1. Realization 11a. PRO & CP & V2 (Chapter 8) (v1.1) CAS LX 522 Syntax I

2. Projects for today Review PRO and control, with some additional evidence for PRO from Binding Theory. Review PRO and control, with some additional evidence for PRO from Binding Theory. Look at one other place where CPs appear inside other sentences: clausal adjuncts. Look at one other place where CPs appear inside other sentences: clausal adjuncts. Look at the phenomenon of “V2” languages—another place where CP is important. Look at the phenomenon of “V2” languages—another place where CP is important.

3. Before we finish embedded clauses… Another place we find embedded clauses is as modificational adjuncts. Another place we find embedded clauses is as modificational adjuncts. Pat ate lunch [ PP on the hill ] [ PP by the tree ] [ PP in the rain ]. Pat ate lunch [ PP on the hill ] [ PP by the tree ] [ PP in the rain ]. To express reasons and times, we also find whole CPs adjoined to our clause: To express reasons and times, we also find whole CPs adjoined to our clause: We discussed adjuncts [ CP before we finished our discussion of embedded clauses] We discussed adjuncts [ CP before we finished our discussion of embedded clauses] There’s nothing really new here, except the observation that before can have category C. There’s nothing really new here, except the observation that before can have category C. Just like after, while, during, etc. Just like after, while, during, etc.

4. Adjunct clauses: where do they go? Pat cleaned poorly yesterday. Pat cleaned poorly yesterday. #Pat cleaned yesterday poorly. #Pat cleaned yesterday poorly. Pat cleaned poorly [before Chris arrived]. Pat cleaned poorly [before Chris arrived]. #Pat cleaned [before Chris arrived] poorly. #Pat cleaned [before Chris arrived] poorly. Pat cleaned [before Chris arrived] yesterday. Pat cleaned [before Chris arrived] yesterday. Pat cleaned yesterday [before Chris arrived]. Pat cleaned yesterday [before Chris arrived]. Pat heard that [before Chris arrived] [Tracy cleaned the sink]. Pat heard that [before Chris arrived] [Tracy cleaned the sink]. Pat heard [before Chris arrived] that [Tracy cleaned the sink]. Pat heard [before Chris arrived] that [Tracy cleaned the sink].

5. Because clauses Reason clauses are also clausal adjuncts. Reason clauses are also clausal adjuncts. Because I lost the game, I left. Because I lost the game, I left. I left because I lost the game. I left because I lost the game. vP lose the game T T [past] TP DP I CP C because vP leave T T [past] TP DP I TP CP C Ø DECL

6. If clauses If clauses are like because clauses. If clauses are like because clauses. If he loses the game, I will leave. If he loses the game, I will leave. I will leave if he loses the game. I will leave if he loses the game. vP lose the game T T [pres] TP DP he CP C if vP leave TP DP I TP CP C Ø DECL MP T M+T will

7. Unique  -Generalization *Dantes accused. *Dantes accused. This cannot mean Dantes accused himself, and isn’t good on its own. We concluded (back in chapter 3, p. 81), that  -role assignment is constrained by…. This cannot mean Dantes accused himself, and isn’t good on its own. We concluded (back in chapter 3, p. 81), that  -role assignment is constrained by…. The Unique  -Generalization Each  -role must be assigned but a constituent cannot be assigned more than one  -role. The Unique  -Generalization Each  -role must be assigned but a constituent cannot be assigned more than one  -role. So, presume that’s true. So, presume that’s true.

8. PRO Jack tried to capture Nina Jack tried to capture Nina Here, capture has two  -roles (Agent and Theme), and try has two  -roles (Agent and Proposition). Intuitively, Jack is the Agent of both the trying and the capturing. But assuming that the Unique  -Generalization is true, this can’t be: Jack can’t be getting two  -roles. Here, capture has two  -roles (Agent and Theme), and try has two  -roles (Agent and Proposition). Intuitively, Jack is the Agent of both the trying and the capturing. But assuming that the Unique  -Generalization is true, this can’t be: Jack can’t be getting two  -roles. Something must be getting the Agent  -role of capture (Jack is pretty clearly getting the Agent  -role of try), but we can’t see it. Something must be getting the Agent  -role of capture (Jack is pretty clearly getting the Agent  -role of try), but we can’t see it. Conclusion: There’s something we can’t see there, getting the Agent  -role of capture. It’s a little bit like a silent pronoun, so we call it PRO. Conclusion: There’s something we can’t see there, getting the Agent  -role of capture. It’s a little bit like a silent pronoun, so we call it PRO.

