1. The Explanatory Range of Movement Presentation at Workshop on Comparative and Theoretical Syntax When and Why do Constituents Move? University of Aarhus, December 14-16, 2004 Torben Thrane [Århus School of Business]

2. The Janus-Effect of Move When you see a cheetah move you can ask for an explanation of this fact in one of two ways: What properties of the cheetah will account for its having moved? (‘Systemic’ explanation – muscles, sinews, etc.) What properties of the cheetah will its having moved account for? (‘Functional’ explanation – hunger, fear, etc.) Each explanation is causal in its own right, but they are not causally connected [H. Putnam, Reductionism and the Nature of Psychology (1973)]

3. Movement in language The most casual inspection of output conditions reveals that items commonly appear “displaced” from the position in which the interpretation they receive is otherwise represented at the LF interface. 91 [Chomsky 1995:316] You only have to look to see that something has moved The axiom of Chomsky’s version of GG: Movement is not a thesis that needs support; it is one of the facts of language that can be invoked to support other theses. Rather there are just extremely general principles like “move anything anywhere” [Chomsky 2000: 1] There is no meaningful controversy over the basic facts.

4. Functional vs. systemic explanation of movement in language What properties of language will some linguistic item having moved account for ? (‘Functional’) (1a) John called up his sister vs. (b) John called his sister up What properties of language will account for some linguistic item having moved? (‘Systemic’)

5. Movement in language The most casual inspection of output conditions reveals that items commonly appear “displaced” from the position in which the inter- pretation they receive is otherwise represented at the LF interface. 91 [Chomsky 1995:316] 91 Technically, this is not quite correct; see note 1. 1 The PF level itself is too primitive and unstructured to serve this purpose, but elements formed in the course of the mapping of syn- tactic objects to a PF representation might qualify. Notice that I am sweeping under the rug questions of considerable significance, notably, questions about what in the earlier Extended Standard Theory (EST) framework were called “surface effects” on interpretation. These are manifold, involving topic-focus and theme- rheme structures, figure-ground properties, effects of adjacency and linearity, and many others. Prima facie, they seem to involve some additional level or levels internal to the phonological component, postmorphology but prephonetic, accessed at the interface along with PF (Phonetic Form) and LF (Logical Form). [Chomsky 1995:220 – my italics]

6. t [ NPi ][V[V ] Functional vs. systemic explanation of movement in language What properties of language will some linguistic item having moved account for ? (‘Functional’) (1) John called up his sister vs. John called his sister up What properties of language will account for some linguistic item having moved? (‘Systemic’) ][ VP (2) Johncried [ IP [ NPi ] ]

7. NP s DN´ IP sted place at to stille put sin cykel one’s bike N´ VP V´ DPV I NP AN et a godt good PRO Advice about parking your bike (3) Nede/*ned i kælderen er et godt sted at stille sin cykel Down in cellar-the is a good place to put one’s bike er is VPAdvP Nede/*ned i kælderen Down in cellar-the S This sits fairly well with the idea of Danish as a V2 language

8. NP s DN´ IP sted place at to stille put sin cykel one’s bike N´ VP V´ DPV I NP AN Et A godt good PRO Mirror-image advice about parking your bike (4) Et godt sted at stille sin cykel er nede/ned i kælderen A good place to put one’s bike is down in cellar-the er is VP AdvP nede/ned i kælderen down in cellar-the S... and so does this

9. NP s DN´ IP sted place at to stille put sin cykel one’s bike N´ VP V´ DPV I NP AN et a godt good PRO Revised structure for (3) er is VPAdvP Nede/*ned i kælderen Down in cellar-the S (5) CP Spec LOC IP VP t LOC stille put sin cykel one’s bike I V´ DPV Spec NP LOC at to et godt sted a good place PRO (6) *Nede i kælderen er en god idé at stille sin cykel (7) Det er en god idé at stille sin cykel ned(e) i kælderen “Under any approach that takes Attract/Move to be driven by morphological features...there should be no interaction between theta-theory and the theory of movement.” [Chomsky 1995: 312]

10. Revised structure of (4) + further matters er is VP AdvP nede/ned i kælderen down in cellar-the S CP Spec LOC IP VP t LOC stille put sin cykel one’s bike I V´ DPV Spec NP LOC at to et godt sted a good place PRO (9) Han parkerede sin cykel nede/*ned i kælderen (8) (10) Han stillede sin cykel nede/ned i kælderen

11. (4) Et godt sted at stille sin cykel er nede/ned i kælderen A good place to put one’s bike is down in cellar-the V V´ nede/ned i kælderen down in cellar-the er is AdvP VP CP Spec LOC IP VP t LOC stille put sin cykel one’s bike I V´ DPV Spec NP LOC at to Et godt sted A good place PRO (11)

12. (4) Et godt sted at stille sin cykel er nede/ned i kælderen A good place to put one’s bike is down in cellar-the V V´ nede/ned i kælderen down in cellar-the er is tvtv AdvP VP NP tsts IPC CP C´ NP tsts CP Spec LOC IP VP t LOC stille put sin cykel one’s bike I V´ DPV Spec NP LOC at to Et godt sted A good place PRO (12)

