Transcript Class 15 Notes

1
CLASS 15, March 2, 2007
LIN 1310B
Introduction to Linguistics
Prof: Nikolay Slavkov
TA: Qinghua Tang
2
Today
• Announcements and Reminders:
-Continue reading chapter 5 (at least up to p. 155).
-Assignment 2 is due Tuesday (March 6) before class.
-Note about Assignment 2: Please do NOT use triangles for
any phrases when you draw your trees. In order to get full
points, draw the complete trees!
-Assignment 2 can be handwritten or typed.
• Today’s Lecture:
- Address questions about Assignment 2
- Continue with Syntax
3
Assignment 2 Questions
(1) The students in the park may have missed the train to
Kingston.
(2) The Bank of Canada is considering cuts in the interest
rates.
(3) The properties of verbs in isolation puzzled the class.
(4) Susan knew that Mark could have placed the cookies in
the kitchen.
(5) Bill reported that a student asked whether the eclipse
would occur.
-In (1) and (4) consider tense as +pst.
-In (2) use your knowledge of morphology to analyse interest
rates as a compound. I.e. analyse interest rates as one
word. Everything else should be analysed as separate
words though! And remember, no triangles!
-In (5), “eclipse would occur”: consider tense here –pst.
4
Review: Trees
• We know that Merge combines words into phrases;
Merge also combines phrases with other phrases
building larger phrases and ultimately sentences.
• We know that IP is an Inflection phrase that takes VP as
a complement and NP in its specifier.
• We know that modals go under I.
• We know that auxiliaries (be and have) are treated as
special verbs, so they form a VP independent of main
verbs (such as walk, work, see, etc.)
• Thus when we have an auxiliary (be and/or have) we
draw two VPs in our tree.
5
Review: Complement Options
(Subcategorization)
• We know that lexical items have certain
complement options: for example certain verbs
may require a complement (e.g. devour), others
may not allow a complement (e.g. die), still others
may be flexible and occur either with or without a
complement (e.g. eat)
• We know that certain verbs may require two
complements (e.g. put). For such verbs we
introduced tertiary branching.
6
Review: tertiary branching
7
The subcomponents of syntax
• We have already said that the SYNTAX
consists of at least two major
subcomponents: Lexicon and the
Computational System. These two
components interact with each other and
allow us to form and interpret sentences.
8
The Computational System
• The computational system computes the
sentence.
• It relies on the X’ schema (operations like
merge and move apply in compliance with
the X’ schema).
9
The lexicon
• The lexicon provides us with the different items
that we ‘plug into’ the computational system.
• Subcategorization requirements, which are part of
the lexicon, are very important, because they
constitute the site of interaction between the
lexicon and the computational system (see next
slide for further explanation).
10
Interaction between the lexicon and
the computational system
• The computational system provides the frame (X’) and the
operations (merge, move) for computing a sentence.
However, we cannot simply ‘paste’ items from the lexicon
into the X’ schema. We have to take into consideration
each item’s subcategorization requirements.
• So, for the verb die, the X’ schema gives us a position
where we can merge a complement (i.e. an object).
However, the lexicon tells us that die is not a verb that
takes a complement (i.e. object). Thus we predict that
sentences where die takes an object will not be allowed
even though they are compatible with the X’ schema. (see
next slide for an example)
11
Example
The computational
system (X’ schema)
does not distinguish
between the example to
the left and the example
to the right (i.e. the trees
are identical). However,
the lexicon interacts
with the computational
system imposing
subcategorization
requirements and
making one of the
sentences grammatical
and the other
ungrammatical.
12
Complement Clauses
• We already mentioned that a whole sentence can be a
complement to another sentence.
E.g. Students know that profs are monsters.
Intuitively we know that there are two sentences (clauses) here:
Students know. Profs are monsters.
One sentence is embedded in the other. Can you tell which one?
