Principles and Parameters (I) Rajat Kumar Mohanty rkm@cse.iitb.ac.in Department of Computer Science and Engineering Indian Institute of Technology Bombay

X-bar theory and non-lexical Categories Outline X-bar theory and non-lexical Categories X-bar structure of S Spec-head Configuration VP-internal Subject Hypothesis Extended Projection Principle Small Clause X-bar structure of S` [+Q]-CP Principle Binary Branching and VP-shells

Levels of Representation in Universal Grammar (UG) Lexicon Theta roles X-bar rules Constrained by theta criterion D(eep)-Structure Move-alpha S(urface)-Structure Transformational rules LF (logical form) Constrained by EPP PF (phonetic form)

Projection Principle Representations at each syntactic level (i.e., LF, DS and SS) are projected from the lexicon, in that they observe the subcategorisation properties of lexical items.

X-bar Theory It tells us how words are combined to make phrases and sentences. It captures the commonality between different types of phrases, which PS-rules cannot.

(Intermediate projection) X-bar Projection XP (Maximal projection) X ` (Intermediate projection) YP X (Zero projection) ZP

X-bar Projection XP (X-phrase) YP (Specifier) X ` X (Head) ZP (Complement)

X-bar Projection XP X ` YP (Specifier) X ` ZP (Adjunct) X (Head) ZP (Complement)

X-bar Projection NP N ` NP John’s N PP solution to the problem

X-bar Projection NP N ` Det the N ` PP In the cabinet meeting N PP discussion of the cricket match

C(onstituent)-command C-command is a structural relation among the terminal and non-terminal nodes in a syntactic tree  c-commands  iff: the first branching node dominating  also dominates   does not dominate  A B E C D F G

C-command NP Det N ` PP N ` P NP N PP P NP Det N ` N the of discussion the cricket match the N meeting

 governs  iff Government  is a lexical head (or tensed I)  C-commands  No barrier (VP, NP, PP, AP, or tensed IP) intervenes between  and 

X-bar structure of S : IP I(NFL(ECTION)) as the Head of S IP ( = S) Spec(ifier) I ` ( = Aux) I VP NP Tense : [+/- FINITE] Φ-features: [PNG, case] … ……

Spec-Head Agreement A head (X) and its specifies (Spec-X) must agree in relevant features IP NP I ` Case: NOM PNG: 3sg I VP Case: NOM PNG: 3sg … ……

VP-internal Subject Hypothesis The external argument of a verb is generated within the VP. IP ( = S) Spec I ` … VP I Tense Φ-features … Spec V ` V NP NP … …

John likes his teacher. IP Spec I ` VP I NP V ` [Tense] [AGR] [+ EPP] … V NP John like his teacher

Extended Projection Principle There must be a subject in a clause. Examples John likes his teacher *(There) is a unicorn in the garden

John likes his teacher. IP NP I ` Johni VP I NP V ` [Tense] [AGR] [+ EPP] … V NP ti like his teacher Movement rule

There is a unicorn in the garden. IP NP I ` There VP I Spec V ` [Tense] [AGR] [+ EPP] … Insertion rule V ` PP V NP in the garden be a unicorn

John considers Bill to be incompetent IP John considers Bill to be incompetent I ` NP I VP John [Tense] [AGR] [+ EPP] … NP V ` ti V IP consider NP I ` VP Bill I V ` NP To [+EPP] ti V AP be incompetent

Small Clause John considers Bill to be incompetent *John considers Bill to incompetent *John considers Bill be incompetent John considers Bill incompetent Small clause

John considers Bill incompetent IP John considers Bill incompetent I ` NP I VP John NP V ` [Tense] [AGR] [+ EPP] … ti V AP consider NP A ` N ` A N Bill incompetent

X-bar structure of S-bar : CP C(omp(lementizer)) as the Head of S` CP ( = S` ) C ` Spec C IP ( = S ) …… [+/- Q]

I think that John should leave IP I think that John should leave I ` NP I VP N ` NP V ` N + EPP … V CP I think Spec C ` ti IP C [-Q] John should leave that

I want for John to leave IP I ` NP I VP N ` NP V ` N + EPP … V CP I Spec C ` ti IP C [-Q] John to leave for

I wonder if John has left IP I wonder if John has left I ` NP I VP N ` NP V ` N + EPP … V CP I wonder Spec C ` ti IP C [-Q] John has left if

Who did Mary see? CP C ` Spec [+Q]-CP Principle: C IP [+ Q] A [+Q]-CP must have a specifier NP I ` NP did I VP … +EPP Aux Spec V ` whoj Maryi NPi NP V tj see

Binary Branching and VP-shells A node can dominate at most two branches John put the book *(on the shelf) John put *(the book) on the shelf Put: [V; _ NP PP] S V (NP) (PP)

Head-to-head movement constraint v P VP-Shell v ` spec v VP V ` NP light verb PP V put Head-to-head movement constraint V-raising

v P v ` v IP John put the book on the shelf I ` NP N ` I N spec Tense AGR +EPP … v John ti VP V ` put NP PP V the book on the shelf ti

Summary Projection Principle: Lexical information (such as theta roles) is syntactically represented at all levels of representation X-bar Theory tells us how words are combined to make phrases and sentences. The head of S is I(NFL(LECTION) and the head of S` is Comp(lementizer) VP-internal Subject Hypothesis: The external argument of a verb is generated within the VP. Extended Projection Principle (EPP): A clause must have a subject [+Q]-CP Principle: A [+Q]-CP must have a specifier Transformational rules can be movement rules insertion rules Rules must be maximally constrained, otherwise they could produce anything (e.g., Head-to-head movement constraint, EPP, etc)

Sources and further readings Comsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. CUP, Cambridge. Comsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Foris, Dordrecht. Ouhalla, Jamal. 1994. Introducing Transformational grammar. Arnold, London.

THANK YOU