Week 9 Notes Binding Theory

Week 9 Notes Binding Theory - Vita Markman Syntax 11/07/07...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
1 Vita Markman 11/07/07 Syntax Week 9, Lectures 2 (V-to-T movement – finish up; Binding Theory) Week 10 Binding Theory 1. Review Æ What are some diagnostics for determining whether there is V-to-T movement in a language? Æ Is there V-to-T movement in English declarative sentences? How can you tell? Æ What is the significance of the fact that it is not possible to say (1) while (2) is fine? (1) * John fears not the fat cat (by the way note, that this sentence is acceptable if it is meant to be ‘archaic- sounding’. Something like ‘Fear not the fat cat my child!’ What does this tell us about the historical development of English with respect to verb raising?) (2) The fat cat has not frightened John Æ is the position of the auxiliary ‘’have’ and ‘will’ the same i nitially? How can we test that? (3) John will not fear the fat cat soon (4) John was not worrying about the fat cat Æ What about the placement of negation in the following sentence (5): (5) John will/ could/ should (not) have (not) seen the fat cat Æ What is a descriptive generalization regarding the position of the auxiliary with respect to negation in sentences containing multiple auxiliaries? How can we explain this generalization? Æ T Æ C movement
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
2 Æ What is the reason for ‘do’ support in (6) and (7)? (6) Did / does John see the fat cat? (7) Does the fat cat see John? Æ What is responsible for the relative ordering of ‘do’ and the subject in (6) and (7)? Æ Why is there no ‘do’ in (8) and (9)? (8) Will / can / could the fat cat see John? (9) Has John seen the fat cat? Æ Now, looking at wh- questions and assuming that the wh-element raises to the spec of CP, what about the position of the verb? (10) Whom(i) does John see t(i) ? (11) Who(j) t(j)sees John? Æ Descriptively, what is the contrast between (10) and (11) attributed to? Æ Now, turning to embedded sentences: (12) I wonder [CP whether John can see / has seen the fat cat] (13) I wonder [CP whether John saw the fat cat] (14) *I wonder [CP if John did see the fat cat] (on a non-emphatic reading) (15) *I wonder [CP whether/ if has the fat cat seen John] Æ What seems to be NOT happening in embedded clauses and what does it tell us regarding the final position of the verb in ‘yes/ no’ questions in general? Æ Given the HMC, can we expect a language that lacks V-to-T movement to have V-to- C Movement? Why not? 2. Binding Theory (BT for short) (based on Roberts 1997) Æ Consider the following sentences in (16) – (18) (16) John saw himself (17) John saw him (18) John saw John Æ What do the above sentences mean? Now, why can’t (17) mean the same thing as (16)? For example, ‘him’ DOES mean the exact same thing as ‘himself’ in (19). So, our problem is not semantic.
Background image of page 2
3 (19) John(i) thinks that he(i) is smart --Notice, that you cannot place ‘himself’ in (19) instead of ‘him’. So we are dealing with a syntactic question, not a semantic question Æ So. the question BT raises is what is the distribution of elements like ‘himself’ known
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 4
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/06/2011 for the course LING 322 taught by Professor David during the Spring '09 term at Simon Fraser.

Page1 / 9

Week 9 Notes Binding Theory - Vita Markman Syntax 11/07/07...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online