9. PRO Jack tried [ to PRO capture Nina ] Jack tried [ to PRO capture Nina ] PRO must be there to satisfy the U  G. PRO must be there to satisfy the U  G. But something must be there in the specifier of TP: T always has a [ u D*] feature to check (the “ EPP ”). But something must be there in the specifier of TP: T always has a [ u D*] feature to check (the “ EPP ”). (except maybe in Irish and Arabic) (except maybe in Irish and Arabic) Since Jack tried to capture Nina is grammatical, we also need PRO to move to SpecTP to satisfy the EPP. Since Jack tried to capture Nina is grammatical, we also need PRO to move to SpecTP to satisfy the EPP.

10. PRO Jack tried [ PRO to capture Nina ] Jack tried [ PRO to capture Nina ] So, we have two deep principles of the grammar that point to a need for PRO in this sentence. So, we have two deep principles of the grammar that point to a need for PRO in this sentence. Unique  -Generalization Unique  -Generalization EPP (T has a [uD*] feature) EPP (T has a [uD*] feature) PRO acts a bit like an anaphor, in that it must corefer with the subject of the higher verb (try is a subject control verb ). PRO acts a bit like an anaphor, in that it must corefer with the subject of the higher verb (try is a subject control verb ).

11. One more argument for PRO Principle A: An anaphor must be bound in its binding domain. Principle A: An anaphor must be bound in its binding domain. Jack hoped [ that Kim would explain herself ] Jack hoped [ that Kim would explain herself ] Jack wanted [ Kim to explain herself ] Jack wanted [ Kim to explain herself ] *Jack hoped [ that Kim would call himself ] *Jack hoped [ that Kim would call himself ] *Jack wanted [ Kim to call himself ] *Jack wanted [ Kim to call himself ] Jack hoped [ PRO to see Kim ] Jack hoped [ PRO to see Kim ] Jack hoped [ PRO to exonerate himself ] Jack hoped [ PRO to exonerate himself ] Principle B: A pronoun must be free in its binding domain. Principle B: A pronoun must be free in its binding domain. Jack hoped [ that Chase would exonerate him ] Jack hoped [ that Chase would exonerate him ] Jack wanted [ Chase to exonerate him ] Jack wanted [ Chase to exonerate him ] Jack hoped [ PRO to exonerate him ] Jack hoped [ PRO to exonerate him ]

12. PRO So, we have pretty good evidence for PRO, despite its invisibility: So, we have pretty good evidence for PRO, despite its invisibility: We believe T has a [uD*] feature (EPP). We believe T has a [uD*] feature (EPP). Every TP needs a specifier. Every TP needs a specifier. We believe the Unique  -generalization. We believe the Unique  -generalization. No DP can get two different  -roles. No DP can get two different  -roles. Binding Theory reacts as if something is there serving as a binder. Binding Theory reacts as if something is there serving as a binder.

13. Idioms Idiomatic interpretation available for raising verbs: Idiomatic interpretation available for raising verbs: [The cat] i seems t i to have your tongue. [The cat] i seems t i to have your tongue. [The cat] i seems t i to be out of the bag. [The cat] i seems t i to be out of the bag. The cat was originally Merged within the lower vP—its  -role comes from have/be out. Not so here: The cat was originally Merged within the lower vP—its  -role comes from have/be out. Not so here: [The cat] tried [PRO to have your tongue]. [The cat] tried [PRO to have your tongue]. [The cat] arranged [PRO to be out of the bag]. [The cat] arranged [PRO to be out of the bag]. A further argument for PRO being there and being something different from [the cat]. A further argument for PRO being there and being something different from [the cat].

