlands Publisher: Brill.
Alexiadou, Artemis, Elena Anagnostopoulou, and Florian Schäfer (2015). External Argu-
ments in Transitivity Alternations, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Alexiadou, Artemis and Florian Schäfer (2020). ‘The Voice Domain in Germanic’, in
Michael T. Putnam and B. Richard Page (eds.), ‘The Cambridge Handbook of Ger-
manic Linguistics’, 461–492, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1 edn.,
URL https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/9781108378291%23CN-bp-20/
type/book_part.
Alexopoulou, Theodora and Dimitra Kolliakou (2002). ‘On Linkhood, Topicalization and
Clitic Left Dislocation’, Journal of Linguistics 38 (2): 193–245, URL https://www.
cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0022226702001445/type/journal_article.
249
250 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Allen, W. S. (1956). ‘Structure and System in the Abaza Verbal Complex’, Transactions
of the Philological Society 55 (1): 127–176, URL https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-968X.
1956.tb00566.x. Publisher: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
An, Duk-ho (2020). ‘Three ways to see in Korean: Sentence final endings, clause structure,
and the subjunctive circumstantial evidence construction’, Linguistic research 37 (3):
477–498. Publisher: 경희대학교 언어정보연구소.
Anagnostopoulou, Elena (1999). ‘On Experiencers’, in Artemis Alexiadou, Geoffrey Hor-

rocks, and Melita Stavrou (eds.), ‘Studies in Greek Syntax’, 67–93, Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Aoun, Joseph and Yen-hui Audrey Li (1993). ‘Wh-Elements in Situ: Syntax or LF?’, Lin-
guistic Inquiry 24 (2): 199–238, URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/4178811.
Aoun, Joseph and Yen-hui Audrey Li (2003). Essays on the Derivational and Represen-
tational Nature of Grammar: The Diversity of Wh-Constructions, Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Arregi, Karlos (2003). ‘Clitic left dislocation is contrastive topicalization’, in ‘Proceedings

of the 26th annual penn linguistics colloquium, penn working papers in linguistics’,
vol. 9.1, 31–44, Philadelphia: Penn Linguistics Club.
Bach, Emmon (1962). ‘The Order of Elements in a Transformational Grammar of Ger-

man’, Language 38 (3): 263–269, URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/410785. Publisher:
Linguistic Society of America.
Baker, Mark (1985). ‘The Mirror Principle and morphosyntactic explanation’, Linguistic
Inquiry 16 (3): 373–415.
Baker, Mark and Jonathan David Bobaljik (2017). ‘On inherent and dependent theories
of ergative case’, in Jessica Coon, Diane Massam, and Lisa Travis (eds.), ‘The Oxford
handbook of ergativity’, 111–134, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Publisher: Oxford
University Press Oxford.
Baker, Mark C. (1988a). Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing,

Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Baker, Mark C. (1988b). ‘Theta theory and the syntax of applicatives in Chichewa’,
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 6 (3): 353–389, URL https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF00133903.
Baker, Mark C. (2001). The Atoms of Language, New York: Basic Books.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 251
Baker, Mark C. (2014). ‘Pseudo Noun Incorporation as Covert Incorporation: Linearization

and Crosslinguistic Variation’, Language and Linguistics 15: 5–46.
Barbiers, Sjef, Olaf Koeneman, and Marika Lekakou (2009). ‘Syntactic doubling and the
structure of wh-chains’, Journal of Linguistics 45 (1): 1–46.
Barrie, Michael (2013). ‘Antisymmetry and Hixkaryana’, in Theresa Biber-

auer and Michelle Sheehan (eds.), ‘Theoretical Approaches to Disharmonic
Word Order’, 245–269, Oxford: Oxford University Press, URL https://oxford.
universitypressscholarship.com/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199684359.001.0001/
acprof-9780199684359-chapter-9.
Barrie, Michael (2017). ‘All in Cayuga’, .
Barrie, Michael and Hyunjung Lee (2017). ‘Complementizer allomorphy in Busan Korean’,
in Michael Yoshitaka Erlewine (ed.), ‘Proceedings of GLOW in Asia XI’, 15–27, National
University of Singapore: MIT Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, MITWPL.
Barss, Andrew and Howard Lasnik (1986). ‘A Note on Anaphora and Double Objects’,
Linguistic Inquiry 17: 347–354.
Basilico, David (1996). ‘Head Position and Internally Headed Relative Clauses’, Language
72 (3): 498–532, URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/416277. Publisher: Linguistic Soci-
ety of America.
Belletti, Adriana (1988). ‘The Case of Unaccusatives’, Linguistic Inquiry 19 (1): 1–34.
Bernstein, Judy (2008). ‘Reformulating the Determiner Phrase Hypothesis’, Language

and Linguistics Compass 2 (6): 1246–1270.
Besnier, Niko (2002). Tuvaluan: A Polynesian Language of the Central Pacific., Descriptive
Grammars, Abingdon: Routledge.
Bittner, Maria and Ken Hale (1996). ‘Ergativity: Toward a Theory of a Heterogenous Class’,
Linguistic Inquiry 27 (4): 531–604.
Bjorkman, Bronwyn (2017). ‘Singular they and the syntactic representation of gender in
English’, Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 2 (1): 80.
Blake, Barry, J. (1994). Case, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bliss, Heather (2008). ‘Structuring Information in Blackfoot: Against an A’-Agreement

Analysis of Cross-Clausal Agreement’, CD8.
252 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bloomfield, Leonard (1933). Language, New York: Holt.
Bodine, Ann (1975). ‘Androcentrism in prescriptive grammar: singular ’they’, sex-

indefinite ’he’, and ’he or she”, Language in Society 4 (1): 129–146.
Boeckx, Cedric and Kleanthes Grohmann (2003). ‘Introduction’, in Cedric Boeckx and
Kleanthes Grohmann (eds.), ‘Multiple Wh-Fronting’, 1–16, Amsterdam/Philadelphia:
John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Borer, Hagit (2005). Structuring Sense, volume 1: In Name Only, Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Bošković, Željko (2009). ‘More on the no-DP analysis of article-

less languages’, Studia Linguistica 63 (2): 187–203, URL https://
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9582.2009.01158.x. _eprint:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1467-9582.2009.01158.x.
Bošković, Željko (2013). ‘On NPs and clauses’, in Günther Grewendorf and Thomas Ede
Zimmermann (eds.), ‘From sentence types to lexical categories’, 179–246, Berlin,
Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, URL https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614511601.179.
Bošković, Željko and Jon Gajewski (2011). ‘Semantic correlates of the DP/NP parameter’,
in Suzi Lima, Kevin Mullin, and Brian Smith (eds.), ‘Proceedings of the 39th Annual
Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society’, 121–134, Amherst, MA: University of
Massachusetts, Graduate Linguistic Student Association.
Braidi, Susan (2020). Acquisition of Second Language Syntax, London and New York: Tay-
lor & Francis.
Bresnan, Joan W. (1974). ‘The Position of Certain Clause-Particles in Phrase Structure’,

Linguistic Inquiry 5 (4): 614–619, URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/4177846. Publisher:
The MIT Press.
Bruening, Benjamin (2006). ‘Differences between the Wh-Scope-Marking and Wh-Copy

Constructions in Passamaquoddy’, Linguistic Inquiry 37 (1): 25–49.
Buechel, Eugene and Paul Manhart (2002). Lakota Dictionary: Lakota-English/English-

