Syntax最新文献

{"title":"Cross‐clausal scrambling and subject case in Balkar: On multiple specifiers and the locality of overt and covert movement","authors":"Tatiana Bondarenko, Colin Davis","doi":"10.1111/synt.12286","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12286","url":null,"abstract":"We use fieldwork data about cross‐clausal scrambling in Balkar (Turkic) to clarify the nature of movement and its constraints. Balkar has a variety of embedded nominalized clauses, with different subject cases and possibilities for movement. Clauses with nominative (nom) subjects permit cross‐clausal object extraction but not subject extraction. In contrast, clauses with accusative subjects permit both such movements, although movement of the subject is required for object extraction. Finally, clauses with genitive subjects permit only subject extraction. We argue that these facts provide evidence for the following proposals: (i) multiple specifiers are usually possible provided that tucking‐in applies; (ii) the highest of a phase's multiple specifiers is privileged for accessibility; (iii) movement is constrained by anti‐locality (a ban on short movements); and (iv) Balkar DPs do not permit multiple specifiers. These factors are intertwined informatively in Balkar, and are supported by additional facts about possessors, binding, and covert movement.","PeriodicalId":501329,"journal":{"name":"Syntax","volume":"46 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140367090","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Movement in disguise: Morphology as a diagnostic for verb movement in Algonquian","authors":"Ksenia Bogomolets, Paula Fenger, Adrian Stegovec","doi":"10.1111/synt.12281","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12281","url":null,"abstract":"This paper argues for a unification of two seemingly unrelated phenomena from unrelated language families: Verb Second in Germanic, and Conjunct versus Independent Order in Algonquian. It is argued that both reflect the possibility of the verb moving to C. While in Germanic this results in word order differences, in Algonquian V‐to‐C movement is detectable only via morphological alternations in agreement morphology. Under this view, Conjunct/Independent agreement and V2 are merely distinct reflexes of the same underlying process. This opens up new avenues of research in relation to V‐to‐C movement, framing it as a parametric option with potentially very different surface results in different languages depending on the setting of other parameters.","PeriodicalId":501329,"journal":{"name":"Syntax","volume":"52 16","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140376600","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Just pair‐merge","authors":"Ken Safir","doi":"10.1111/synt.12284","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12284","url":null,"abstract":"Two structure‐building operations are currently posited in minimalist theory: an operation forming sets (set merge), and an operation forming ordered pairs (pair‐merge). I argue that pair‐merge is sufficient to generate syntactic relations, so set merge, also called simple merge, should be eliminated from syntactic theory on grounds of simplicity. This conclusion requires reevaluating the relationship between structure‐building and labeling of constituents for the expression of syntactic relations, because labeling plays a crucial role in this comparison of theories according to the simplicity metric. An existing labeling hypothesis, specifically Chomsky's Labeling Algorithm, is shown not to have any advantage claimed for it by comparison with the just pair‐merge hypothesis proposed here. An advantage of the only pair‐merge hypothesis is that it provides a more principled origin for the inherent asymmetry in the c‐command relation that does not follow from a theory that includes set merge.","PeriodicalId":501329,"journal":{"name":"Syntax","volume":"72 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140146622","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Nominal licensing via dependent case: The view from pseudo noun incorporation in Wolof","authors":"Suzana Fong","doi":"10.1111/synt.12282","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12282","url":null,"abstract":"Bare nominals in Wolof can occur in the object position and they must be adjacent to the verb that subcategorizes for them. This is a property usually attributed to pseudo noun incorporation (PNI). However, there are two circumstances under which this adjacency requirement is obviated: a DP is introduced between the subject and the PNI‐ed object, or the latter is ‐moved. While these are disparate phenomena, a dependent case analysis of nominal licensing can account for PNI in Wolof. I assume that all nominals must be licensed with case, with case assignment being calculated