When is a Verb not a Verb?

Changes are proposed to the categorial status traditionally accorded to Aux-related and verbal elements in the clause, and the new taxonomy is applied in implementing the old insight that be should be analyzed as the default, semantically empty verb. The central issue is when a verb-like element does (not) count as categorially a V for distributional purposes. The major proposals are: 1) to remove be and have from the category Aux and treat them as Vs; 2) to separate out participles from genuine tensed and bare verbs; 3) to group do with modals, rather than with have and be, into a category Mood that also includes a null indicative morpheme. This scheme is used to account for the entire distribution of the forms of be just by treating it as V with no properties. Be fulfills two requirements that cannot always be met by contentful verbs: first, it satisfies the syntactico-semantic need for Tense to c-command a clause-mate V (the “V Requirement”); second, it satisfies the morphosyntactic need for participial affixes ( -ing, -en) to have hosts. It is shown how the former requirement derives the exceptionally high position of finite be by base-generating it above negation etc., rather than raising it across. VP-ellipsis data provide independent support for this treatment. Finally, some tentative suggestions are offered for how the V Requirement might be derived from deeper principles, while still allowing for the fact that it is apparently not fully enforced in languages with null copulas

Grammaticality judgments and linguistic methodology

Throughout much of the history of linguistics, grammaticality judgments – intuitions about the well-formedness of sentences – have constituted most of the empirical base against which theoretical hypothesis have been tested. Although such judgments often rest on subtle intuitions, there is no systematic methodology for eliciting them, and their apparent instability and unreliability have led many to conclude that they should be abandoned as a source of data. Carson T. Schütze presents here a detailed critical overview of the vast literature on the nature and utility of grammaticality judgments and other linguistic intuitions, and the ways they have been used in linguistic research. He shows how variation in the judgment process can arise from factors such as biological, cognitive, and social differences among subjects, the particular elicitation method used, and extraneous features of the materials being judged. He then assesses the status of judgments as reliable indicators of a speaker's grammar. Integrating substantive and methodological findings, Schütze proposes a model in which grammaticality judgments result from interaction of linguistic competence with general cognitive processes. He argues that this model provides the underpinning for empirical arguments to show that once extragrammatical variance is factored out, universal grammar succumbs to a simpler, more elegant analysis than judgment data initially lead us to expect. Finally, Schütze offers numerous practical suggestions on how to collect better and more useful data. The result is a work of vital importance that will be required reading for linguists, cognitive psychologists, and philosophers of language alike. "Native speakers' judgments of the acceptability of linguistic examples have always formed a major part of the data of linguistics, but linguists generally either have elicited such data in a haphazard fashion and accepted the results uncritically or have rejected acceptability judgments altogether and equally uncritically. Schütze's book is a welcome relief from the failure of linguists to deal responsibly with what can be either the most fertile or the most misleading source of information about languages." —James D. McCawley, University of Chicago "Schütze has written an extraordinarily useful and timely book. In it, he provides a clear and readable review of past studies of the methodology of generative syntax. But this is not merely a survey: it is also a call for more careful and objective scientific methods in syntax, including a set of practical methodological suggestions for working syntacticians. If heeded, they will greatly strengthen the empirical base of linguistic theory." —Tom Wasow, Stanford Universit

INFL in child and adult language : agreement, case and licensing

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy, 1997.Includes bibliographical references (p. 280-292).by Carson Theodore Robert Schütze.Ph.D

Objectless locative prepositions in British English

In British English, sentences like This film has monsters in are possible without the pronoun it. Descriptively, we refine landscape of the phenomenon, identifying restrictions on the distribution and interpretation of OLPs, including dialectal variation within British English, and observing an A-bar movement restriction on monsters. Analytically, we argue against an A-movement analysis (Griffiths & Sailor), and ponder alternatives from a cross-linguistic perspective

Transparent free relatives with "who": Support for a unified analysis

This paper provides novel data, including from acceptability ratings, supporting a unified analysis of Transparent Free Relatives (TFRs) as variants of Standard Free Relatives (SFRs), rather than entirely different beasts. Two arguments are presented. First, who-TFRs exist, contrary to the view in the literature that TFRs can only be formed with what. Second, who-TFRs degrade following the same illunderstood pattern as who-SFRs. These outcomes cohere better with accounts of TFRs that treat them as similar to SFRs, versus accounts that treat them as virtually unrelated

When is a Verb not a Verb?

Changes are proposed to the categorial status traditionally accorded to Aux-related and verbal elements in the clause, and the new taxonomy is applied in implementing the old insight that be should be analyzed as the default, semantically empty verb. The central issue is when a verb-like element does (not) count as categorially a V for distributional purposes. The major proposals are: 1) to remove be and have from the category Aux and treat them as Vs; 2) to separate out participles from genuine tensed and bare verbs; 3) to group do with modals, rather than with have and be, into a category Mood that also includes a null indicative morpheme. This scheme is used to account for the entire distribution of the forms of be just by treating it as V with no properties. Be fulfills two requirements that cannot always be met by contentful verbs: first, it satisfies the syntactico-semantic need for Tense to c-command a clause-mate V (the “V Requirement”); second, it satisfies the morphosyntactic need for participial affixes ( -ing, -en) to have hosts. It is shown how the former requirement derives the exceptionally high position of finite be by base-generating it above negation etc., rather than raising it across. VP-ellipsis data provide independent support for this treatment. Finally, some tentative suggestions are offered for how the V Requirement might be derived from deeper principles, while still allowing for the fact that it is apparently not fully enforced in languages with null copulas