Lakota, Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press.
Burzio, Luigi (1986). Italian Syntax, Dordrecht: Reidel.
Butt, Miriam and Wilhelm Geuder (2003). ‘Light Verbs in Urdu and Grammaticalization’,
in Regine Eckardt, Klaus von Heusinger, and Christoph Schwarze (eds.), ‘Words in
BIBLIOGRAPHY 253
Time: Diachronic Semantics from Different Points of View’, 295–350, Berlin: Mouton
de Gruyter.
Cameron, Deborah (1992). Feminism and Linguistic Theory, New York: St. Martin’s Press,
Inc.
Carnie, Andrew (2002). Syntax: A Generative Introduction, Malden: Blackwell.
Carnie, Andrew (2008). Constituent Structure, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Carstens, Vicki and Michael Diercks (2013). ‘Parameterizing Case and Activity: Hyper-
raising in Bantu’, in Seda Kan, Claire Moore-Cantwell, and Robert Staubs (eds.), ‘Pro-
ceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society’, 99–118,
Amherst, MA: GLSA Publications.
Cecchetto, Carlo and Caterina Donati (2015). (Re)labeling, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chang, Betty Shefts and Kun Chang (1980). ‘Ergativity in Spoken Tibetan’, Bulletin of the
Institute of History and Philology 51: 15–32.
Chen, Tingchun (2018). Multiple case assignment : an Amis case study, Doctoral disser-
tation, MIT.
Cheng, Lisa L.-S. and Rint Sybesma (2014). ‘The Syntactic Structure of Noun Phrases’,
in C.-T. James Huang, Audrey Li, and Andrew Simpson (eds.), ‘The Handbook of Chi-
nese Linguistics’, 248–274, West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Section: 10 _eprint:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/9781118584552.ch10.
Cheng, Lisa Lai Shen (1991). On the Typology of Wh-Questions, Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
Cheng, Lisa Lai Shen (1997). On the Typology of Wh-Questions, New York: Garland Press.
Cheng, Lisa Lai Shen and Rint Sybesma (1988). ‘yi-wan tang, yi-ge tang: Classifiers and
massifiers’, Tsing-Hua Journal of Chinese Studies 28 (3): 385–412.
Cheng, Lisa Lai-Shen and Rint Sybesma (2012). ‘Classifiers and DP’, Linguistic Inquiry
43 (4): 634–650.
Chierchia, Gennaro (1998). ‘Reference to kinds across languages’, Natural Language Se-
mantics 6 (4): 339–405.
Cho, Sae-Youn (2006). ‘A study on case stacking and case alternation in korean: A
constraint-based approach’, Studies in Modern Grammar 43: 101–115.
254 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Cho, Sungdai and John Whitman (2019). Korean: A Linguistic Introduction, Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press, URL https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/
korean/1F8BF29C717FB36EBB48024B087BD1F5.
Chomsky, Noam (1955). The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory, Chicago, IL: University
of Chicago Press.
Chomsky, Noam (1957). Syntactic Structures, Janua Linguarum, vol. 4, The Hague: Mou-
ton.
Chomsky, Noam (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, Noam (1970). ‘Remarks on Nominalization’, in Roderick Jacobs and Peter

Rosenbaum (eds.), ‘Readings in English Transformational Grammar’, 184–221, Wash-
ington: Georgetown UP.
Chomsky, Noam (1977). ‘On wh-movement’, in Peter W. Culicover, Thomas Wasow, and
Adrian Akmajian (eds.), ‘Formal Syntax’, 71–132, New York, NY: Academic Press, Inc.
Chomsky, Noam (1980a). ‘On Binding’, Linguistic Inquiry 11 (1): 1–46.
Chomsky, Noam (1980b). Rules and Representations, New York: Columbia UP.
Chomsky, Noam (1981). Lectures on Government and Binding, Dordrecht: Foris.
Chomsky, Noam (1982). Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government
and Binding, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, Noam (1986a). Barriers, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, Noam (1986b). Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use,
Convergence (New York, N.Y.), Praeger, URL https://books.google.co.kr/books?id=
b0VZPtZDL8kC.
Chomsky, Noam (1993). ‘A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory’, in Ken Hale and
Samuel J. Keyser (eds.), ‘The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of
Sylvain Bromberger’, 1–52, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, Noam (1994). Bare Phrase Structure, MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics, vol. 5,
Cambridge, MA: MIT Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, MITWPL.
Chomsky, Noam (1995). The Minimalist Program, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, Noam (1998). ‘Minimalist Inquiries: the Framework’, .

BIBLIOGRAPHY 255
Chomsky, Noam (2000). ‘Minimalist Inquiries: The Framework’, in Roger Martin,

D. Michaels, and Juan Uriagereka (eds.), ‘Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax
in Honor of Howard Lasnik’, 89–156, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, Noam (2001). ‘Derivation by Phase’, in Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), ‘Ken Hale: A
Life in Language’, 1–52, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, Noam (2004). ‘Beyond Explanatory Adequacy’, in Adriana Belletti (ed.), ‘The
cartography of syntactic structures, Vol. 3, Structures and Beyond’, Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Chomsky, Noam (2013). ‘Problems of projection’, Lingua 130 (1): 33–49.
Chomsky, Noam (2015). ‘Problems of projection: Extensions’, in Elisa Di Domenico, Cor-

nelia Hamann, and Simona Matteini (eds.), ‘Structures, Strategies and Beyond: Studies
in honour of Adriana Belletti’, 3–16, Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Chomsky, Noam (2019). ‘Some Puzzling Foundational Issues: The Reading Program’,
Catalan Journal of Linguistics 0 (0), URL https://raco.cat/index.php/CatalanJournal/
article/view/10.5565-rev-catjl.287. Section: Articles.
Chomsky, Noam (2020). ‘The UCLA Lectures’, .
Chomsky, Noam & and Howard Lasnik (1977). ‘Filters and Control’, Linguistic Inquiry 8:
425–504.
Chomsky, Noam, Ángel J. Gallego, and Dennis Ott (2019). ‘Generative Grammar
and the Faculty of Language: Insights, Questions, and Challenges’, Catalan Jour-
nal of Linguistics 0 (0): 229–261, URL https://revistes.uab.cat/catJL/article/view/
sp2019-chomsky-gallego-ott.
Chomsky, Noam and Morris Halle (1968). The Sound Pattern of English, New York, NY:
Harper & Row.
Chung, Sandra (2009). ‘Six Arguments for Wh-Movement in Chamorro’, in Donna Gerdts,
John Moore, and Maria Polinsky (eds.), ‘Hypothesis A/Hypothesis B: Linguistic Explo-
rations in Honor of David M. Perlmutter’, 91–110, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chung, Sandra and William J. Seiter (1980). ‘The History of Raising and Relativization
in Polynesian’, Language 56 (3): 622–638, URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/414453.
Publisher: Linguistic Society of America.
256 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Cinque, Guglielmo (1981). ‘On Keenan and Comrie’s Primary Relativization Constraint’,
Linguistic Inquiry 12 (2): 293–308, URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/4178220. Pub-
lisher: The MIT Press.
Cinque, Guglielmo and Luigi Rizzi (2008). ‘The Cartography of Syntactic Structures’, STiL
– Studies in Linguistics 2: 43–59.
Citko, B. (2011). Symmetry in Syntax: Merge, Move and Labels, Cambridge Studies in
Linguistics, Cambridge University Press, URL https://books.google.co.kr/books?id=
iZNYouJIccUC.
Citko, Barbara (2017). ‘Right node raising’, in ‘The wiley blackwell compan-
ion to syntax, second edition’, 1–33, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, URL https:
//onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781118358733.wbsyncom020. Tex.eprint:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/9781118358733.wbsyncom020.
Clackson, James (2007). Indo-European Linguistics: An Introduction, Cambridge: Cam-

bridge University Press.
Cole, Peter (1987). ‘The Structure of Internally Headed Relative Clauses’, Natural Lan-
guage & Linguistic Theory 5 (2): 277–302, URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/4047634.
Publisher: Springer.
Comrie, Bernard (1989). Language Universals and Linguistic Typology, Oxford: Basil
Blackwell, 2nd edn.
Comrie, Bernard and Edward L. Keenan (1979). ‘Noun Phrase Accessibility Revisited’,
Language 55: 649–664.
Conrod, Kirby (2019). Pronouns raising and emerging, Doctoral Dissertation, University
of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Coon, Jessica (2013). Aspects of Split Ergativity, Oxford Studies in Comparative Syntax,
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Coon, Jessica and Omer Preminger (2017). ‘Split Ergativity is not about Ergativity’, in Jes-
sica Coon, Diane Massam, and Lisa Travis (eds.), ‘The Oxford handbook of ergativity’,
226–252, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Publisher: Oxford University Press Oxford.
Corbett, Greville G. (2000). Number, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cornilescu, Alexandra (2000). ‘The Double Subject Construction in Romanian’, in Virginia