14. Subject control v. object control Subject control verbs take a nonfinite complement, with PRO as the subject, and PRO must refer to the higher subject. Subject control verbs take a nonfinite complement, with PRO as the subject, and PRO must refer to the higher subject. Gael tried [ PRO to disarm the bomb ] Gael tried [ PRO to disarm the bomb ] Object control verbs are ditransitives that take an object and a nonfinite complement, with PRO as the subject, and PRO must refer to the higher object. Object control verbs are ditransitives that take an object and a nonfinite complement, with PRO as the subject, and PRO must refer to the higher object. David persuaded Sherry [ PRO to leave ] David persuaded Sherry [ PRO to leave ]

15. Persuasion and promises Not all ditransitive control verbs are object control verbs. Not all ditransitive control verbs are object control verbs. Though all object control verbs are ditransitives. Though all object control verbs are ditransitives. David persuaded Sherry [ PRO to leave ] David persuaded Sherry [ PRO to leave ] David promised Sherry [ PRO to run for office ] David promised Sherry [ PRO to run for office ] Chase asked Jack [ PRO to be allowed to continue ] Chase asked Jack [ PRO to be allowed to continue ] Chase asked Jack [ PRO to get off his case ] Chase asked Jack [ PRO to get off his case ] Whether a verb is a subject control verb or an object control verb is an individual property of the verb. Promise is recorded in our lexicon as a subject control verb, persuade as an object control verb. Whether a verb is a subject control verb or an object control verb is an individual property of the verb. Promise is recorded in our lexicon as a subject control verb, persuade as an object control verb.

16. ECM verbs ECM verbs also take infinitive complements, but with an overt subject (that checks accusative case with the ECM verb). ECM verbs also take infinitive complements, but with an overt subject (that checks accusative case with the ECM verb). Tony found [ Michelle to be charming ] Tony found [ Michelle to be charming ] Tony found [ that Michelle was charming ] Tony found [ that Michelle was charming ] Jack expected [ Tony to take the day off ] Jack expected [ Tony to take the day off ] Jack expected [ that Tony would take the day off ] Jack expected [ that Tony would take the day off ]

17. Raising verbs Raising verbs have no Agent/Experiencer in SpecvP, and take a nonfinite complement. The subject of the embedded complement moves into their subject position: Raising verbs have no Agent/Experiencer in SpecvP, and take a nonfinite complement. The subject of the embedded complement moves into their subject position: Jack seems [ to be tired ] Jack seems [ to be tired ] It seems [ that Jack is tired ] It seems [ that Jack is tired ] The time appears [ to have expired ] The time appears [ to have expired ] It appears [ that the time has expired ] It appears [ that the time has expired ] The President happened [ to have a pen ] The President happened [ to have a pen ] It happened [ that the President had a pen ] It happened [ that the President had a pen ]

18. There seems… We also find the raising verb seem with there. We also find the raising verb seem with there. There. The other expletive subject. There. The other expletive subject. Vincent seems to be lost. Vincent seems to be lost. It seems that Vincent is lost. It seems that Vincent is lost. There seems to be a dog in the woods. There seems to be a dog in the woods. It is an expletive subject that checks both the EPP and case features of T. There checks only the EPP feature of T (a dog checks T’s case feature). It is an expletive subject that checks both the EPP and case features of T. There checks only the EPP feature of T (a dog checks T’s case feature).

19. *There seems a man to be in the garden. There seems to be a man in the garden. There seems to be a man in the garden. There appears in SpecTP, satisfying the EPP feature. There appears in SpecTP, satisfying the EPP feature. There are two TPs here, and each TP has/had an EPP feature. There are two TPs here, and each TP has/had an EPP feature. [ TP There seems [ TP to be a man in…]] [ TP There seems [ TP to be a man in…]] So, there must have first Merged into the lower SpecTP and then moved to the upper SpecTP. So, there must have first Merged into the lower SpecTP and then moved to the upper SpecTP. [ TP There seems [ TP to be a man in…]] [ TP There seems [ TP to be a man in…]]

20. *There seems a man to be in the garden [ TP There seems [ TP to be a man in…]] [ TP There seems [ TP to be a man in…]] This makes sense, both EPP features are satisfied, a man gets case from (the higher, finite) T. This makes sense, both EPP features are satisfied, a man gets case from (the higher, finite) T. But think back to when we were building the structure and had reached this point: But think back to when we were building the structure and had reached this point: [ T to be a man in the garden] [ T to be a man in the garden] We now have to satisfy the [uD*] feature of T. We have there lying around in our numeration. But if we didn’t, we could have just moved a man to SpecTP to satisfy the EPP. We now have to satisfy the [uD*] feature of T. We have there lying around in our numeration. But if we didn’t, we could have just moved a man to SpecTP to satisfy the EPP. [ TP a man to be in the garden] [ TP a man to be in the garden]