in terms of dependent case. If this is not possible, a last resort strategy arises, namely surface adjacency with the verb. This analysis provides a unified analysis of PNI in Wolof.","PeriodicalId":501329,"journal":{"name":"Syntax","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140146678","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"On the definition of Merge","authors":"Erik Zyman","doi":"10.1111/synt.12287","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12287","url":null,"abstract":"Two fundamental tasks of syntactic inquiry are to identify the elementary structure-building operations and to determine what properties they have and why. This article aims to bring us closer to those goals by investigating Merge. Two recent definitions of Merge are evaluated. It is argued that both have significant strengths but also some drawbacks, and that set-theoretic definitions of Merge in general face conceptual problems. It is proposed that Merge is not set-theoretic but graph-theoretic in nature: the syntactic objects it operates on and creates are (bare-phrase-structure-compliant) phrase-structure trees. Two new formal definitions of Merge are proposed and evaluated. One obeys the No-Tampering Condition but makes it unclear why Merge(<mjx-container aria-label=\"alpha comma beta\" ctxtmenu_counter=\"0\" ctxtmenu_oldtabindex=\"1\" jax=\"CHTML\" role=\"application\" sre-explorer- style=\"font-size: 103%; position: relative;\" tabindex=\"0\"><mjx-math aria-hidden=\"true\"><mjx-semantics><mjx-mrow data-semantic-children=\"0,1,2\" data-semantic-content=\"1\" data-semantic- data-semantic-role=\"sequence\" data-semantic-speech=\"alpha comma beta\" data-semantic-type=\"punctuated\"><mjx-mi data-semantic-annotation=\"clearspeak:simple\" data-semantic-font=\"italic\" data-semantic- data-semantic-parent=\"3\" data-semantic-role=\"greekletter\" data-semantic-type=\"identifier\"><mjx-c></mjx-c></mjx-mi><mjx-mo data-semantic- data-semantic-operator=\"punctuated\" data-semantic-parent=\"3\" data-semantic-role=\"comma\" data-semantic-type=\"punctuation\" rspace=\"3\" style=\"margin-left: 0.056em;\"><mjx-c></mjx-c></mjx-mo><mjx-mi data-semantic-annotation=\"clearspeak:simple\" data-semantic-font=\"italic\" data-semantic- data-semantic-parent=\"3\" data-semantic-role=\"greekletter\" data-semantic-type=\"identifier\"><mjx-c></mjx-c></mjx-mi></mjx-mrow></mjx-semantics></mjx-math><mjx-assistive-mml aria-hidden=\"true\" display=\"inline\" unselectable=\"on\"><math altimg=\"/cms/asset/912f0c60-02ca-4dc0-8efd-fcd161777bda/synt12287-math-0001.png\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML\"><semantics><mrow data-semantic-=\"\" data-semantic-children=\"0,1,2\" data-semantic-content=\"1\" data-semantic-role=\"sequence\" data-semantic-speech=\"alpha comma beta\" data-semantic-type=\"punctuated\"><mi data-semantic-=\"\" data-semantic-annotation=\"clearspeak:simple\" data-semantic-font=\"italic\" data-semantic-parent=\"3\" data-semantic-role=\"greekletter\" data-semantic-type=\"identifier\">α</mi><mo data-semantic-=\"\" data-semantic-operator=\"punctuated\" data-semantic-parent=\"3\" data-semantic-role=\"comma\" data-semantic-type=\"punctuation\">,</mo><mi data-semantic-=\"\" data-semantic-annotation=\"clearspeak:simple\" data-semantic-font=\"italic\" data-semantic-parent=\"3\" data-semantic-role=\"greekletter\" data-semantic-type=\"identifier\">β</mi></mrow>$$ alpha, beta $$</annotation></semantics></math></mjx-assistive-mml></mjx-container>) satisfies only one selectional feature of <mjx-container aria-label=\"alpha\" ctxtmenu_counter=\"1\" ctxtmenu_oldtabindex=\"1\" jax=\"CHTML\"","PeriodicalId":501329,"journal":{"name":"Syntax","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140075233","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"How to apply multiple scrambling in Japanese","authors":"Jun Abe","doi":"10.1111/synt.12283","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12283","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, I argue that the phenomena of multiple scrambling in Japanese are best captured by assuming different derivations, depending on whether they involve long-distance or clause-internal scrambling. I argue that long-distance multiple scrambling involves remnant VP scrambling, on the assumption that long-distance scrambling necessarily produces a focus chain, which thus prohibits separate applications of scrambling in multiple scrambling configurations. The evidence comes from (i) long-distance multiple scrambling of <i>wh</i>-phrases that behaves like <i>wh</i>-movement, and (ii) long-distance multiple scrambling of quantificational phrases (QPs) that behaves as if these QPs constitute a single QP. As for clause-internal multiple scrambling, I argue that it may involve separate applications of scrambling as well as remnant VP scrambling. The evidence