Montapanyane (ed.), ‘Comparative Studies in Romanian Syntax’, 83–133, Amsterdam:
Brill.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 257
Cowper, Elizabeth (1992). A Concise Introduction to Government and Binding Theory,

Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Cruschina, Silvio (2011). Discourse-Related Features and Functional Projections, Oxford:

Oxford University Press.
da Cunha, Celso Ferreira and Luís Filipe Lindley Cintra (1985). Breve gramática do por-
tuguês contemporâneo, Lisbon: J.S. da Costa.
Dalrymple, Mary and Irina Nikolaeva (2011). Objects and information structure, Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Davies, William D. and Stanley Dubinsky (2003). ‘On extraction from NPs’, Natural Lan-
guage and Linguistic Theory 21 (1): 1–37.
Dayal, Veneeta (2011). ‘Hindi Pseudo-Incorporation’, Natural Language & Linguistic The-
ory 29 (1): 123–167.
Dayal, Veneeta (2016). Questions, Oxford surveys in semantics and pragmatics, Oxford:
Deal, Amy Rose and Catherine O’Connor (2010). ‘The Perspectival Basis of Fluid-S Case-
Marking in Northern Pomo’, in Suzi Lima (ed.), ‘Proceedings of the Fifth Conference on
the Semantics of Under-Represented Languages in the Americas’, 173–188, Amherst,
MA: GLSA Publications.
Denham, Kristin (2000). ‘Optional Wh-Movement In Babine-Witsuwit’en’, Natural Lan-

guage and Linguistic Theory 18 (2): 199–251, URL http://link.springer.com/10.1023/A:
1006475026526.
Diercks, Michael (2012). ‘Parameterizing Case: Evidence from Bantu’, Syntax 15 (3): 253–
286.
Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. (2008). ‘Language Ecology and Linguistic Diversity on the African
Continent’, Language and Linguistics Compass 2 (5): 840–858, URL https://compass.
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00085.x.
Dixon, R. M. W. (1979). ‘Ergativity’, Language: Journal of the Linguistic Society of America.

Los Angeles, CA 55: 59–138.
Dixon, R. M. W. (1987). ‘Studies in Ergativity’, Lingua: International Review of General

Linguistics (Lingua) .
Dixon, R.M.W. (1994). Ergativity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

258 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen (1994). The Syntax of Romanian, The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.
Dryer, Matthew S. (1991). ‘SVO Languages and the OV:VO Typology’, Journal of Linguis-
tics 27 (2): 443–482, URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/4176126. Publisher: Cambridge
University Press.
Dryer, Matthew S. (2011). ‘Order of Subject, Object and Verb’, URL http://wals.info/
feature/83.
Déchaine, Rose-Marie and Martina Wiltschko (2002). ‘Decomposing Pronouns’, Linguistic

Inquiry 33 (3): 409–442.
Epstein, Melissa A. (1999). ‘On the Singular Indefinite Article in English’, in Gianluca
Storto (ed.), ‘UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics, Vol 3: Syntax at Sunset 2’, 14–58,
Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics.
Erlewine, Michael Yoshitaka (2017). ‘Low sentence-final particles in Mandarin Chinese

and the Final-over-Final Constraint’, Journal of East Asian Linguistics 26 (1): 37–75,
URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-016-9150-9.
Erlewine, Michael Yoshitaka, Theodore Levin, and Coppe Van Urk (2017). ‘Ergativity and
Austronesian-Type Voice Systems’, in Jessica Coon, Diane Massam, and Lisa Demena
Travis (eds.), ‘The Oxford Handbook of Ergativity’, 373–396, Oxford University Press, 1
edn., URL https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/37094/chapter/323333000.
Ernst, Thomas (2002). The Syntax of Adjuncts, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Everaert, Martin B. H., Marinus A. C. Huybregts, Noam Chomsky, Robert C. Berwick,

and Johan J. Bolhuis (2015). ‘Structures, Not Strings: Linguistics as Part of the
Cognitive Sciences’, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 19 (12): 729–743, URL http://www.
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364661315002326.
Fanselow, Gisbert (2003). ‘Münchhausen-Style Head Movement and the Analysis of Verb
Second’, UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics 13: 40–76.
Felser, Claudia (2004). ‘Wh-copying, phases, and successive cyclicity’, Lingua 114 (5):
543–574.
Fillmore, Charles J. (1968). ‘The Case for Case’, in Emmon Bach and Robert Harms (eds.),
‘Universals in Linguistic Theory’, 1–90, New York City, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Fodor, Janet Dean and Carrie Crowther (2002). ‘Understanding stimulus poverty argu-
ments’, The Linguistic Review 19 (1-2): 105–145, URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/tlir.
19.1-2.105.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 259
Foley, William A. and Robert D. Jr. Van Valin (1984). Functional syntax and universal
grammar, Cambridge: Cambidge University Press.
Fox, Danny (1999). ‘Reconstruction, Binding Theory, and the Interpretation of Chains’,
Frege, Gottlob (1891). ‘Function and Concept’, .
Frigeni, Chiara (2004). ‘’How do you miss your external argument?’ Non-active voice al-
ternations in Italian’, Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 23 (1): 47–94.
Fukui, Naoki (1995). Theory of projection in syntax, Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Galloway, Brent (1993). A Grammar of Upriver Halkomelem, Berkeley, Los Angeles, Lon-
don: University of California Press.
Ghomeshi, Jila (2010). Grammar Matters: The social significance of how we use language,
Winnipeg, MB: Arbeiter Ring Publishing.
Ghomeshi, Jila and Diane Massam (2020). ‘Number is Different in Nominal and Pronom-
inal Phrases’, Linguistic Inquiry 51 (3): 597–610, URL https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_
00350. _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00350.
Giorgi, Alessandra and Fabio Pianesi (1997). Tense and Aspect: From Semantics to Mor-
phosyntax, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Greenberg, Joseph (1963). Universals of Language, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Greenberg, Joseph (1977). ‘Numeral classifiers and substantival number: Problems in the
genesis of a linguistic type’, in Adam Makkai, Valeri Becker Makkai, and Luigi Heilmann
(eds.), ‘Linguistics at the crossroads’, 276–300, Lake Bluff, IL: Jupiter Press.
Greenberg, Joseph H. (1955). Studies in African Linguistic Classification, New Haven, CT:
Compass Publishing Company. Tex.lccn: 57001130.
Grimshaw, Jane (1979). ‘Complement Selection and the Lexicon’, Linguistic Inquiry 10 (2):
279–326.
Gruber, Jeffrey (1965). Studies in lexical relations, Ph.D. Dissertation, MIT.
Gruber, Jeffrey S. (2001). ‘Thematic Relations in Syntax’, in Mark Baltin and Chris Collins
(eds.), ‘The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory’, 257–298, Oxford: Blackwell
Publishing.
260 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Guntsetseg, Dolgor (2016). Differential Case Marking in Mongolian, Tunguso-Sibirica,