21. *There seems a man to be in the garden [ TP a man to be in the garden] [ TP a man to be in the garden] After doing this, we can continue to add on seem, v, T, and then insert there into the higher SpecTP, yielding: After doing this, we can continue to add on seem, v, T, and then insert there into the higher SpecTP, yielding: [ TP there seems [ TP a man to be in…]] [ TP there seems [ TP a man to be in…]] But this is ungrammatical. So what goes wrong? But this is ungrammatical. So what goes wrong? The difference between There seems a man to be in the garden and There seems to be a man in the garden is at the point where we’ve got [ T to be a man in the garden]. Here there’s a choice: Move a man or Merge there. The difference between There seems a man to be in the garden and There seems to be a man in the garden is at the point where we’ve got [ T to be a man in the garden]. Here there’s a choice: Move a man or Merge there. The usual approach here is to say Merge is preferred to Move, so if you have the choice, you always Merge (it’s “easier”). The usual approach here is to say Merge is preferred to Move, so if you have the choice, you always Merge (it’s “easier”).

22. Verb classes in summary ECM verbs, e.g., believe, find ECM verbs, e.g., believe, find I believe [ TP him to have told the truth]. I believe [ TP him to have told the truth]. We find [ TP these truths to be self-evident ].(or hold) We find [ TP these truths to be self-evident ].(or hold) Subject control verbs, e.g., attempt, promise Subject control verbs, e.g., attempt, promise Kim k promised Jack [ CP Ø NULL PRO k to avoid kidnappers ]. Kim k promised Jack [ CP Ø NULL PRO k to avoid kidnappers ]. Kim k will try [ CP Ø NULL PRO k to avoid kidnappers ]. Kim k will try [ CP Ø NULL PRO k to avoid kidnappers ]. Object control verbs, e.g., convince, ask Object control verbs, e.g., convince, ask I convinced her k [ CP Ø NULL PRO k to drive to work]. I convinced her k [ CP Ø NULL PRO k to drive to work]. Jack asked Kim k [ CP Ø NULL PRO k to avoid kidnappers ]. Jack asked Kim k [ CP Ø NULL PRO k to avoid kidnappers ]. Raising verbs, e.g., appear, seem Raising verbs, e.g., appear, seem I appear [ TP to have missed the bus]. I appear [ TP to have missed the bus]. Jack seems [ TP to need a nap]. Jack seems [ TP to need a nap].

23. While thinking about syntax Before finishing his homework, Ike watched TV. Before finishing his homework, Ike watched TV. Finish: transitive (Agent, Theme) Finish: transitive (Agent, Theme) Agent: ? Agent: ? Theme: his homework Theme: his homework Watch: transitive (Agent, Theme) Watch: transitive (Agent, Theme) Agent: Ike Agent: Ike Theme: TV Theme: TV Ike watched TV is the main clause. Ike watched TV is the main clause. Before finishing his homework is a modifier. Before finishing his homework is a modifier.

24. While thinking about syntax Before finishing his homework, Ike watched TV. Before finishing his homework, Ike watched TV. Intuitively, it is Ike who was (at least at risk of) finishing his homework. Intuitively, it is Ike who was (at least at risk of) finishing his homework. We are not going to have any particular explanation for exactly how the interpretation tied to the subject comes about, but it seems to be. We are not going to have any particular explanation for exactly how the interpretation tied to the subject comes about, but it seems to be. Before he finished his homework, Ike watched TV. Before he finished his homework, Ike watched TV.

25. While PRO thinking about syntax Before PRO finishing his homework, … Before PRO finishing his homework, … This PRO does seem to be controlled by the subject somehow (*While raining, Ike dashed to the store). This PRO does seem to be controlled by the subject somehow (*While raining, Ike dashed to the store). The form finishing is not the progressive, it is the present participle, a nonfinite form. The form finishing is not the progressive, it is the present participle, a nonfinite form.

26. Before PRO finishing… T is not finite, so no [tense] feature. T is not finite, so no [tense] feature. It is not the infinitive either. It is not the infinitive either. We’ll say this form has the [ing] feature. We’ll say this form has the [ing] feature. The [ u Infl: ] feature of v is matched, valued, and checked by the [ing] feature, resulting in finishing. The [ u Infl: ] feature of v is matched, valued, and checked by the [ing] feature, resulting in finishing. T T [ing] TP DP PRO CP C before V finish VP DP his homework v v vPvP v [uInfl:ing]

