Pázmány Péter Katolikus Egyetem • Mini-course • 11–12 January ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Marcel den Dikken — Pázmány Péter Katolikus Egyetem — Mini-course 2013 — The syntax of adpositional phrases 2 but he rejects (4) immediately: ‘We have now posited two full-blown functional sequences leading up to CP, one for Place and one for Path, in the extended projection of just a single lexical head: P. This is not right. The structure in [(4)] is ill formed: no single lexical head supports two extended projections that are simultaneously present. This entails that, in order to accommodate the full array of modification and r-word placement possibilities of directional PPs, the path domain must be an extended projection of a lexical P head in its own right. In other words, [(4)] should be revised as in [(5)], with a lexical PP in between Path and CP(Place), and with the projections outside PP Dir serving as members of the extended projection of P , the directional counterpart to P .’ Dir Loc (5) [ CP(Path) C(Path) [ DegP(Path) Deg(Path) [ PathP Path [ PP P Dir [ CP(Place) C(Place) [ DegP(Place) Deg(Place) [ Place [ P DP]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] PlaceP PP Loc • Den Dikken (2010) goes on to demonstrate that, though (5) can be employed in full, many directional xPPs are structurally less elaborate than (5) he seeks to provide a principled account for the restrictions on the variation in the size of the locative and directional structural layers of the xPP he does so by relabelling some of the functional projections in the Koopman-style xPP on the basis of cross-categorial parallels with the extended projections of verbs and nouns ‘Place’ and ‘Path’ are aspectual functional categories, corresponding to event aspect in the verbal domain (and number in the nominal domain) — the difference between locative and directional Ps is likened to the distinction between stative and dynamic Vs ‘Deg(Place)’ and ‘Deg(Path)’ are likened to T and Dem, all brought together under the umbrella of ‘deixis’ — temporal deixis (‘present’ vs ‘past’ vs ‘future’); demonstrative deixis (‘this’ vs ‘that’ vs ‘yon’); spatial deixis (‘here/at the speaker’ vs ‘there/not at the speaker’ vs ‘yonder/far from the speaker’; ‘towards the speaker’ vs ‘away from the speaker’) (6) a. [ C [ Dx [ Asp [ V ...]]]] b. [ C [ Dx [ Asp [ N ...]]]] c. [ C [ Dx [ Asp [ P ...]]]] CP [FORCE] DxP [TENSE] AspP [EVENT] VP CP [DEF] DxP [PERSON] AspP [NUM] NP CP [SPACE] DxP [SPACE] AspP [SPACE] PP • V can take a variety of xVP complements, but one logically possible complementation pattern is unattested: there is, apparently, a local dependency relationship between Asp and Dx, so (7b) fails (7) a. V [ VP V ...] b. *V [ AspP Asp [EVENT] [ VP V ...]] c. V [ DxP Dx [TENSE] [ AspP Asp [EVENT] [ VP V ...]]] d. V [ C [ Dx [TENSE] [ Asp [EVENT] [ V ...]]]] CP DxP AspP VP assuming that this restriction carries over to spatial aspect as well, and that no special restrictions hold on xPP beyond this general one on the licensing of aspect, we expect that P Dir should be able to take three possible xPP complements (8) a. P Dir [ PP P Loc DP] b. *P Dir [ AspP Asp [PLACE] [ PP P Loc DP]] c. [PLACE] [PLACE] P Dir [ DxP Dx [ AspP Asp [ PP P Loc DP]]] d. P [ [PLACE] C [ [PLACE] Dx [ [PLACE] Asp [ P DP]]]] Dir CP DxP AspP PP Loc P Dir can, in turn, have a variety of extended projections; only some of these can be V-complements