Harrassowitz Verlag.
Haider, Hubert (2010). The Syntax of German, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hale, Ken (1983). ‘Warlpiri and the Grammar of Non-Configurational Languages’, Natural
Language and Linguistic Theory 1 (1): 5–47.
Hale, Kenneth and Samuel Jay Keyser (2002). Prolegomenon to a Theory of Argument
Structure, Linguistic Inquiry Monograph, vol. 39, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Halle, Morris and Alec Marantz (1993). ‘Distributed Morphology and the Pieces of Inflec-
tion’, in Kenneth Hale and Samuel J. Keyser (eds.), ‘The View from Building 20: Essays
in Linguistic in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger’, 111–176, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hanink, Emily A. (2020). ‘DP structure and internally headed relatives in Washo’, Natural
Language & Linguistic Theory URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-020-09482-y.
Harizanov, Boris and Vera Gribanova (2019). ‘Whither head movement?’, Natu-
ral Language & Linguistic Theory 37 (2): 461–522, URL https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11049-018-9420-5.
Harley, Heidi (2004). ‘Merge, conflation and head movement: The First Sister Principle
revisited’, in Keir Moulton and Matthew Wolf (eds.), ‘NELS 34’, 239–254, Amherst, MA:
GLSA.
Harley, Heidi (2007). ‘External Arguments: On the independence of Voice° and v°’, files,
CD6: GLOW XXX.
Harley, Heidi (2010). ‘Thematic roles’, in Patrick Hogan (ed.), ‘The Cambridge Encyclope-
dia of the Language Sciences’, 861–862, Cambridge: Cambidge University Press.
Harley, Heidi (2013). ‘External arguments and the Mirror Principle: On the distinctness
of Voice and v’, Lingua 125 (1): 34–57.
Harris, Randy Allen (1995). The Linguistics Wars, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hashimoto, Daiki (2020). ‘Scientific Standards for Linguistics’, ICU Working Papers in
Linguistics 9: 11–17.
Hiemstra, Inge (1986). ‘Some aspects of wh-questions in Frisian’, Nowele 8: 97–110.
Hornstein, Norbert (2001). Move! A minimalist theory of construal, Oxford: Blackwell Pub-
lishing.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 261
Hornstein, Norbert and Jairo Nunes (2008). ‘Adjunction, Labelling, and Bare Phrase
Structure’, Biolinguistics 2 (1): 57–86.
Huang, C.-T. James (1982). Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar, Ph.D.
Dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Huang, C.-T. James (1988). ‘Wo pao de kuài and Chinese Phrase Structure’, Language
64 (2): 274–311.
Huang, C. T. James (1994). ‘Verb Movement and Some Syntax-semantics Mismatches in

Chinese’, Chinese Languages and Linguistics 2: 587–613.
Hwang, Hyun Kyung (2011). ‘The Interaction of Accent and wh-intonation in Korean and
Japanese’, Language Research 47 (1): 45–70.
Hwang, Kyu-Hong (2022). ‘Singular They in English: Its Origin and Developments’, 새한
영어영문학 (The New Korean Journal of English Language & Literature) 64 (1): 175–194.
Hyams, Nina (1986). Language Acquisition and the Theory of Parameters, Dordrecht:
Riedel.
Ingham, Bruce (2003). Lakota, Munich: Lincom.
Ionin, Tania and Ora Matushansky (2018). Cardinals: The Syntax and Semantics of
Cardinal-Containing Expressions, Linguistic Inquiry Monographs, Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Itkonen, Esa (1991). Universal History of Linguistics: India, China, Arabia, Europe, Studies
in the History of the Language Sciences, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Company.
Jackendoff, Ray (1972). Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar, Cambridge, MA:

MIT Press.
Jackendoff, Ray (1977). X-bar Syntax: A Study of Phrase Structure, Linguistic Inquiry
Monographs, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Jacobs, Peter (1994). ‘The inverse in Squamish’, in Talmy Gívon (ed.), ‘Voice and Inversion’,
121–146, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Jelinek, Eloise (1984). ‘Empty categories, case, and configurationality’, Natural Language
& Linguistic Theory 2 (1): 39–76.
262 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Jeong, Sunwoo (2018). ‘Causatives and Inchoatives in Korean: A Unified Ac-

count’, in Shin Fukuda, Mary Shin Kim, and Mee-Jeong Park (eds.), ‘Proceed-
ings of the 25th Japanese/Korean Linguistics Conference (JK 25)’, CSLI Pub-
lications, URL https://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/
ja-ko-contents/JK25/JK25-Jeong.pdf.
Johns, Alana (1992). ‘Deriving Ergativity’, Linguistic Inquiry 23 (1): 57–87.
Joseph, Brian D. (1983). ‘Relativization in modern Greek: Another look at the accessi-
bility hierarchy constraints’, Lingua 60 (1): 1–24, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/
science/article/pii/002438418390044X.
Jung, Hyun Kyoung (2014). ‘Korean First Phase Syntax as Non-Voice-bundling’, 생성문법연
구 24 (1): 201–229, URL http://scholar.dkyobobook.co.kr/searchDetail.laf?barcode=
4010023794680. Publisher: 한국생성문법학회.
Jónsson, Jóhannes Gísli (2003). ‘Not so quirky: On subject Case in Icelandic’, in Ellen
Brandner and Heike Zinsmeister (eds.), ‘New perspectives on Case theory’, 127–163,
Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Kalin, Laura (2014). ‘The syntax of OVS word order in Hixkaryana’, Natural Language &
Linguistic Theory 32 (4): 1089–1104, URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-014-9244-x.
Kang, Sang-kyun (2016). ‘DP internal structure of korean’, Language Research 52 (3):
323–368.
Kato, Mary A., Ana Maria Martins, and Jairo Nunes (2023). The Syntax of Portuguese,
Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Kaufmann, Ingrid (2007). ‘Middle voice’, Lingua 117 (10): 1677–1714.
Kayne, Richard (1975). French Syntax: The Transformational Cycle, Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Kayne, Richard (1989). ‘Facets of Romance past participle agreement’, in Paola Benincà
(ed.), ‘Dialect Variation and the Theory of Grammar’, 85–103, Dordrecht: Foris.
Kayne, Richard (1994). The Antisymmetry of Syntax, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kayne, Richard (2003). ‘Antisymmetry, Adpositions and Remnant Movement’, conferences

box.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 263
Keenan, Edward L. (1985). ‘Passive in the World’s Languages’, in Timothy Shopen (ed.),
‘Language Typology and Syntactic Description, I: Clause Structure; II: Complex Con-
structions; III: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon’, I:243–281, Cambridge: Cam-
bridge UP.
Keenan, Edward L. and Bernard Comrie (1977). ‘Noun Phrase Accessibility and Universal
Grammar’, Linguistic Inquiry. Amherst, MA 8: 63–99.
Kellogg, Brainerd and Alonzo Reed (1877). Higher Lessons in English, New York: Clark &
Maynard.
Kim, Jong-Bok (1999). ‘Grammatical Interfaces in Korean Internally Headed Relative

Clause Construction’, Linguistic Research 17: 257–275.
Kim, Kyumin and Paul B. Melchin (2018). ‘Modifying plurals, classifiers, and co-
occurrence: The case of Korean’, Glossa 3 (1): 25.
Kim, Min-Joo (2007). ‘Formal linking in Internally Headed Relatives’, Natural Language
Semantics 15 (4): 279–315, URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-007-9020-0.
Kim, Nayoung (1978). ‘Tolok Sentential Complements in Korean’, in ‘Papers in Korean