27. Before PRO finishing… How does PRO get its case feature checked? How does PRO get its case feature checked? Some relevant sentences: Some relevant sentences: Before he finished his homework, Ike watched TV. Before he finished his homework, Ike watched TV. Before Ike’s finishing of his homework, tension was high. Before Ike’s finishing of his homework, tension was high. T T [ing] TP DP PRO CP C before V finish VP DP his homework v v vPvP v

28. Before PRO finishing… Given this, the best hypothesis seems to be that the [ing] T also has a [ null ] feature, checking case with PRO just like finite T checks nominative case with other subjects. Given this, the best hypothesis seems to be that the [ing] T also has a [ null ] feature, checking case with PRO just like finite T checks nominative case with other subjects. [null] = [ucase:null] [null] = [ucase:null] T T [ing] TP DP PRO CP C before V finish VP DP his homework v v vPvP v

29. Before PRO finishing… The only thing left is to attach the modifier into the main clause… The only thing left is to attach the modifier into the main clause… T T [past] TP DP Ike TP V watch VP DP TV v v vPvP v T T [ing] TP DP PRO CP C before V finish VP DP his homework v v vPvP v CP Ø DECL

30. Before his cooking of the t(of)urkey, Ike had never opened the oven before.

31. On gerunds There is yet another form of the verb that shows up with -ing on the end of it in English: the gerund. There is yet another form of the verb that shows up with -ing on the end of it in English: the gerund. A gerund is basically a verb acting as a noun— we’ve been looking at this kind of deverbal noun already. One way to tell whether you are looking at a gerund (noun) or not (a verb) is to see whether it is modified by adjectives or adverbs: A gerund is basically a verb acting as a noun— we’ve been looking at this kind of deverbal noun already. One way to tell whether you are looking at a gerund (noun) or not (a verb) is to see whether it is modified by adjectives or adverbs: Before his quick(*ly) cooking of the t(of)urkey… Before his quick(*ly) cooking of the t(of)urkey… Before quick-*(ly) finishing his homework… Before quick-*(ly) finishing his homework…

32. CP The thread here (chapter 8) is motivating and making use of the CP level of our structure: The thread here (chapter 8) is motivating and making use of the CP level of our structure: C is the home of the [clause-type:…] feature, differentiating interrogatives and declaratives. C is the home of the [clause-type:…] feature, differentiating interrogatives and declaratives. C is sometimes available to check case on the subject when it can’t be checked the higher verb (ECM) or finite T: C is sometimes available to check case on the subject when it can’t be checked the higher verb (ECM) or finite T: I want [ Ø NULL PRO to see more syntax ] I want [ Ø NULL PRO to see more syntax ] I intended [ for her to be win the lottery ]. I intended [ for her to be win the lottery ]. We’ll see more for CP as we explore question formation—but first, we’ll see it at work in German… We’ll see more for CP as we explore question formation—but first, we’ll see it at work in German…

33. V2 languages There are a number of languages that are classified as “verb second” or “ V2 ” languages. They are so called because in general the (tensed) verb must be second, after the first major constituent in the sentence. There are a number of languages that are classified as “verb second” or “ V2 ” languages. They are so called because in general the (tensed) verb must be second, after the first major constituent in the sentence. De man heeft een boek gezien gisteren.(Dutch) the man has a book seen yesterday ‘the man has seen a book yesterday.’ De man heeft een boek gezien gisteren.(Dutch) the man has a book seen yesterday ‘the man has seen a book yesterday.’ een boek heeft de man gezien gisteren. een boek heeft de man gezien gisteren. gisteren heeft de man een boek gezien. gisteren heeft de man een boek gezien. Die Kinder haben diesen Film gesehen.(German) the children have this film seen ‘The children have seen this film.’ Die Kinder haben diesen Film gesehen.(German) the children have this film seen ‘The children have seen this film.’ Diesen Film haben die Kinder gesehen. Diesen Film haben die Kinder gesehen.

34. Analyzing V2 How can we account for this? How can we account for this? Assume that in German, most things are very similar to English: Assume that in German, most things are very similar to English: The UTAH is the same (Agents in SpecvP, etc.) The UTAH is the same (Agents in SpecvP, etc.) The EPP is the same (T has a [uD*] feature; there needs to be a DP in SpecTP) The EPP is the same (T has a [uD*] feature; there needs to be a DP in SpecTP) Things to remember: Things to remember: French/Irish and English differ in whether v moves to T. French/Irish and English differ in whether v moves to T. Irish and French/English differ in whether the subject moves to SpecTP. Irish and French/English differ in whether the subject moves to SpecTP. In English yes-no questions (but not in declaratives), T moves to C. In English yes-no questions (but not in declaratives), T moves to C.

