Download CAS LX 522 Syntax I

CAS LX 522
Syntax I
Binding
n
Principle A of the Binding Theory (preliminary):
An anaphor must be bound.
*
Week 5b. q-Theory (with a little
more binding theory)
I¢
I
-ed
Principle A
n
This also explains why the following
sentences are ungrammatical:
n
n
*Himselfi saw Johni in the mirror.
*Herselfi likes Maryi’s father.
n *Himselfi likes Mary’s father i.
n
There is nothing which c-commands
and is coindexed with himself and herself.
The anaphors are not bound, which
violates Principle A.
n
n
VP
V
see
DP i
himself
DP i
himself
*Johni said that himselfi likes pizza.
*Johni said that Mary called himselfi.
John didn’t say that anyone likes pizza.
John didn’t say that Mary called anyone.
Binding domains
n
It seems that not only does an anaphor need to
be bound, it needs to be bound nearby (or
locally).
n
Principle A (revised):
An anaphor must be bound in its binding
domain.
n
What is wrong? John binds himself in
every case. What is different?
In the ungrammatical cases, himself is in
an embedded clause.
DP
mother
I
-ed
In these sentences the DP John c-commands
and is coindexed with (=binds) himself,
satisfying our preliminary version of
Principle A—but the sentences are
ungrammatical.
n
Binding domains
n
V
see
D¢
But this is not the end of the story; consider
n
n
Johni saw himselfi in the mirror.
n John i gave a book to himself i.
n *John i said that himself i is a genius.
n *John i said that Mary dislikes himself i.
VP
DP i
John D
’s
Binding domains
n
n
I¢
DP
IP
DP i
John
IP
Binding Domain (preliminary):
The binding domain of an anaphor is the
smallest clause containing it.
1
Principle A
n
n
n
The definition of binding domain is very
complicated (this occupied many
syntacticians in the early ’80s).
A clause (IP) delimits a binding domain.
But other things do too…
Mary likes [DP John’s picture of himselfi ].
n *Mary i likes [DP John’s picture of herselfi ].
n Mary i wants [DP a picture of herselfi ].
Binding domain
n
n
Let’s say this:
The binding domain for an anaphor is the
smallest of:
n
n
An IP that dominates it.
A DP, with a specifier, that dominates it.
n
n
Note! This is not perfect, but it is a pretty
close approximation.
Pronouns
*Johni saw himi in the mirror.
n John i said that he i is a genius.
n John i said that Mary dislikes him i.
n John i saw him j in the mirror.
Principle B
n
n
n
How does the distribution of pronouns
differ from the distribution of anaphors?
It looks like it is just the opposite.
n
Free
Not bound
n
n
Principle C
n
We now know where pronouns and
anaphors are allowed. So what’s wrong
with these sentences? The pronouns are
unbound as needed for Principle B.
What are the binding relations here?
n
n
*Hei likes Johni.
*Shei said that Maryi fears clowns.
Hisi mother likes Johni.
*Johni saw himi.
Johni’s mother saw himi.
Principle C
n
n
n
n
n
Principle B
A pronoun must be free in its binding domain.
Binding is a means of assigning reference.
R-expressions have intrinsic reference;
they can’t be assigned their reference from
somewhere else.
R-expressions can’t be bound, at all.
Principle C
An r-expression must be free.
2
Binding Theory
n
n
n
n
n
Constraints on interpretation
Principle A. An anaphor must be bound in its
binding domain.
Principle B. A pronoun must be free in its
binding domain.
Principle C. An r-expression must be free.
The binding domain for an anaphor is the
smallest of (i) An IP that dominates it, (ii) A DP,
with a specifier, that dominates it.
Bound: coindexed with a c-commanding
antecedent (Free: not bound).
n
n
pronounce
Lexicon
If we put together a tree that isn’t
interpretable, the process (derivation) is
sometimes said to crash.
Merge
Workbench
Constraints on interpretation
n
Binding Theory is about interpretation.
