Case and event structure

I argue in this paper for a novel analysis of case in Icelandic, with implications for case theory in general. I argue that structural case is the manifestation on the noun phrase of features which are semantically interpretable only on verbal projections; thus, Icelandic case does not encode features of noun phrase interpretation, but it is not uninterpretable either; case is properly seen as reflecting (interpretable) tense and aspect features. Accusative case in Icelandic is available when the two subevents introduced in a transitive verb phrase are identified with each other, and dative case is available when the two parts are distinct (thus Icelandic case manifests aktionsart or inner aspect, in partial contrast to Finnish). This analysis bears directly on the theory of feature checking in the Minimalist Program; specifically, it paves the way for a restrictive theory of feature checking in which no features are strictly uninterpretable: all formal features come in interpretable-uninterpretable pairs, and feature checking is the matching of such pairs, driven by legibility conditions at Spell-Out

Merge and features: The engine of syntax

Merge is the central engine of syntax, in Chomsky’s Minimalist Program. In this chapter I discuss Merge, which is relatively well understood, and formal syntactic features, which are much less well understood, and their relation to each other in Chomsky’s work and related efforts

Syntactic Features

Syntactic features are formal properties of syntactic objects which determine how they behave with respect to syntactic constraints and operations (such as selection, licensing, agreement, and movement). Syntactic features can be contrasted with properties which are purely phonological, morphological or semantic, but many features are relevant both to syntax and morphology, or to syntax and semantics, or to all three components. The formal theory of syntactic features builds on the theory of phonological features, and normally takes morphosyntactic features (those expressed in morphology) to be the central case, with other, possibly more abstract features being modeled on the morphosyntactic ones. Many aspects of the formal nature of syntactic features are currently unresolved. Some traditions (such as HPSG) make use of rich feature structures as an analytic tool, while others (such as Minimalism) pursue simplicity in feature structures in the interest of descriptive restrictiveness. Nevertheless, features are essential to all explicit analyses

Introduction to Nordlyd 31: The Proceedings of the 19th Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics

This special five-volume edition is both Nordlyd number 31 and the Proceedings for the Nineteenth Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics. Here I provide a little background for the conference and the Proceedings. SCL 19 was held in Tromsø on January 10–12, 2002, under the auspices of the Nordic Association of Linguists (NAL) and with support from the Nordic Academy for Advanced Study (NorFA), the University of Tromsø, the Faculty of Humanities, and the English Department at the University of Tromsø. The Center for Advanced Study in Theoretical Linguistics (CASTL) also contributed to the production of this Proceedings

A span is a thing: A span-based theory of words

Publisher home page at https://glsa-umass.github.io/index.html

Prepositions with CP and their implications for extended projections

In some limited cases, English allows a particular preposition to combine with a certain kind of subordinate clause, as exemplified by in that in “I take the proposal seriously, in that I loathe it”. In contrast, Norwegian systematically allows prepositions to combine with subordinate clauses (as in Det resulterte i at vi vant, literally “It resulted in that we won”). I argue that the English case should be handled as the subcategorization for a certain complement class by a particular lexical entry, while the Norwegian case indicates that the extended projection of clauses can continue up to the preposition. This highlights an important difference between lexical selection and extended projection, revealing a hitherto underappreciated source of parametric variation, and sheds light on several properties of extended projections as well as of prepositions. Specifically, the extended projections of N and V may “converge” at P, challenging the notion of extended projection as being confined to a single lexical category

Complex Predicates and the Functional Sequence

In this paper I argue that a fine-grained functional hierarchy of semantically contentful categories such as Tense, Aspect, Initiation, and Process has explanatory power in understanding the crosslinguistic distribution of complex predicates. Complex predicates may involve adjunction, control, or raising, and show other variables as well. In a Minimalist framework, specific parameters cannot be invoked to allow or disallow different kinds of serial verbs, light verbs, resultatives, and so on. Instead, what variation is observed must come from the specifications of lexical items. This places a great burden on the learner, a burden which, I argue, is partly alleviated by the functional sequence

Stem Alternations in the Passive in Sierra Miwok

Journal home page at http://www.cascadilla.com/wccfl.html.Central Sierra Miwok (CSM; Freeland1951) is described as having root-and-template morphology (for a recent approach and further references, see Downing 2006). There are four stem forms, referred to by number, and identified by their place in the conjugational paradigms. The exact form of each stem depends on the phonological shape of the root, specifically whether it contains two or three consonants and whether it is vowel- or consonant-final

Minimalist C/case

This article discusses A-licensing and case from a minimalist perspective, pursuing the idea that argument NPs cyclically enter a number of A-relations, rather than just a single one, resulting in event-licensing, case-licensing and phi-licensing. While argument case commonly reflects Voice/v-relations, canonical A-movement is driven by higher elements, either in the C-T system or in a superordinate v-system (in ECM constructions). In addition, there is a distinction to be drawn between the triggering of A-movement, by for example C, and the licensing of the landing site, by for instance T, C-probing leading to tucking-in into Spec-T. Much of the evidence presented comes from quirky case constructions in Icelandic and from ECM and raising constructions in Icelandic and English. It is argued that T in ECM constructions inherits phi-licensing from the matrix v, regardless of the case properties of v