35. English Yes-No Question In a YNQ, the [Q] feature of C matches and values the [ u clause-type ] feature of T as strong ([ Q* ]). In a YNQ, the [Q] feature of C matches and values the [ u clause-type ] feature of T as strong ([ Q* ]). T moves up to adjoin to C, checking the feature. T moves up to adjoin to C, checking the feature. V perform VP DP the autopsy v v vPvP T TP DP Scully v CP C Ø [Q] C T will [Q*]

36. Analyzing V2 Since the finite verb is sometimes to the left of the subject: Since the finite verb is sometimes to the left of the subject: Diesen Roman las ich schon letztes Jahr this book read I already last year ‘I read this book already last year.’ Diesen Roman las ich schon letztes Jahr this book read I already last year ‘I read this book already last year.’ Just like it is in English YNQs: Just like it is in English YNQs: Will I get an A? Will I get an A? We can suppose that German and English differ in that when C values the [ u clause- type: ] feature of T, it is always strong. We can suppose that German and English differ in that when C values the [ u clause- type: ] feature of T, it is always strong. In fact, more natural sounding than what we have to say in English: When C values [uclause-type:] as [Q] (but not [Decl]) it’s strong. In fact, more natural sounding than what we have to say in English: When C values [uclause-type:] as [Q] (but not [Decl]) it’s strong.

37. Topics The constituent that appears first in a V2 clause is generally considered to be a topic. The constituent that appears first in a V2 clause is generally considered to be a topic. Suppose that C has a topic feature [ u top* ] and whatever is the topic of the sentence (be it an adverb, the subject, the object) is also marked with an (interpretable) [top] feature. Suppose that C has a topic feature [ u top* ] and whatever is the topic of the sentence (be it an adverb, the subject, the object) is also marked with an (interpretable) [top] feature. Then this will work just like the EPP, essentially. Then this will work just like the EPP, essentially.

38. V2 languages The basic idea we’ll be pursuing with respect to V2 languages is this: The basic idea we’ll be pursuing with respect to V2 languages is this: To get the tensed verb higher than the subject (which is sometimes is), we move the verb to T, and then T (with the verb) to C. To get the tensed verb higher than the subject (which is sometimes is), we move the verb to T, and then T (with the verb) to C. To put C into “second position”, we move some phrase into SpecCP. To put C into “second position”, we move some phrase into SpecCP. The “first phrase” in V2 languages is generally interpreted as the topic of the sentences. So, we say that the topic (whatever it is going to be) has a feature that marks it as such: An interpretable [top] feature. The “first phrase” in V2 languages is generally interpreted as the topic of the sentences. So, we say that the topic (whatever it is going to be) has a feature that marks it as such: An interpretable [top] feature. TP C C+T+V+v CP DP diesen Roman [top]

39. Reminder: T, v, and [u Infl:] The way our system works (movement happens in order to check strong uninterpretable features), we implement this as follows: The way our system works (movement happens in order to check strong uninterpretable features), we implement this as follows: Because the verb moves to T, we need there to be a strong feature checked between T and v. Because the verb moves to T, we need there to be a strong feature checked between T and v. This is common cross-linguistically. Recall French,where the highest verbal head (the v, or an auxiliary) moves to T. This is common cross-linguistically. Recall French,where the highest verbal head (the v, or an auxiliary) moves to T. This explained why verbs always precede adverbs and negation in French. This explained why verbs always precede adverbs and negation in French. Since the [tense] feature of T values the [uInfl:] feature of the highest verbal head, we say that in French, when [tense] values [uInfl:], the feature is strong. Since the [tense] feature of T values the [uInfl:] feature of the highest verbal head, we say that in French, when [tense] values [uInfl:], the feature is strong. VP vPvP T T [past] v v [uInfl:past*] V