Only a structure that satisfies Binding
Theory is interpretable.
interpret
Constraints on interpretation
n
If we succeed in putting together a tree
that is interpretable (satisfying the
constraints), we say the process
(derivation) converges.
pronounce
Lexicon
pronounce
Lexicon
Merge
Workbench
Workbench
interpret
Exercise to ponder
n
Young kids (5-6 years) seem to accept sentences
like (1) as meaning what (2) means for adults.
n
n
n
interpret
*MBi is pointing to heri.
n
n
(1) Mama Bear is pointing to her.
(2) Mama Bear is pointing to herself.
(1) *Mama Beari is pointing to heri.
(2) Mama Beari is pointing to herselfi.
n
Suppose that contrary to appearances, kids do
know and obey Principle B. Look carefully at the
definitions of Binding Theory. If Principle B isn’t
the problem, what do you think kids are getting
wrong to allow (1) to have the meaning of (2)?
n
Think in particular about how you decide which
index to assign to her. What is the implication of
having the same index? What is the implication of
having different indices?
n
n
Merge
Principle B: A pronoun must be free within its
binding domain. Free = not bound. Bound by =
coindexed with and c-commanded by.
(3) Mama Beari is pointing to herj.
n
Indexes signify a “pointing relation”. Coindexation
implies coreference.
Raining implies wet streets. Do wet streets imply
raining?
3
Verbs and arguments
n
Verbs come in several types…
Some have only a subject, they can’t have an
object—the intransitive verbs.
n
Some need an object—the transitive verbs.
n
Some need two objects—ditransitive verbs.
n
n
n
n
Verbs and arguments
Sleep: Bill slept; *Bill slept the book.
n
The “participants” in an event denoted by
the verb are the arguments of that verb.
n
Some verbs require one argument
(subject), some require two arguments
(subject and object), some require three
arguments (subject, indirect object, direct
object).
Hit: *Bill hit; Bill hit the pillow.
Put: *Bill put; *Bill put the book;
Bill put the book on the table.
Predicates
n
We will consider verbs to be predicates
which define properties of and/or
relations between the arguments.
n
n
n
Subcategorization
n
Sue knows [DP the answer ]
Sue knows [CP that Bill left early ]
n Sue hit [ DP the ball ]
n *Sue hit [CP that Bill left early]
n
n
Bill hit the ball
There was a hitting, Bill did the hitting, the
ball was affected by the hitting.
n
Different arguments have different roles in
the event. (e.g., The hitter, the hittee)
Selection
n
n
Verbs also exert semantic control of the
kinds of arguments they allow: selection.
Not all transitive verbs (that take just one
object) can take the same kind of object.
So know can take either a DP or a CP as its
object argument; hit can only take a DP as
its object argument.
The lexicon
n
n
A major component of our knowledge of a language is
knowing the words and their properties (the lexicon).
In the lexicon, we have the words (lexical items) stored
with their properties, like:
n
For example, many verbs can only have a
volitional (agentive) subject:
n
n
Bill likes pizza. Bill kicked the stone.
n #Pizza likes anchovies. #The stone kicked Bill.
n
n
n
n
n
Syntactic category (N, V, Adj, P, C, I, …)
Number of arguments required
Subcategorization requirements (syntax)
Selectional requirements (semantics)
Pronunciation
…
These pretty much just have to be learned separately
for each verb in the language.
4
Thematic relations
n
n
It has come to be standard practice to
think of the selectional restrictions in
terms of the thematic relation that the
argument has to the verb—the role it plays
in the event.
One thematic relation is agent of an action,
like Bill in:
n
Common thematic relations
n
Agent: initiator or doer in the event
Theme: affected by the event, or
undergoes the action
n
Experiencer: feel or perceive the event
n
Proposition: a statement, can be
true/false.
n
n
n
Bill kicked the ball.
n
Bill kicked the ball.
Bill likes pizza.
Bill said that he likes pizza.
