확장조건과 동사이동
Extension Condition and Head-Movement
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this article is to show that Head-movement differs from phrasal movement in locality and extension condition(EC). First the difference in locality between head movement and phrasal movement comes from the different triggering mechanism: whereas phrasal movement is based on Agree, head movement is triggered by the independently motivated mechanism of C(categorial)-select. Thus X0-movement is local in that C-select means that head may select the head of its complement. Second the difference in the extension condition comes from the notion of phase. Generally X0-movement does not obey the extension condition whereas XP-movement does. The extension condition requires that all operations add a sister to a root node. A new sister cannot be created for any node that is already in a sisterhood relationship. Head movement occurs a X0 node which is already sisterhood relationship with X' node, thus violating the EC. In this article the EC is considered to be a condition only involved with extension of structure, not with a syntactic condition. Thus CHL allows structures to extend to the phase level with the ER. However if head movement occurs on phases, CHL recognizes that there is no more extending on phases and then proceeds the corresponding phases to be shipped to Spell-Out. Thus head movement on phases is considered to be a kind of sign to CHL that phases should be shipped to Spell-out.
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to show that Head-movement differs from phrasal movement in locality and extension condition(EC). First the difference in locality between head movement and phrasal movement comes from the different triggering mechanism: whereas phrasal movement is based on Agree, head movement is triggered by the independently motivated mechanism of C(categorial)-select. Thus X0-movement is local in that C-select means that head may select the head of its complement. Second the difference in the extension condition comes from the notion of phase. Generally X0-movement does not obey the extension condition whereas XP-movement does. The extension condition requires that all operations add a sister to a root node. A new sister cannot be created for any node that is already in a sisterhood relationship. Head movement occurs a X0 node which is already sisterhood relationship with X' node, thus violating the EC. In this article the EC is considered to be a condition only involved with extension of structure, not with a syntactic condition. Thus CHL allows structures to extend to the phase level with the ER. However if head movement occurs on phases, CHL recognizes that there is no more extending on phases and then proceeds the corresponding phases to be shipped to Spell-Out. Thus head movement on phases is considered to be a kind of sign to CHL that phases should be shipped to Spell-out.
참고문헌 (26)
- Assien, J., "Verb Raising", Linguistic Inquiry, 5, pp.325~366 (1974)
- Bobaljik. J. D., "Interaboreal Operations: Head Movement and the Extension Requirement", Linguistic Inquiry, 30, pp.345~356 (1995)
- Chomsky, N., "Barriers" (1986), MIT Press
- Chomsky, N., "Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory" (1993), MIT
- Chomsky, N., "The Minimalist Program" (1995), MIT Press
- Chomsky, N., "Minimalist Inquiries: The Framework" (1998), MIT
- Chomsky, N., "Derivation by Phase" (1999), MIT
- Chomsky, N., "Beyond the Explanatory Adequacy" (2000), MIT
- Chomsky, N., "On Phase" (2005), MIT
- Chomsky, N., "Approaching UG from Below" (2006), MIT
- Embick, D., "Movement Operations after Syntax", Linguistic Inquiry, 32, pp.555~598 (2001)
- Emonds, J., "A Transformational Approach to English Syntax" (1976), Academic Press
- Fanselow, G., "Munchhausen-Style Head Movement and the Analysis of Verb Second" (2000), University of Potsdam
- Fox, D., "Cyclic Linerarization of Syntactic Structure", Theoretical Linguistics, 31, pp.1~45 (2005)
- Heim, I., "Semantics in Generative Grammar" (1998), Blackwell
- Lightfoot, D., "Verb Movement" (1994), Cambridge University Press
- Koopman, H., "Verbal Complexes" (2000), MIT Press
- Mahajan, A., "Word order and (Remnant) VP Movement" (2000), UCLA
- Matushansky, O., "The Status of Head-Movement in Linguistic Theory" (2003), MIT
- Matushansky, O., "Head Movement in Linguistic Theory", Linguistic Inquiry, 37, pp.69~109 (2006)
- Pesetsky, D., "Zero Syntax" (1995), MIT Press
- Pesetsky, D., "T-to-C Movement: Causes and Consequences. In: Ken Hale: A Life in Language", pp.355~426 (2001), MIT Press
- Pollock, J. Y., "Verb Movement, UG and the Structure of IP", Linguistic Inquiry, 20, pp.365~424 (1989)
- Reinhart, T., "The Syntactic Domain of Anaphora", 박사, pp.1976
- Travis, L., "Parameters and the Effects of Word Order Variation", 박사, pp.1984
- Zwart, C., "Syntactic and Phonological Verb-Movement", Syntax, 4(1), pp.34~62 (2001)