1887
Volume 3, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2213-8706
  • E-ISSN: 2213-8714
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This paper examines the derivation of two types of A′-dependencies — relative clauses and Left-Dislocation structures — in the framework of Minimalist Program based on Mandarin data. Relatives and LD structures demonstrate many distinct syntactic and semantic properties when they contain a gap and a resumptive pronoun respectively. A thorough study of the relevant data reveals that when a gap strategy is adopted, island effects and crossover effects are always observed, irrespective of whether the relevant gap is embedded within a relative clause or within an LD structure; on the contrary, when the resumptive strategy is adopted, a sharp distinction is observed between these two structures. A resumptive relative clause gives rise to island effects and crossover effects systematically; by contrast, a resumptive LD structure never gives rise to these effects. In the Minimalist Program, island effects and crossover effects are not exclusively used as diagnostic tests for movement since the operation is also subject to locality constraints. I will argue that a relative clause containing either a gap or an RP and an LD structure with gap are derived by and they are subject to the locality condition whereas a resumptive LD structure is derived by that is an island free operation and it is not subject to the locality constraint. Multiple and multiple Spell-Out are possible in an chain, but not in a chain. The choice of the derivational mechanism depends on the interpretability of the formal features attached to the Probe and to the Goal in the relevant A′-dependencies.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ijchl.3.1.02pan
2016-06-07
2019-08-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Adger, David and Ramchand, Gillian
    (2001) >Phases and interpretability. Proceedings of WCCFL 20: 1–14. Somerville, Mass.: Cascadilla Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Adger, David , & Ramchand, Gillian
    (2005) Merge and move: Wh-dependencies revisited. Linguistic Inquiry, 36, 161–193. doi: 10.1162/0024389053710729
    https://doi.org/10.1162/0024389053710729 [Google Scholar]
  3. Aoun, Joseph , & Choueiri, Lina
    (2000) Epithets. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 18, 1–39 doi: 10.1023/A:1006333217013
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006333217013 [Google Scholar]
  4. Borer, Hagit
    (1984) Restrictive relatives in modern Hebrew. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 2, 219–260. doi: 10.1007/BF00133282
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00133282 [Google Scholar]
  5. Chomsky, Noam
    (1995) The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. (2001) Derivation by phase. Dans Ken Hale . In Michael Kenstowicz (Ed.), A life in language (pp. 1–52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. (2004) Beyond explanatory adequacy. Structures and beyond . In Belletti Adriana (Ed.), The cartography of syntactic structure, Vol. 3 (pp. 104–131). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. (2008) On phases. In Robert Freidin, Carlos P. Otero, Maria Luisa Zubizarreta. Foundational issues in linguistic theory. Essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud (pp. 133–166). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Demirdache, Hamida
    (1991)  Resumptive chains in restrictive relatives, appositives, and dislocation structures . Ph.D. dissertation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Demirdache, Hamida , & Percus, Orin
    (2011) Resumptives, movement and interpretation. In A. Rouveret (Ed.), Resumptive pronouns at the interfaces (pp. 367–394). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lfab.5.10dem
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.5.10dem [Google Scholar]
  11. Engdahl, Elisabet
    (1980)  The syntax and semantics of questions in Swedish . PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
  12. (1985) Parasitic gaps, resumptive pronouns and subject extractions. Linguistics, 23, 3–44. doi: 10.1515/ling.1985.23.1.3
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1985.23.1.3 [Google Scholar]
  13. (1986) Constituent questions. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Gu, Gang
    (2001)  A study of resumptive pronouns . PhD dissertation. The Chinese University of Hongkong.
  15. Guilliot, Nicolas
    (2006)  La Reconstruction à l’Interface entre Syntaxe et Sémantique . PhD dissertation, University of Nantes.
  16. Koopman, Hilda
    (1983) Control from COMP and comparative syntax. The Linguistic Review, 2, 365–391. doi: 10.1515/tlir.1983.2.4.365
    https://doi.org/10.1515/tlir.1983.2.4.365 [Google Scholar]
  17. Mccloskey, James
    (1979) Transformational syntax and model theoretic semantics. A case-study in modern Irish. Dordrecht: Reidel. doi: 10.1007/978‑94‑009‑9495‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9495-9 [Google Scholar]
  18. (1990) Resumptive pronouns, A’-binding and levels of representation in Irish. In Randall Hendrick (Ed.), The syntax of the modern Celtic languages (Syntax and Semantics 23) (pp.199–248). New York & San Diego: Academic Press. Also in Rouveret 2011.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Pan, Victor Junnan
    (2011a) Interrogatives et quantification: une approche générative. Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. (2011b) ATB-topicalization in Mandarin Chinese: An intersective operator analysis. Linguistic Analysis, 37(1-2), 231–272.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. (2014) Wh-ex-situ in Chinese: Mapping between information structure and split CP. Linguistic Analysis, 39(3-4), 371–413.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Reinhart, Tanya
    (1983) Anaphora and semantic interpretation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Ross, John Robert
    (1967)  Constraints on variables in syntax . Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
  24. Rouveret, A
    (1994) Syntaxe du gallois. Principes généraux et typologie. Paris: CNRS Editions.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Rouveret, Alain
    (2002) How are resumptive pronouns linked to the periphery?Linguistic Variation Yearbook, 2, 123–184. doi: 10.1075/livy.2.07rou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/livy.2.07rou [Google Scholar]
  26. (2008) Phasal agreement and reconstruction. In Robert Freidin , Carlos P. Otero , & Maria Luisa Zubizarreta (Eds.), Foundational issues in linguistic theory (pp. 167–195). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. doi: 10.7551/mitpress/9780262062787.003.0008
    https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262062787.003.0008 [Google Scholar]
  27. (2011) Some issues in the theory of resumption: A perspective on early and recent research. In A. Rouveret (Ed.), Resumptive pronouns at the interfaces (pp. 1–62). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lfab.5.01rou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.5.01rou [Google Scholar]
  28. Sells, Peter
    (1984)  Syntax and semantics of resumptive pronouns . PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
  29. Tallerman, Maggie
    (1983) Island Constraints in Welsh. York Papers in Linguistics10: 197–204.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Tellier, Christine
    (1991) Licensing theory and French parasitic gaps. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. doi: 10.1007/978‑94‑011‑3596‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3596-2 [Google Scholar]
  31. Yang, Barry C.-Y
    (2014) Chinese null subject: A view from the top in ‘Peaches and Plums’. In C.-T. James Huang & Feng-hsi Liu (Eds.), Language and Linguistics Monograph Series54 (pp. 227–253).
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Zaenen, Annie , Engdahl, Elisabet , & Maling, Joan M
    (1981) Resumptive pronouns can be syntactically bound. Linguistic Inquiry, 12, 679–682.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ijchl.3.1.02pan
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Agree , Chinese , gap , left-dislocation , Match , relative clause and Resumptive pronoun
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