40. Reminder: v to T So, v starts out with a [uInfl:] feature. So, v starts out with a [uInfl:] feature. v always starts out with a [uInfl:] feature. v always starts out with a [uInfl:] feature. We Merge T, and the [tense] feature (e.g., [past] = [tense:past]) matches and values the [ u Infl: ] feature. We Merge T, and the [tense] feature (e.g., [past] = [tense:past]) matches and values the [ u Infl: ] feature. What differentiates French and English is that when [tense] values [ u Infl: ], the valued [ u Infl: ] feature is strong. What differentiates French and English is that when [tense] values [ u Infl: ], the valued [ u Infl: ] feature is strong. In English, it is not strong except in one case: if the [ u Infl: ] feature is one an auxiliary (Perf, Prog, Pass), then a [ u Infl: ] feature valued by [tense] is strong. In English, it is not strong except in one case: if the [ u Infl: ] feature is one an auxiliary (Perf, Prog, Pass), then a [ u Infl: ] feature valued by [tense] is strong. Auxiliaries precede negation and adverbs, main verbs do not. Auxiliaries precede negation and adverbs, main verbs do not. VP vPvP v T T T [past] v [uInfl:past*] V

41. Reminder: Strong features Strong features are uninterpretable features that can only be checked when they are local to (a sister of) the feature that checks them. Strong features are uninterpretable features that can only be checked when they are local to (a sister of) the feature that checks them. Strong features very often = something must move. Strong features very often = something must move. A feature gets to be strong in one of two ways: A feature gets to be strong in one of two ways: An inherently strong feature of the lexical item. An inherently strong feature of the lexical item. v has a strong [uV*] feature. v has a strong [uV*] feature. T has a strong [uD*] feature. T has a strong [uD*] feature. eat (V) has a strong [uD*] feature (associated with the Theme  -role). eat (V) has a strong [uD*] feature (associated with the Theme  -role). A feature that becomes strong when valued. A feature that becomes strong when valued. Prog has a weak [uInfl:] feature. When valued by [tense], it becomes strong. (In English, Aux moves to T: I am not eating green eggs & ham) Prog has a weak [uInfl:] feature. When valued by [tense], it becomes strong. (In English, Aux moves to T: I am not eating green eggs & ham) T has a weak [uclause-type:] feature. When valued by [clause- type:Q], it becomes strong. (In English, T moves to C in questions: Would you eat them on a train?) T has a weak [uclause-type:] feature. When valued by [clause- type:Q], it becomes strong. (In English, T moves to C in questions: Would you eat them on a train?)

42. V2 languages To account for the fact that v moves to T and then T moves to C in German: a feature that C values on T is valued as strong. To account for the fact that v moves to T and then T moves to C in German: a feature that C values on T is valued as strong. [ u clause-type: ] is a perfect candidate. [ u clause-type: ] is a perfect candidate. So, when [ u clause-type: ] is valued by C in German, it is valued as strong, and so T moves to C. So, when [ u clause-type: ] is valued by C in German, it is valued as strong, and so T moves to C. VP vPvP v T T T [past, uclause-type:decl*] v [uInfl:past*] V TPTP C Subject C [decl]

43. V2 languages To account for the fact that v moves to T and then T moves to C in German: a feature that C values on T is valued as strong. To account for the fact that v moves to T and then T moves to C in German: a feature that C values on T is valued as strong. [ u clause-type: ] is a perfect candidate. [ u clause-type: ] is a perfect candidate. So, when [ u clause-type: ] is valued by C in German, it is valued as strong, and so T moves to C. So, when [ u clause-type: ] is valued by C in German, it is valued as strong, and so T moves to C. VP vPvP v T T T [past, uclause-type:decl*] v [uInfl:past*] V TPTP C Subject C [decl] C

44. V2 languages To account for the fact that the topic moves into SpecCP, we say that C has a [ u top* ] feature. Whatever is the topic in the sentence will have a feature designating that, [top]. To account for the fact that the topic moves into SpecCP, we say that C has a [ u top* ] feature. Whatever is the topic in the sentence will have a feature designating that, [top]. Just like the EPP feature ([uD*]) of T forces the subject into SpecTP, the [utop*] feature of C will force movement of the topic into SpecCP. Just like the EPP feature ([uD*]) of T forces the subject into SpecTP, the [utop*] feature of C will force movement of the topic into SpecCP. VP vPvP v T T T v V TPTP C Subject [top] C [decl, utop*] C

45. V2 languages To account for the fact that the topic moves into SpecCP, we say that C has a [ u top* ] feature. Whatever is the topic in the sentence will have a feature designating that, [top]. To account for the fact that the topic moves into SpecCP, we say that C has a [ u top* ] feature. Whatever is the topic in the sentence will have a feature designating that, [top]. Just like the EPP feature ([uD*]) of T forces the subject into SpecTP, the [utop*] feature of C will force movement of the topic into SpecCP. Just like the EPP feature ([uD*]) of T forces the subject into SpecTP, the [utop*] feature of C will force movement of the topic into SpecCP. VP vPvP v T T T v V TPTP C C [decl, utop*] C CPCP Subject [top]