comes from scope facts that involve two scrambled QPs: when the two QPs undergo remnant VP scrambling, they both take scope in their original positions; when they are separately scrambled, they show a different pattern of reconstruction with respect to scope.","PeriodicalId":501329,"journal":{"name":"Syntax","volume":"55 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140045471","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A unified approach to parasitic gap and across-the-board constructions: Evidence based on Mandarin Chinese","authors":"Jen Ting","doi":"10.1111/synt.12278","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12278","url":null,"abstract":"Despite the lack of consensus on English facts, this study demonstrates that both parasitic gap (PG) and across-the-board (ATB) constructions in Mandarin Chinese exhibit paralle effects in variable binding reconstruction, while also displaying asymmetries in gap licensing categories. I argue that these patterns in Mandarin Chinese align with the sideward movement approach, supporting a version of the unified approach to deriving both constructions. Specifically, the gaps in question are filled by variables, consistent with both constructions being derived via sideward movement. The observed asymmetries lend support to the view that the licensing of ATB gaps is more permissive than that of PGs, as additional conditions (such as the Parallelsim Requirement) on coordinate structures can license sideward movement in ATB sentences.","PeriodicalId":501329,"journal":{"name":"Syntax","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140044279","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Gilaki reverse Ezafe: The two faces of a nominal linker","authors":"Arsalan Kahnemuyipour, Mansour Shabani, Sahar Taghipour","doi":"10.1111/synt.12277","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12277","url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines a nominal linker (known as reverse Ezafe) in the Caspian language Gilaki. It is shown that the nominal linker in Gilaki is in fact the realization of two different morphosyntactic elements with distinct properties. In doing so, we also highlight the differences between reverse Ezafe and Ezafe, found in Persian and other Iranian languages. This study has implications for the typology of nominal linkers, leading to the conclusion that superficially similar linking elements, both within a language and across languages, may in fact have different syntactic properties and as such should be analyzed as distinct phenomena.","PeriodicalId":501329,"journal":{"name":"Syntax","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140037540","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Some implications of again‐modification for the syntax of English particle verb constructions","authors":"Bill Haddican","doi":"10.1111/synt.12276","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12276","url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines the way in which scope‐taking of <jats:italic>again</jats:italic> interacts with word order in the English particle verb alternation. Small‐clause approaches to the particle verb alternation differ from most competing approaches in taking both verb‐particle‐object and verb‐object‐particle orders to contain a result state‐denoting small clause. An expectation of this approach on a structural approach to <jats:italic>again</jats:italic> ambiguity is that both orders should admit restitutive <jats:italic>again</jats:italic> readings. Results from a controlled judgment survey of 73 North American English speakers bear out this prediction.","PeriodicalId":501329,"journal":{"name":"Syntax","volume":"264 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140025240","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Syntactic negation in Ewe (Tongugbe) agent nominalizations","authors":"Selikem Gotah, Soo‐Hwan Lee","doi":"10.1111/synt.12280","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12280","url":null,"abstract":"Drawing on evidence from the scope patterns and the availability of negative polarity item (NPI) licensing of the negation marker <jats:italic>ma‐</jats:italic>, we show that NegP is realized in Ewe (Tongugbe) agentive nominals. We conclude that agentive nominals accommodate sentential negation, posing a challenge to previous assumptions. The implication of this work is that agent nominalizations can be more verb‐like than what has been reported in the literature. We further examine where the Ewe agentive suffix <jats:italic>‐lá</jats:italic> resides in syntax based on the argument structure of the predicates realized inside agentive nominals.","PeriodicalId":501329,"journal":{"name":"Syntax","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140025159","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}