Marcel den Dikken — Pázmány Péter Katolikus Egyetem — Mini-course 2013 — The syntax of adpositional phrases 3 (9) a. V [ PP P Dir ...] b. *V [ AspP Asp [PATH] [ PP P Dir ...]]]] c. *V [ DxP Dx [PATH] [ AspP Asp [PATH] [ PP P Dir ...]]]] d. V [ C [PATH] [ Dx [PATH] [ Asp [PATH] [ P ...]]]] CP DxP AspP PP Dir (9b) is ungrammatical because Asp is locally dependent on Dx, throughout (cf. *(7b) and *(8b)) (9c) is ungrammatical because Dx [PATH] cannot be anaphorically bound by Dx [TENSE]; whenever a Dx head is not the immediate complement of C, it must be anaphorically bound by a higher Dx head (cf. Guéron & Hoekstra’s 1993 ‘T-chain’), but such binding succeeds only if binder and bindee are of the same type (i.e., both temporal, or both numeral, or both spatial) • non-directional xPPs serving as V-complements are apparently never smaller than CP [PLACE] — there is no postpositional order in non-directional xPPs; extraction from non-directional xPPs succeeds only in the case of r-pronouns; there is no P-incorporation with non-directional xPPs [NB: we can relate these properties of non-directional xPPs to the single hypothesis that non-directional xPPs serving as V-complements are always as large as CP , but why this is ostensibly the [PLACE] case is itself not clear at all; perhaps particularly intriguing is the fact that (9a.i), below, is a grammatical structure, so P Loc can incorporate into P Dir and, subsequently, into the V cluster, but it cannot incorporate into the V cluster directly, without the mediation of P Dir] for non-directional xPPs, therefore, we only have (9e) (9) e. V [ CP C [PLACE] [ DxP Dx [PLACE] [ AspP Asp [PLACE] [ PP P Loc DP]]]] • combining (8) and (9), we obtain (9) as the maximal space of variation in xPPs serving as verbal complements (9a.ii) is ungrammatical for the same reason (9c) is: Dx [PLACE] does not have a local C licenser, and [TENSE] cannot be anaphorically bound by the Dx of the matrix clause [PLACE] (9a.iii) is subject to speaker variation: only for those speakers who allow a locative CP in the complement of a directional verb is this structure grammatical (NB: since P Dir in the a–structures does not have an extended projection of its own, it must be incorporated into V for its licensing; P–incorporation leads to the ‘government transparency’ effect of turning the complement of the incorporated head into a derived complement of the incorporator) (9) a.i V [ P [ P DP]] a.ii *V [ P [ Dx [ Asp [ P DP]]]] % a.iii V [ P [ C [ Dx [ Asp [ P DP]]]]] b. *V [ Asp [ P ...]]]] c. *V [ Dx [ Asp [ P ...]]]] d.i V [ C [ Dx [ Asp [ P [ P DP]]]]]] d.ii V [ C [ Dx [ Asp [ P [ Dx [ Asp [ P DP]]]]]]] d.iii V [ C [ Dx [ Asp [ P [ C [ Dx [ Asp [ P DP]]]]]]]] e. V [ C [PLACE] [ Dx [PLACE] [ Asp [PLACE] [ P DP]]]] PP Dir PP Loc [PLACE] [PLACE] PP Dir DxP AspP PP Loc [PLACE] [PLACE] [PLACE] PP Dir CP DxP AspP PP Loc [PATH] AspP PP Dir [PATH] [PATH] DxP AspP PP Dir [PATH] [PATH] [PATH] CP DxP AspP PP Dir PP Loc [PATH] [PATH] [PATH] [PLACE] [PLACE] CP DxP AspP PP Dir DxP AspP PP Loc [PATH] [PATH] [PATH] [PLACE] [PLACE] [PLACE] CP DxP AspP PP Dir CP DxP AspP PP Loc CP DxP AspP PP Loc in total, there are four directional xPPs that can grammatically serve as verbal complements for all speakers of — (9a.i) and all versions of (9d); in addition, some speakers allow (9a.iii), which correlates three properties that distinguish these speakers’ varieties from others’ (such as mine):
Page 1: Pázmány Péter Katolikus Egyetem
Page 5 and 6: Marcel den Dikken — Pázmány Pé
Page 7 and 8: Marcel den Dikken — Pázmány Pé

Pázmány Péter Katolikus Egyetem • Mini-course • 11–12 January ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?