46. V2…step 1 V moves to v. V moves to v. Perf moves to T. Perf moves to T. T moves to C. T moves to C. Subject moves to SpecTP. Subject moves to SpecTP. V gelesen VP DP diesen Roman v v vPvP T TP DP ich v C C Ø [Decl] C Perf+T habe [Decl*] PerfP

47. V2…step 2a The object is marked as topic. The object is marked as topic. C has a [ u top* ] feature. C has a [ u top* ] feature. V gelesen VP DP diesen Roman [top] v v vPvP T TP DP ich v C C Ø [Decl, utop*] C Perf+T habe [Decl*] PerfP

48. V2…step 2b The object moves up to SpecTP. The object moves up to SpecTP. The tensed verb is now in second position. The tensed verb is now in second position. V gelesen VP v v vPvP T TP DP ich v C C Ø [Decl, utop*] C Perf+T habe [Decl*] PerfP CP DP diesen Roman [top]

49. Embedded clauses Will John arrive late? Will John arrive late? T moves to C in English questions. T moves to C in English questions. [uclause-type:] on T is strong when valued by [Q] on C. [uclause-type:] on T is strong when valued by [Q] on C. I wonder [ CP if John will arrive late ]. I wonder [ CP if John will arrive late ]. T does not move to C in embedded questions. T does not move to C in embedded questions. Perhaps because C is “filled” already (by if). Perhaps because C is “filled” already (by if). Intuition: We need to be able to tell when C is [Q]— if nothing is pronounced there, we move T there to signal that C is [Q]. Intuition: We need to be able to tell when C is [Q]— if nothing is pronounced there, we move T there to signal that C is [Q]. Er sagte [ CP dass ich schon letztes Jahr diesen Roman las ] he said that I already last year this book read ‘He said that I read this book already last year.’ Er sagte [ CP dass ich schon letztes Jahr diesen Roman las ] he said that I already last year this book read ‘He said that I read this book already last year.’ If C is filled in German (dass), T does not move to C. If C is filled in German (dass), T does not move to C. Also notice that when T does not move to C, the verb is at the end. Also notice that when T does not move to C, the verb is at the end. German appears to be a head-final language. German appears to be a head-final language.

50. Interlude: what we’re doing Remember, what we’re doing is trying to describe our knowledge of language. Remember, what we’re doing is trying to describe our knowledge of language. We believe that the intricacies of human language are actually too complicated to learn, that we’re in fact describing a kind of system that is genetically “built-in”, sort of like our vision system. We believe that the intricacies of human language are actually too complicated to learn, that we’re in fact describing a kind of system that is genetically “built-in”, sort of like our vision system. If that’s the case, the same system must underlie all human languages, and the differences must be relatively minor. If that’s the case, the same system must underlie all human languages, and the differences must be relatively minor. We’re identifying a few “parameters of variation”— ways in which human languages can differ. We’re identifying a few “parameters of variation”— ways in which human languages can differ.

51. Interlude: what we’re doing What we’re saying here is that languages can differ in a few small respects, and we can account for that : What we’re saying here is that languages can differ in a few small respects, and we can account for that : Headedness: heads come before complements in some languages (English), and after complements in others (Japanese, German). Headedness: heads come before complements in some languages (English), and after complements in others (Japanese, German). Verb-raising: some languages move v to T (French), others don’t. (Under what conditions does T value [uInfl:] as strong?) Verb-raising: some languages move v to T (French), others don’t. (Under what conditions does T value [uInfl:] as strong?) V2: some languages move v all the way to C (through T), and topicalize something, yielding the V2 pattern. (Under what conditions does C have a [utop*] feature and value [uclause-type:] as strong?) V2: some languages move v all the way to C (through T), and topicalize something, yielding the V2 pattern. (Under what conditions does C have a [utop*] feature and value [uclause-type:] as strong?) EPP: VSO languages seem to move v up to T, but don’t move the subject to SpecTP, yielding VSO. (Does T have a [uD*] feature?) EPP: VSO languages seem to move v up to T, but don’t move the subject to SpecTP, yielding VSO. (Does T have a [uD*] feature?)