Linguistics: Proceedings of the Symposium on Korean Linguistics’, 137–147, Columbia:
Hornbeam Press.
Kim, Sun-Woong and Gui-Sun Moon (2021). ‘NP/DP Parameter and (In)definiteness in
Articleless Languages’, Studies in Generative Grammar 31 (2): 273–308.
Kiss, Katalin (1985). ‘Parasitic gaps and case’, .
Kiss, Katalin (1994). ‘Sentence structure and word order’, in F. Kiefer and K. Kiss (eds.),
‘The syntactic structure of Hungarian’, Syntax and semantics 27, 1–90, New York: Aca-
demic Press.
Klaiman, M.H. (1991). Grammatical Voice, Cambridge Studies in Linguistics, Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.
Konnelly, Lex and Elizabeth Cowper (2020). ‘Gender diversity and morphosyntax: An
account of singular they’, Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 5 (1): 40.
Koopman, Hilda (1984). The Syntax of Verbs: from Verb Movement rules in the Kru Lan-
guages to Universal Grammar, Dordrecht: Foris.
264 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Koopman, Hilda and Dominique Sportiche (1991). ‘The position of subjects’, Lingua 85 (2-
3): 211–258, URL http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V6H-4666CX5-66/2/
ab4d4b527581262d09af516295b9434a.
Koopman, Hilda and Anna Szabolcsi (2000). Verbal Complexes, Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Kramer, Christina (2006). ‘Grave Accents, analyzing nation, identity and the death of
Serbo-Croatian’, idea&s 3 (2): 30–31.
Kratzer, Angelika (1996). ‘Severing the External Argument from its Verb’, in Johan
Rooryck and Laurie Zaring (eds.), ‘Phrase Structure and the Lexicon’, 109–138, Dor-
drecht: Kluwer.
Kroeger, Paul (1993). Phrase Structure and Grammatical Relations in Tagalog, Stanford,
CA: CSLI Publications.
Lagunoff, Rachel (1997). Singular they, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Los
Angeles.
Laka, Itziar (1994). On the Syntax of Negation, New York City, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Larson, Richard K. (1988). ‘On the Double Object Construction’, Linguistic Inquiry 19 (3):
335–391.
Larson, Richard K. (1990). ‘Double Objects Revisited: Reply to Jackendoff’, Linguistic In-
quiry 21 (4): 589–632.
Lasnik, Howard and Mamoru Saito (1992). Move Alpha: Conditions on its Application and
Output, vol. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Lasnik, Howard and Juan Uriagereka (2002). ‘On the poverty of the challenge’, The Lin-
guistic Review 19 (1-2): 147–150, URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/tlir.19.1-2.147.
Lebeaux, David (1991). ‘Relative Clauses, Licensing and the Nature of the Derivation’,
in Susan Rothstein (ed.), ‘Syntax and Semantics 25: Perspective on Phrase Structure:
Heads and licensing’, 209–239, San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Lebeaux, David (2009). Where Does Binding Theory Apply?, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Lee, Soo-Hwan and Yining Nie (2022). ‘Korean case stacking and the nominal template’,
in ‘Proceedings of PLC 45’, .
Lees, Robert (1960). The Grammar of English Nominalizations, The Hague: Mouton.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 265
Lefebvre, Claire (1982). ‘L’expansion d’une catégorie grammaticale: Le determinant la’, in

Lefebvre, Claire, Magloire-Holly, Hélène, and Nanie Piou (eds.), ‘Syntaxe de l’haïtien’,
21–63, Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma.
Legate, Julie (2003). ‘Some Interface Properties of the Phase’, Linguistic Inquiry 34 (3):
506–516.
Legate, Julie Anne (2008). ‘Morphological and Abstract Case’, Linguistic Inquiry 39 (1):
55–101, URL http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/ling.2008.39.1.55.
Legate, Julie Anne (2014). Voice and v: Lessons from Acehnese, Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Legate, Julie Anne (2021). ‘Noncanonical Passives: A Typology of Voices in an Impover-

ished Universal Grammar’, Annual Review of Linguistics 7 (1): 157–176, URL https:
//www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031920-114459.
Legate, Julie Anne and Charles D. Yang (2002). ‘Empirical re-assessment of stimulus
poverty arguments’, The Linguistic Review 19 (1-2): 151–162, URL http://dx.doi.org/
10.1515/tlir.19.1-2.151.
Lev, Shaul (2016). Hebrew Labile Alternation, Master’s thesis, Tel Aviv University.
Levin, Beth (1993). English Verb Classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation.,
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Levin, Beth and Malka Rappaport Hovav (1994). Unaccusativity: At the Syntax-Lexical
Semantics Interface, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Levin, Lori and Jane Simpson (1981). ‘Quirky Case and Lexical Representations of Ice-
landic Verbs’, in Roberta A. Hendrick, Carrie S. Masek, and Mary Frances Miller (eds.),
‘Papers from the Seventeenth Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society’, 185–196,
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, Chicago Linguistics Society.
Levin, Theodore (2015). Licensing without Case, doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge,
MA.
Levin, Theodore (2017). ‘Successive-cyclic case assignment: Korean nominative-

nominative case-stacking’, Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 35 (2): 447–498, URL
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-016-9342-z.
Li, Audrey (2008). ‘Case, 20 Years Later’, in Marjorie K. M. Chan and Hana Kang (eds.),
‘Proceedings of the 20th North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics’, vol. 1,
41–68, Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.
266 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Li, Yen-Hui Audrey (1985). Abstract Case in Chinese, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of
Southern California.
Li, Yen-Hui Audrey (1990). Order and Constituency in Mandarin Chinese, Dordrecht:
Kluwer.
Li, Yen-Hui Audrey (1999). ‘Plurality in a Classifier Language’, Journal of East Asian Lin-
guistics 8 (1): 75–99.
Li, Yen-Hui Audrey (2006). ‘Chinese Ba’, in Martin Everaert (ed.), ‘The Blackwell Com-
panion to Syntax’, vol. 3, 374–468, Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Lounsbury, Floyd Glenn (1953). Oneida Verb Morphology, New Haven, CT: Yale University.
Mahajan, Anoop (2003). ‘Word Order and (Remnant) VP Movement’, in Simin Karimi (ed.),
‘Word Order and Scrambling’, 217–237, Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
Marantz, Alec (1984). On the Nature of Grammatical Relations, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Marantz, Alec (1991). ‘Case and Licensing’, in Germán F. Westphal, Benjamin Ao, and
Hee-Rahk Chae (eds.), ‘ESCOL 91: Proceedings of the Eighth Eastern States Conference
on Linguistics’, 234–253.
Marantz, Alec (2001). ‘Words’, files.
Marvin, Tatjana (2003). Topics in the Stress and Syntax of Words, Ph.D Dissertation, MIT,
Cambridge, MA.
Massam, Diane (1985). Case Theory and the Projection Principle, Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
Massam, Diane (2001). ‘Pseudo Noun Incorporation in Niuean’, Natural Language & Lin-
guistic Theory 19 (1): 153–197.
Massam, Diane (2009). ‘On the Separation and Relatedness of Classifiers, Number, and
Individuation in Niuean’, Language and Linguistics 10 (4): 669–699.
Massam, Diane (2020). Niuean: Predicates and Arguments in an Isolating Language, Ox-
ford Studies of Endangered Languages, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Matthews, Stephen and Virginia Yip (1994). Cantonese: A Comprehensive Grammar, Lon-
don: Routledge.
May, Robert (1985). Logical Form: Its Structure and Derivation, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 267
McCloskey, James (1996). ‘On the scope of verb-movement in Irish’, Natural Language &
Linguistic Theory 14 (1): 47–104.
McCloskey, James (2001a). ‘The distribution of subject properties in Irish’, in William

Davies and Stanley Dubinsky (eds.), ‘Objects and other subjects’, 157–192, Dordrecht:
Kluwer Academic Press.
McCloskey, James (2001b). ‘The Morphosyntax of WH-extraction in Irish’, Journal of Lin-

guistics 37 (1): 67–100.
McCloskey, James (2011). ‘The Shape of Irish clauses’, in Andrew Carnie (ed.), ‘Formal
approaches to Celtic linguistics’, 37, Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
McCloskey, Jim (2017). ‘Ellipsis, polarity, and the cartography of verb-initial orders in
Irish’, in Enoch Aboh, Eric Haeberli, Genoveva Puskás, and Manuela Schönenberger
(eds.), ‘Theory and description’, 99–152, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, URL
https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501504037-005.
McDaniel, Dana (1986). Conditions on wh-chains, Ph. D. Dissertation, City University of

New York, City University of New York.
McDaniel, Dana (1989). ‘Partial and Multiple Wh-Movement’, Natural Language & Lin-
guistic Theory 7 (4): 565–604.
McGregor, William B. (2009). ‘Typology of Ergativity’, Language and Linguistics Compass

3 (1): 480–508, URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00118.x.
McKee, Cecile and Dana McDaniel (2001). ‘Resumptive Pronouns in English Relative
Clauses’, Language Acquisition 9 (2): 113–156, URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/
20011506. Publisher: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
McWhorter, James (1998). Word on the Street: Debunking the Myth of a Pure Standard
English, Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publications.
Michelson, Karin and Mercy Doxtator (2002). Oneida-English/English-Oneida Dictionary,

Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
Miller, Philip H. (1992). Clitics and constituents in phrase structure grammar, New York
City, NY: Garland Press.
Milroy, James and Lesley Milroy (1998). Authority in Language, London: Routledge.
Mithun, Marianne (1991). ‘Active/Agentive Case Marking and its Motivations’, Language
67 (3): 510–546.
268 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Montague, Richard (1970). ‘English as a Formal Language’, in Bruno Visentini (ed.), ‘Lin-
guaggi nella societa e nella tecnica’, 188–221, Edizioni di Communita.
Motut, Alexandra (2010). ‘Merge over Move and the empirical force of economy in Mini-
malism’, Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 33: 54.
Moulton, Keir, Trevor Block, Holly Gendron, Dennis Storoshenko, Jesse Weir, Sara
Williamson, and Chung-hye Han (2022). ‘Bound Variable Singular They Is Under-
specified: The Case of All vs. Every’, Frontiers in Psychology 13, URL https://www.
frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.880687.
Moulton, Keir, Chung-Hye Han, Trevor Block, Holly Gendron, and Sander Nederveen
(2020). ‘Singular they in context’, Glossa: a Journal of General Linguistics 5 (1): 122.
Mpiranya, Fidèle (2015). Swahili Grammar and Workbook, Abingdon and New York: Rout-
ledge.
Muchahary, Laheram (2014). ‘Case Markers in Tiwa Language: A Brief Study’, Language
in India 14 (1): 220–229.
Nakajima, Heizo (2001). ‘Linguistic Description and Theory’, Korean Journal of English
Language and Linguistics 1 (3): 349–368.
Newell, Heather (2008). Aspects of the Morphology and Phonology of Phases, Ph.D Disser-
tation, McGill University, Montreal, QC.
Newmeyer, Frederick (2014). Linguistic Theory in America, San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
Oehrle, Richard T. (1976). The Grammatical Status of the English Dative Alternation, Doc-
toral Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Okimasis, Jean L. (2004). Cree, Language of the Plains, Cree language labs, Regina, SK:
University of Regina Press.
Owen-Smith, Thomas (2015). Grammatical Relations in Tamang, a Tibeto-Burman Lan-

guage of Nepal Thomas, doctoral dissertation, SOAS, University of London.
Palmer, Frank R. (2001). Mood and Modality, Cambridge: Cambidge University Press.
Pan, Victor Junnan (2022). ‘Deriving Head-Final Order in the Peripheral Domain of Chi-
nese’, Linguistic Inquiry 53 (1): 121–154, URL https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00396.
_eprint: https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00396.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 269
Pan, Victor Junnan and Waltraud Paul (2016). ‘Why Chinese SFPs are neither optional
nor disjunctors’, Lingua 170: 23–34, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/
article/pii/S0024384115002004.
Park, Myung Kwan and Sun-Woong Kim (2009). ‘The Syntax of Afterthoughts in Korean:
Move and Delete’, The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal 17 (4): 25–53.
Park, So-Young (2008). Functional categories: The syntax of DP and DegP, Doctoral Dis-
sertation, University of Southern California.
Park, So-Young (2020). ‘The Role of Human and Definite Features in Korean Pluralization’,
생성문법연구 (Studies in Generative Grammar) 30 (2): 175–196. Publisher: 한국생성문법학
회.
Perlmutter, David M. and S. Soames (1978). Syntactic Argumentation and the Structure of
English, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Pesetsky, David (1982). Paths and Categories, Ph.D. Dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Pesetsky, David (2000). Phrasal Movement and its Kin, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
du Plessis, Hans (1977). ‘Wh-Movement in Afrikaans’, Linguistic Inquiry 8 (4): 723–726.
Poletto, Cecilia and Jean-Yves Pollock (2004). ‘On the left periphery of some Romance
wh-questions’, in Luigi Rizzi (ed.), ‘The Structure of CP and IP: The Cartography of
Syntactic Structures Volume 2’, 251–296, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Polinsky, Maria (2016). Deconstructing Ergativity: Two Types of Ergative Languages and
Their Features, Oxford Studies in Comparative Syntax, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Polinsky, Maria (2018). Heritage Languages and Their Speakers, Cambridge Studies in
Linguistics, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Pollock, Jean-Yves (1989). ‘Verb Movement, Universal Grammar, and the Structure of IP’,
Postal, Paul (1969). ‘On so-called ‘pronouns in English’, in D. Reibel and S. A. Schane
(eds.), ‘Modern Studies in English’, 201–224, Eaglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Postal, Paul (1974). On Raising, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Postal, Paul Martin (1971). Cross-over Phenomena, Transatlantic series in linguistics, New
York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Preminger, Omer (2014). Agreement and Its Failures, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
270 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Preminger, Omer (2020). ‘Functional structure in the noun phrase: revisiting Hebrew
nominals’, Glossa: a Journal of General Linguistics 5 (1): 68.
Pullum, Geoffrey K. and Barbara C. Scholz (2002). ‘Empirical assessment of stimulus

poverty arguments’, The Linguistic Review 19 (1-2): 9–50.
Punske, Jeffrey (2023). Morphology: A Distributed Morphology Introduction, Hoboken, NJ:

Wiley.
Pylkkänen, Liina (2008). Introducing Arguments, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ramchand, Gillian (2008). Verb Meaning and the Lexicon: A First-Phase Syntax, Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Reinhart, Tanya (1976). The Syntactic Domain of Anaphora, Ph. D. Dissertation, MIT,
Cambridge, MA.
Reinhart, Tanya (1981). ‘Definites NP Anaphora and C-Command Domains’, Linguistic

Inquiry 12 (4): 605–635.
Reinhart, Tanya (2002). ‘The Theta System - An Overview’, Theoretical Linguistics 28 (3):
229–290.
Rice, Keren (1991). ‘Intransitives in Slave (Northern Athapaskan): Arguments for Unac-
cusatives’, International Journal of American Linguistics 57 (1): 51–69.
Richards, Marc (2019). ‘Problems of ‘Problems of Projection’: Breaking a concep-

tual tie’, Catalan Journal of Linguistics 139–152, URL https://raco.cat/index.php/
CatalanJournal/article/view/10.5565-rev-catjl.220.
Richards, Norvin (1997). What moves where, when, and in which language, Ph.D. Disser-
tation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Richards, Norvin (1999). ‘Featural Cyclicity and the Ordering of Multiple Specifiers’, in
Samuel David Epstein and Norbert Hornstein (eds.), ‘Working Minimalism’, 127–157,
Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Richards, Norvin (2001). Movement in Language: Interactions and architectures, Oxford:

Richards, Norvin (2013). ‘Lardil “Case stacking” and the timing of case
assignment’, Syntax (Oxford, England) 16 (1): 42–76, URL https://
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9612.2012.00169.x. Tex.eprint:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1467-9612.2012.00169.x.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 271
Ritter, Elizabeth (1991). ‘Two functional categories in noun phrases: evidence from Mod-
ern Hebrew’, in Susan Rothstein (ed.), ‘Syntax and semantics, Volume 25: Perspective
on phrase structure’, 37–62, New York: Academic Press.
Ritter, Elizabeth (1992). ‘Cross-Linguistic Evidence for Number Phrase’, Canadian Journal
of Linguistics 37 (2): 197–218.
Ritter, Elizabeth (1993). ‘Where’s Gender?’, Linguistic Inquiry 24 (4): 795–803.
Rivero, María-Luisa (1994). ‘Clause Structure and V-Movement in the Languages of the
Balkans’, Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 12 (1): 63–120.
Rizzi, Luigi (1990). Relativized Minimality, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Rizzi, Luigi (1997). ‘The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery’, in Liliane Haegeman (ed.),
‘Elements of Grammar: A handbook in generative syntax’, 281–337, Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Rizzi, Luigi (2001). ‘On the Position of Int(errogative) in the Left Periphery of the Clause’,
in Guglielmo Cinque and Giampaolo Salvi (eds.), ‘Current Studies in Italian Syntax:
Essays offered to Lorenzo Renzi’, 287–296, Amsterdam: North Holland, URL http://
www.ciscl.unisi.it/persone/rizzi.htm.
Rizzi, Luigi (2006). ‘On the Form of Chains: Criterial Positions and ECP Effects’, in Lisa
Cheng and Norbert Corver (eds.), ‘Wh-Movement: Moving on’, 97–133, Cambridge: MIT
Press.
Roberts, Ian (1993). Verbs and Diachronic Syntax: A Comparative History of English and
French, Boston: Kluwer.
Roberts, Ian (2017). The Wonders of Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ross, John (1967). Constraints on Variables in Syntax, Ph.D. Dissertation, MIT, Cam-
bridge, MA.
Rowlett, Paul (2007). The Syntax of French, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ruangjaroon, Sugunya (2005). The Syntax of Wh-Expressions as Variables in Thai, Ph.D.