13. IP V V´ C CP C´ AdvP Nede/*ned i kælderen Down in cellar-the a er is tvtv AdvP tata VP NP tsts (3) Nede/*ned i kælderen er et godt sted at stille sin cykel Down in cellar-the is a good place to put one’s bike CP Spec LOC IP VP t LOC stille put sin cykel one’s bike I V´ DPV Spec NP LOC at to et godt sted a good place PRO (13)

14. Ned vs. nede Der There er is et godt a good at stille sin cykel to put one’s bike (14a) der there er is et godt sted a good place at stille sin cykel to put one’s bike *Ned Down i kælderen in cellar-the (Acc.) (16b) sted place i kælderen in cellar-the (Dat.) der there er is et godt a good at stille sin cykel to put one’s bike Nede Down i kælderen in cellar-the (Dative) (16a)sted place *Der There er is et godt sted a good place at stille to put ned i kælderen down in cellar-the (Acc.) (15b)sin cykel one’s bike nede down Der There er is et godt a good at stille sin cykel to put one’s bike (14b)sted place i kælderen in cellar-the (Dat.) nede down Der There er is et godt sted a good place at stille to put i kælderen in cellar-the (Acc.) (15a)sin cykel one’s bike ned down (3) Nede i kælderen er et godt sted at stille sin cykel Subject

15. Intermezzo Fact: Spoken language is linear, by genetic necessity produced and perceived through one channel Fact: Grammatical structure is hierarchical, with a clearly discernible level of phrase structure between the levels of lexical structure and sentence structure Need:An empirically falsifiable theory of the mapping between linear structure and hierachical structure Claim: Theories of movement may be systemic or functional in explanatory range; only the latter are empirically falsifiable. Conclusion: If the Need is to be satisfied by a theory of movement, its explanatory range must be functional.

16. The Representational Thesis All linguistic facts are mental facts All mental facts are representational facts All representational facts are facts about informational functions The Extended [Thrane 2004a,b] [Dretske 1995:xiii]

17. The language faculty as a 2 o Representational System A Model of Language Perception 1 o - Represetational systems (Perceptual and Conceptual) Conceptual input1 o -RepresentationsDigitalizationSensory input 2 o - Representational System (The Language Faculty) Complete Digitalization Linguistic data 2 o -Representations

18. The Generative View of Representational Domains CP IP VP Information Structure Modalization Structure Argument Structure Sentence Movement

19. The Representational View of Representational Domains AS SI MS 1 o -Rep INPUT Principles of Linear Organization

20. Optional -Necessary Obligatory Johnhis shoesin the bathroomputon Constitutive +Necessary John Constituents +Argumental -Argumental John his shoes on in the bathroom

21. +argumental-argumental +necessary ComplementParasite -necessary ArgumentSatellite Typology of sentence constituents Constituents are Necessary iff they help define situation type Constituents are Argumental iff they are referential V selects Complements and Parasites to form V´ V´combine with Arguments and Satellites to for VP

22. VP V´ V S A C P puton his shoes John in the bathroom ∑ ∏ ∑ = situation type Argument structure ∏ = proposition

23. Localist basis? Case Relationsabserglocabl CASE COMPONENTS place source abs(olutive); erg(ative); loc(ative); abl(ative) The axioms of John Anderson’s Localist Case Theory Constituent typesCAPS Selectional Components C = Complement; A = Argument; P = Parasite; S = Satellite

24. VP V´ V S A C P stille put ned i kælderen down in cellar-the sin cykel one’s bike John hver aften every night 19. Hver aften ˌ stiller John sin cykel ˈ ned i kælderen 18. John ˌ stiller sin cykel ˈ ned i kælderen hver aften 17. Sin cykel ˌ stiller John ˈ ned i kælderen hver aften 20. * ˈ Ned i kælderen ˌ stiller John sin cykel hver aften

25. 23. Hver aften ˈ stiller John sin cykel ˈ nede i kælderen 22. John ˈ stiller sin cykel ˈ nede i kælderen hver aften 21. Sin cykel ˈ stiller John ˈ nede i kælderen hver aften 24. ˈ Nede i kælderen ˈ stiller John sin cykel hver aften ● V´ V S A C P stille put nede i kælderen down in cellar-the sin cykel one’s bike John hver aften every night Ø VP S 25. John ˈ stiller sin cykel et nyt sted hver aften

26. VP C nede i kælderen down in cellar-the Ø være be VP VP V´A et godt sted a good place V´ V S C P ˈ stille put sin cykel one’s bike Ø Ø A Ø ●S NP

27. To conclude - Systemic movement is not empirically falsifiable Functional movement is empirically falsifiable, if an initial order is assumed If an initial order is not assumed, movement reduces to linear organization of hierarchically related constituents according to language-specific principles of information structure