1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. International Journal of Chinese Linguistics
  4. Volume 12, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 12, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2213-8706
  • E-ISSN: 2213-8714
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

In the field of generative syntax, the literature proposes conceptual notions of labeling or labeling algorithms to interpret the categorization / or parts of speech of a given syntactic object. Building on this mechanism, we put forth the argument that a revised feature percolation principle (FPP) is a necessary supplement to effectively categorize linguistic items, and it should be applied at each merge operation. The study demonstrates that s-selection and categorial features (binary specifications of [V] and [N]) serve the crucial role of labeling from lexical representations to phrasal representations. This process illustrates the categorization process for merge (X, Y) → {H {X, Y}}. To test the minimalist treatment of this principle, we conduct an examination of data from both English and Mandarin Chinese languages. I compare several approaches by which labeling can be done in syntax. These approaches include: (a) through merge (Chomsky 1995), (b) through movement / or minimal search (Chomsky 2013, Epstein et al. 2014, and Rizzi 2012), and (c) through probing (Cecchetto & Donati 2010). Through empirical evidence, this study demonstrates that a feature percolation analysis effectively addresses the issues arising from a minimal search in both merge (XP, YP) and the merge (X, Y) problem. Furthermore, we derive constructions like VP ellipsis and VP fronting. Theoretically, this approach is well-motivated by the principle of compositionality found in linguistic items, and it offers a more economical labeling method. In empirical testing, we apply this configuration and mechanism to examine additional structures.

© 2025 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ijchl.00034.chi
2025-06-10
2025-06-14

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/ijchl.00034.chi
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Adger, D.
    (2003) Core Syntax: a minimalist approach, Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780199243709.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199243709.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  2. Baker, M.
    (2003) Lexical categories: Verbs, nouns, and adjectives. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511615047
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615047 [Google Scholar]
  3. Cecchetto, C. & Donati, C.
    (2010) On Labeling: Principle C and head movement, Syntax, 13(3), 241–278. 10.1111/j.1467‑9612.2010.00140.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9612.2010.00140.x [Google Scholar]
  4. Chomsky, N.
    (1995) The Minimalist Program. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. (2005) On Phase. Ms., MIT.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. (2013) Problems of projection. Lingua1301, 33–49. 10.1016/j.lingua.2012.12.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.12.003 [Google Scholar]
  7. Cinque, G.
    (Ed.) (2002) Functional structure in DP and IP. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780195148794.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195148794.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  8. Cole, P., Hermon, G. & Sung, L.-M.
    (1993) Feature Percolation. Journal of East and Asian Linguistics. 2(1): 91–118. 10.1007/BF01440584
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01440584 [Google Scholar]
  9. Embick, D.
    (2010) Stem alternations and stem distributions. ms. University of Pennsylvania.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Epstein, S. D., Kitahara, H., & Daniel, T.
    (2014) Labeling by minimal search: Implications for successive-cyclic a-movement and the conception of the postulate “phase”. Linguistic Inquiry, 45(3), 463–481. 10.1162/LING_a_00163
     https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00163 [Google Scholar]
  11. Huang, C.-T. J., Li, Y.-H. A., & Li, Y.
    (2009) The syntax of Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139166935
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139166935 [Google Scholar]
  12. Kayne, R.
    (1994) The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Larson, R. K.
    (1988) On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry19(3),335–391
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Li, Y.-H. A.
    (1999) Plurality in a classifier language. Journal of East Asian Linguistics81, 75–99. 10.1023/A:1008306431442
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008306431442 [Google Scholar]
  15. Lieber, R.
    (1980) On the organization of the lexicon (Doctoral dissertation). Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Available atMIT DSpace.
  16. Longobardi, G.
    (1994) Reference and proper names: A theory of N-movement in syntax and logical form. Linguistic Inquiry25(4), 609–665.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Marantz, A.
    (1997) No escape from syntax: Don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. InProceedings of the 21st Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium: Penn Working Papers in Linguistics4(2), 201–225.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Murasugi, K.
    (1997) An Antisymmetry Analysis of Japanese Relative Clauses, ms,. Kinjo Gakuin University.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Nishigauchi, T.
    (1998) Quantification and wh-constructions. InN. Tsujimura (Ed.), A handbook of Japanese linguistics. New York: Blackwell Publishers.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Pollock, J. Y.
    (1989) Verb movement, universal grammar, and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry20(3), 365–424.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Rizzi, L.
    (1997) The fine structure of the left periphery. InL. Haegeman. (ed.), Elements of grammar (pp.281–337). Dordrecht: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑94‑011‑5420‑8_7
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_7 [Google Scholar]
  22. (2012) Cartography, Criteria, and Labeling. InU. Shlonsky (Ed.), Beyond functional sequence: The cartography of syntactic structures (Vol. 10, pp. 314–338). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Wetzer, H.
    (1996) The typology of adjectival predication. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110813586
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110813586 [Google Scholar]
  24. Williams, E.
    (1981) Argument structure and morphology, The Linguistic Review1(1), 81–114. 10.1515/tlir.1981.1.1.81
     https://doi.org/10.1515/tlir.1981.1.1.81 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/ijchl.00034.chi
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): categorization; labeling; part of speech; projection principle; syntactic operation

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error