August 3, 2005
Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||This paper shows that a VP in English is only a VP at the outset of a derivation, and that VP- preposing in English is in fact preposing of the internal arguments of the verb, followed by remnant movement of the original VP. Therefore, English looks much more like German (Muller (1998)), than it appears at first glance The evidence for the non-constituency of the verb and its original arguments in preposed position comes from its solution to what has been termed Pesetsky’s Paradox, in that an object of a preposed VP can bind into an adverbial at the end of a sentence. The paradox results from the incompatibility of the phenomenon with the conjunction of two assumptions: (i) binding requires c-command; (ii) only constituents move.. Assumption (i) requires the object to be higher than the adverbial, but the preposing of the verb and object to the exclusion of the adverbial would then require that a non-constituent (the verb and object) prepose. The paradoxical nature of the phenomenon rests on the two assumptions, and the paper presents additional evidence that binding requires c-command, showing the contrasts between topicalized VPs and topicalized PPs. The full set of binding phenomena can be accounted for with a ccommand requirement on binding, but cannot be accounted for with a rival account of command that makes reference to grammatical functions, known as o-command within HPSG (Pollard and Sag (1992, 1994) or ranking (Bresnan (2002)) or f-command (Dalrymple (1999)).|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|External links||This entry has no external links. Add one.|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Letitia R. Naigles (2001). Why Theories of Word Learning Don't Always Work as Theories of Verb Learning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (6):1113-1114.
William J. Rapaport (1979). An Adverbial Meinongian Theory. Analysis 39 (March):75-81.
Maria Bittner & Ken Hale (2000). Comparative Notes On Ergative Case Systems. In Robert Pensalfini & Norvin Richards (eds.), MITWPEL 2: Papers on Australian Languages. Dep. Linguistics, MIT.
Michael J. Almeida (2004). Supervenience and Property-Identical Divine-Command Theory. Religious Studies 40 (3):323-333.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads3 ( #213,976 of 738,880 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?