Dissertation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver.
Rubin, Edward J. (2003). ‘Determining Pair-Merge’, Linguistic Inquiry 34 (4): 660–668.
Rudin, Catherine (1988). ‘On multiple questions and multiple wh-fronting’, Natural Lan-
guage and Linguistic Theory 6: 445–501.
272 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Rullmann, Hotze, Lisa Matthewson, and Henry Davis (2008). ‘Modals as distributive in-
definites’, Natural Language Semantics 16 (4): 317–357, URL https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11050-008-9036-0.
Russell, Bertrand (1914). Our Knowledge of the External World: As a Field for Scientific
Method in Philosophy, London: George Allan and Unwin, Ltd.
Sabel, Joachim (2000). ‘Partial wh-movement and the typology of wh-questions’, in Uli
Lutz, Ana Müller, and Arnim Von Stechow (eds.), ‘Wh-Scope Marking’, 409–446, Ams-
terdam/Phildelphia: John Benjamins.
Saito, Mamoru (2016). ‘(A) Case for labeling: labeling in languages without -feature
agreement’, The Linguistic Review 33 (1): 129–175, URL https://doi.org/10.1515/
tlr-2019-2038.
Sande, Hannah L. (2017). Distributing morphologically conditioned phonology: Three case

studies from Guébie, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
Sato, Yosuke (2010). ‘One-replacement and the label-less theory of adjuncts’, Canadian
Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique 55 (3): 416–423.
Schachter, Paul (1976). ‘The Subject in Philippine Languages: topic, actor, actor-topic,
or none of the above?’, in Charles N. Li (ed.), ‘Subject and Topic’, 491–518, New York:
Academic Press.
Sells, Peter (1984). Syntax and Semantics of Resumptive Pronouns, Ph.D. Dissertation,
University of Massachussetts, Amherst.
Sheehan, Michelle, Theresa Biberauer, Ian Roberts, and Anders Holmberg (2017). The
Final-Over-Final Condition: A Syntactic Universal, Linguistic Inquiry Monographs, Cam-
bridge, MA: MIT Press.
Sheehan, Michelle L. (2013). ‘Some Implications of a Copy Theory of Labeling’, Syntax

16 (4): 362–396, URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/synt.12010.
Shelmerdine, Susan C. (2013). Introduction to Latin, Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing

Company, Incorporated.
Shim, Jae-Young (2018). ‘<φ, φ>-less Labeling’, Lanaguage Research 54 (1): 23–39, URL
https://doi.org/10.30961/lr.2018.54.1.23.
Shima, Etsuro (2000). ‘A Preference for Move over Merge’, Linguistic Inquiry 31 (2): 375–
385, URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/4179110.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 273
Shimoyama, Junko (1999). ‘Internally Headed Relative Clauses in Japanese and E-Type
Anaphora’, Journal of East Asian Linguistics 8 (2): 147–182, URL https://doi.org/10.
1023/A:1008338020411.
Shlonsky, Ur (1992). ‘Resumptive Pronouns as a Last Resort’, Linguistic Inquiry 23 (3):

443–468, URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/4178780. Publisher: The MIT Press.
Shlonsky, Ur (2010). ‘The Cartographic Enterprise in Syntax’, Language and Linguis-

tics Compass 4 (6): 417–429, URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/
j.1749-818X.2010.00202.x.
Simpson, Jane (1983). ‘Resultatives’, in Lori Levin, Malka Rappaport Hovav, and An-
nie Else Zaenen (eds.), ‘Papers in lexical-functional grammar’, 143–157, Bloomington,
IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
Skinner, Tobin (2009). Investigations of Downward Movement, Ph.D. Dissertation, McGill

University.
Soh, Hooi Ling (2014). ‘Aspect’, in C.-T. James Huang, Y.-H. Audrey Li, and Andrew
Simpson (eds.), ‘The Handbook of Chinese Linguistics’, 126–155, Wiley, 1 edn., URL
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781118584552.ch6.
Speas, Margaret (1990). Phrase Structure in Natural Language, Dordrecht: Kluwer Aca-
demic Publishers.
Spreng, Bettina (2005). ‘Antipassive Morphology and Case Assignment in Inuktitut’, in

Alana Johns, Diane Massam, and Juvenal Ndayiragije (eds.), ‘Ergativity: Emerging Is-
sues’, Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Staff LiveWire Calgary (2019). ‘MRU student-designed AR app provides Blackfoot lan-
guage translation’, LiveWire Calgary URL https://livewirecalgary.com/2019/10/10/
mru-student-designed-ar-app-provides-blackfoot-language-translation/.
Sternefeld, Wolfgang (1991). Syntaktische Grenzen: Chomskys Barrierentheorie und ihre

Weiterentwicklungen, Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Stowell, Tim (1981). Origins of Phrase Structure, Ph.D. Dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Subbarao, Karumuri V. and Peri Bhaskararao (2004). ‘8. Non-nominative subjects in Tel-
ugu’, in Karumuri V. Subbarao and Peri Bhaskararao (eds.), ‘Non-nominative subjects’,
161–196, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, URL https://www.jbe-platform.com/content/
books/9789027295163-tsl.61.10sub.
274 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Szabolcsi, Anna (1983). ‘The Possessor that Ran Away from Home’, The Linguistic Review
3 (1): 89–102.
Sáenz-Badillos, Angel (1996). A History of the Hebrew Language, Cambridge, England:

Cambridge University Press.
Tailleur, Sandrine (2013). The French Wh Interrogative System: Est-ce que, Clefting?, Doc-
toral Dissertation, University of Toronto.
Tellier, C. (2019). ‘17. Head-internal Relatives and Parasitic Baps in Moor£’, in Isabelle
Haik and Laurice Tuller (eds.), ‘Vol 6’, 298–318, De Gruyter Mouton, URL https://doi.
org/10.1515/9783110884890-018.
Travis, Lisa de Mena (1984). Parameters and Effects of Word Order Variation, Ph.D. Dis-
sertation, Massachussets Institute of Techonology, Cambridge, MA.
Travis, Lisa de Mena (1989). ‘Parameters of Phrase Structure’, in Mark Baltin and An-
thony Kroch (eds.), ‘Alternative Conceptions of Phrase Structure’, 263–279, Chicago,
IL: Chicago University Press.
Uriagereka, Juan (1999). ‘Multiple Spell Out’, in Samuel Epstein and Norbert Hornstein
(eds.), ‘Working Minimalism’, 251–282, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Van Der Wal, Jenneke (2015). ‘Evidence for abstract Case in Bantu’, Lingua 165: 109–
132, URL https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0024384115001369.
Van Valin, Robert and Randy LaPolla (1997). Syntax: Meaning, structure and function,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
de Villiers, Jill (1995). ‘Empty categories and complex sentences: The case of wh- ques-
tions’, in Paul Fletcher and Brian MacWhinney (eds.), ‘The handbook of Child Lan-
guage’, 508–540, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
de Villiers, Jill, Thomas Roeper, and Anne Vainikka (1990). ‘The Acquisition of Long-
Distance Rules’, in Lyn Frazier and Jill de Villiers (eds.), ‘Language Processing and Lan-
guage Acquisition. Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics, vol 10’, 257–297, Springer:
Dordrecht.
Wanner, Anja (2009). Deconstructing the English Passive, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Watanabe, Akira (2006). ‘Functional Projections of Nominals in Japanese: Syntax of Clas-