-Profs are monsters is the embedded sentence or the complement
clause (clause=sentence)
-that is a complementizer (C) introducing the complement clause
-whether or if can also be used in such constructions, so we’ll also
call them complementizers (Cs)
-where do we put complementizers in our tree? We will assume that
there is a Complementizer Phrase (CP) above IP. We will also
assume that complementizers (Cs) are heads of CPs.
13
Matrix and Complement Clause
• p. (145, e.g. 22)
• Note that all languages allow embedding
(i.e. sentence-like constructions to function
as complements) => evidence for UG.
Let’s
draw a tree for the embedded clause of:
14
The coach knows that/whether/if the team will win
15
Let’s draw a tree for the whole sentence:
The coach knows that/whether/if the team will win
16
Multiple embedding
Remember that recursivity is a key property in
our system. Merge can apply recursively.
Therefore, we predict that we can have
multiple embedding. In other words, Merge
can embed one clause into another, and then
another and another…
E.g. I know that John knows that Peter said
that the killer left the building.
17
Move
• So far we’ve only used the operation Merge.
By now, we’re ready start exploring
structures where Move operates as well.
18
Yes-no questions
• Consider the following data:
That guy should go.  declarative
Should that guy go?  yes-no question
For the yes-no question, the modal (should)
appears to the left of the subject (that guy).
This is a problem, because so far we have said that
modals appear in I, which is to the right of the
subject.
Let’s draw tree for the declarative.
19
That guy should go.
• p. 147, fig5.13
20
Should that guy go?
• In order to solve our problem of the modal
occurring to the left of the verb, we will assume
that it has moved there.
Should that guy _____ go?
• So the modal has indeed originated in its
traditional place, as head of I, but has moved.
• Note that the move operation is also called a
transformation because it transforms the sentence
‘That guy should go’ into ‘Should that guy go?’
21
Should that guy go?
• So, we are assuming that the modal should moves out of its traditional
place under I. But where does it go? What should we designate as its
landing site?
• Since we’ve already introduced a Complementizer Phrase (CP) above
IP, we will use CP for a landing site of the moved modal.
• So we are proposing that in embedded clauses C (the head of CP) is
occupied by complementizers such as that/if/whether. In Yes-no
questions we also have a CP, and it’s head is the landing site for the
moved modal.
• Note that we use the feature +Q under C which indicates that the
sentence is a question.
• Also note that C is the landing site for the modal. But the modal
moves along with the head I, so in our tree we write I above the
modal, even though it has moved to C.
• Finally, note that we write the symbol t in the position formerly
occupied by the modal. This stands for trace. Even though the modal
has moved out, it leaves a trace behind it and the position where it was
in the tree does not disappear.
22
Should that guy go?
• p. 149, fig 5.15
23
I to C movement
• The move operation that applies to yes-no
questions is often called Inversion (because
we move the modal in front of the subject).
• The Move operation in yes-no questions is
formally described as follows:
Inversion
Move I to C
24
Why use Move?
• Why not just assume that there are two different structures
(one declarative, where the modal is to the left of the
subject, and one interrogative where the modal is to the
right of the subject)?
-Because by using the operation move, we preserve the
insight that the declarative and the yes-no question are
basically two different forms of the same sentence.
Therefore, we want to have the same structure for them,
with a transformational operation Move that derives the
question from the statement.
-Because it is ultimately more complex to postulate two
distinct structures.
25
•
Evidence???
How do we know that the modal in I does indeed move to the C
position??? How do we justify the analysis that we proposed in the
previous slides?
Consider the following data:
1. Would we return?
2. He asked whether we would return.
3. *He asked whether would we return.
=>In embedded clauses with a complementizer the modal does not move
to the left of the subject. If the modal moves as in (3), the sentence
is ungrammatical.
=>This can be explained because we know that the complementizer
whether is occupying the C position in the tree. In other words the
C position is filled by a complementizer and therefore, the modal
cannot move there.
=>In yes-no questions, there is no complementizer to occupy the C
position, and therefore the modal is allowed to move to C.