sifiers’, Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 24: 241–306.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 275
Webelhuth, Gert (1990). ‘Diagnostics for Structure’, in Günther Grewendorf and Hans
den Besten (eds.), ‘Scrambling and Barriers’, 41–76, Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Williams, Bev and Nita Rearden (2006). ‘Yup’ik Language Programs at Lower Kuskokwim
School District, Bethel, Alaska’, Journal of American Indian Education 45 (2): 37–41,
URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/24398604. Publisher: University of Minnesota Press.
Williams, Edwin S. (1977). ‘Discourse and Logical Form’, Linguistic Inquiry 8 (1): 101–139,
URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/4177974. Publisher: The MIT Press.
Williams, Edwin S. (1980). ‘Predication’, Linguistic Inquiry 11 (1): 203–238.
Williams, Edwin S. (1981). ‘Argument structure and morphology’, The Linguistic Review
1: 18–114.
Williamson, Janis Shirley (1984). Studies in Lakhota Grammar, Ph. D. Dissertation, Uni-
versity of California, San Diego.
Wiltschko, Martina (2003). ‘-exw as Third-Person Object Agreement in Halkomelem’, In-

ternational Journal of American Linguistics 69 (1): 76–91, URL http://www.jstor.org/
stable/10.1086/376486. Publisher: The University of Chicago Press.
Wiltschko, Martina (2006). ‘On ’Ergativity’ in Halkomelem Salish’, in Alana Johns, Di-
ane Massam, and Juvénal Ndayiragije (eds.), ‘Ergativity: Emerging Issues’, 197–227,
Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Wiltschko, Martina (2008). ‘The syntax of non-inflectional plural marking’, Natural Lan-
guage & Linguistic Theory 26 (3): 639–694.
Wiltschko, Martina (2014). The Universal Structure of Categories: Towards a Formal Ty-
pology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Woodbury, Hanni (2018). A Reference Grammar of the Onondaga Language, Toronto: Uni-
versity of Toronto Press.
Woolford, Ellen (2006). ‘Lexical Case, Inherent Case, and Argument Structure’, Linguistic
Inquiry 37 (1): 111–130.
Yang, Gu (1995). ‘Aspect Licensing, Verb Movement and Feature Checking’, Cahiers de
Linguistique Asie Orientale 24 (1): 49–83, URL https://brill.com/view/journals/clao/
24/1/article-p49_3.xml.
Yeon, Jaehoon (2015). ‘Passives’, in Lucien Brown and Jaehoon Yeon (eds.), ‘The Hand-
book of Korean Linguistics’, 116–136, West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
276 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Yoon, James (1996). ‘Ambiguity of government and the Chain Condition’, Natural Lan-
guage and Linguistic Theory 14 (1), URL http://link.springer.com/10.1007/BF00133404.
Yun, Jiwon (2008). ‘Noun-verb asymmetries in Korean phonology’, in Natasha Abner and
Jason Bishop (eds.), ‘Proceedings of the 27th <span class="nocase">West Coast Con-
ference on Formal Linguistics</span>’, 449–457, Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.
Yun, Jiwon (2023). ‘Wh-intonation in Korean’, in Sara Williamson, Adeola Aminat

Babayode-Lawal, Bosman, Nicole Chan, Sylvia Cho, Ivan Fong, and Kaye Holubowsky
(eds.), ‘Japanese/Korean Linguistics Volume 30’, vol. 30, 45–60, Stanford CA: CSLI
Publications.
Zaenen, Annie, Elisabet Engdahl, and Joan M. Maling (1981). ‘Resumptive Pronouns Can
Be Syntactically Bound’, Linguistic Inquiry 12 (4): 679–682, URL http://www.jstor.org/
stable/4178253. Publisher: MIT Press.
Zúñiga, Fernando and Seppo Kittilä (2019). Grammatical Voice, Cambridge Textbooks in
Linguistics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Özsoy, A. Sumru (2019). ‘Introduction’, in A. Sumru Özsoy (ed.), ‘Word Order in Turkish’,
Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 1–40, Cham, Switzerland: Springer
International Publishing.

Intermediate Gen Syntax (1)

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Intermediate Gen Syntax (1)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Intermediate Generative Syntax

This textbook is an investigation into contemporary understanding of Generative Gram-

1 Foundations of the study of language 9

2 Review of basic syntax 23

3 The Architecture of Grammar 43

4 Further developments of phrase structure 81

5 Case theory and A-Movement 125

6 Licensing Nominals and Grammatical Relations 153

6.3.1 Case Study 1: Greek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166

7 Wh-movement and relative clauses 183

Calligraphy of tree drawing 239

Foundations of the study of

1.1 The science of language

(1) a. John1 thinks that Mary likes him1 .

(2) Principles of Anaphora (to be revised)

(3) a. John ate an apple.

(4) English, Indo-European

In example (4a), the prepositional complementizer for is optional. In example (4b),

(i) I expect John to wash the dishes.

(5) Portuguese Indo-European (da Cunha and Cintra, 1985, 137)

(6) Mongolian, Mongolic (Guntsetseg, 2016, 82)

(8) Portuguese Indo-European (da Cunha and Cintra, 1985, 137)

that means ‘not know’, so it is glossed as neg.know.

(9) Korean, Koreanic (Dongwoo Park, pc)

If a language has complex morphophonology that obscures the underlying morpho-

(10) Blackfoot, Algic (Bliss, 2008, 1)

Blackfoot (bla) is an Algonquian language of the Algic fam-

1.2 Prescriptivism and descriptivism

Prescriptivism is the practice of dictating, by virtue of some authority, acceptable

(11) a. To whom do you wish to speak?

(12) a. Everyone forgot their homework yesterday.

1.3 Evidence of syntactic knowledge

A primary goal of linguistic inquiry is to understand how language is processed in the

(13) a. Mary is reading a book.

(14) The girl who is playing is named Rosie.

(15) *Is the girl who playing is named Rosie?

(16) Is the girl who is playing named Rosie?

(18) a. When did the boy say he hurt himself?

(19) a. a few minutes ago (possible answer for either question)

1.4 Syntactic theorizing

(20) A - What did you buy?

(21) Korean, Koreanic (Dongwoo Park, pc)

a. 민수가1 자기를1 봤다.

b. 민수는1 자기가1 똑똑하다고 생각한다.

(22) Descriptive Generalization (Korean): An anaphor and its antecedent may

(23) a. * 자기가1 민수를1 봤다.

(24) Descriptive Generalization (Korean): An anaphor must appear after its

(25) Cayuga, Iroquoian (Barrie, 2017, 3,4)

a. Mary aPesPah gwe:go˛h neP ohyaP

(26) a. All the children have eaten lunch.

We might make the following generalization.

(28) a. * swahyo:wah John aha:k gwe:go˛h

• generative linguistics - a school of linguistics that attempts to model unconscious

• universal - a property of grammar that is invariant and is found in all languages

• parameter - a property of grammar that varies across languages

• prescriptivism - the practice of dictating standard language use

• Grammatical - A sentence is grammatical if it does not violate any rule of grammar.

• Acceptable - A sentence is acceptable if a native speaker judges it to have the rele-

• descriptive generalization - a statement that characterizes a set of data by finding

• Ghomeshi (2010) - A concise and entertaining discussion on common misconcep-

• Bodine (1975) - A study on androcentric phenomena in the English language, fo-

• Cameron (1992) - A collection of articles dealing with feminist issues in grammar

• Cowper (1992) - Contains an accessible and concise history of generative syntax

• Lagunoff (1997) - Dissertation on the sociolinguistics, syntax and semantics of