Thematic relations
n
Goal:
n
n
Source:
n
Instrument:
n
n
Location:
n
Agent, Source, …
grape: Theme
n Bill: Goal, Recipient, …
nA
Bill cooked dinner for Mary.
Bill sits under the tree on Wednesdays.
q-roles
n
n
n
Ray gave a grape to Bill.
n Ray:
Bill ate the burrito with a plastic spork.
Benefactive:
Armed with these terms, we can describe
the semantic connection between the verb
and its arguments.
n
Bill took a pencil from the pile.
n
n
n
Bill ran to Copley Square.
Bill gave the book to Mary. (Recipient)
n
n
Thematic relations
An argument can participate in several
thematic relations with the verb (e.g.,
Agent, Goal).
In the syntax, we assign a special
connection to the verb called a “q-role”,
which is a collection of thematic relations.
For the purposes of syntax, the q-role (the
collection of relations) is much more central
than the actual relations in the collection.
q-roles
n
n
We will often need to make reference to a
particular q-role, and we will often do this
by referring to the most prominent
relation in the collection.
For example, in Bill hit the ball, we say that
Bill has the “Agent q-role”, meaning it has
a q-role containing the Agent relation,
perhaps among others.
5
The Theta Criterion
n
n
n
Although an argument can have any
number of thematic relations in the qrole…
Each argument has exactly one q-role.
On the other side, verbs (as we’ve seen)
are recorded in the lexicon with the
number of participants they require; each
participant must have a q-role as well.
The Theta Criterion
n
n
n
Verbs have a certain number of q-roles to assign
(e.g., say has two), and each of those must be
assigned to a distinct argument.
Meanwhile, every argument needs to have
exactly one q-role (it needs to have at least one, it
can’t have more than one).
This requirement that there be a one-to-one
match between the q-roles a verb has to assign
and the arguments receiving q-roles is the Theta
Criterion.
Theta Grids
n
We can formalize the information about q-roles in
the lexical entry for a verb by using a theta grid,
like so:
give
n
n
Theta Grids
Source/Agent
Theme
Goal
i
j
k
n
give
The columns each represent a q-role, the indices in
the lower row will serve as our connection to the
actual arguments; e.g.
Johni gave [the book]j [to Mary]k.
Source/Agent
Theme
Goal
i
j
k
n
Goal
j
k
The other q-role are
internal q-roles.
An example: push.
push
n
Adjuncts are related to the verb via thematic
relations (e.g., instrument, location, etc.), but an
adjunct does not get a q-role. They are optional.
n
n
Agent
Theme
i
j
Billi pushed the shopping cartj.
n
n
Theme
i
The Theta Criterion in action
The q-roles in the theta grid are obligatory.
(Optional things like on the hill are not in the q-grid).
give
Source/Agent
The first q-role is
assigned to the subject.
It is the external q-role.
It is often designated by
underlining it.
Theta Grids
n
Johni gave [the book]j [to Mary]k.
Fine, push assigns two q-roles, one (the external q-role) is
assigned to Bill, the other (the internal q-role) is assigned
to the shopping cart. There are two arguments here, each
gets a q-role.
*Billi pushed. (j?)
*Billi pushed the shopping cartj the corner?.
6
The Theta Criterion in action
n
“Argument”?
n
An example: cough.
cough
n
Agent
n
i
n
n
Billi coughed.
n
n
Fine, cough assigns one q-role (the external q-role), to Bill.
There are one arguments here, and it gets a q-role.
The EPP
n
n
n
n
n
So, the theta grid for rain really looks like
this:
It rained.
It snowed.
How many q-roles does rain assign?
If we think about it, it doesn’t really mean
anything at all. It is not a participant in the event; it
really can’t be getting a q-role. (cf. also Spanish).
The EPP
n
It’s hard to say, actually. There are some further
concepts that we should have before we can even
start to state this accurately. For now, let’s just
suppose that DPs and CPs are necessarily arguments,
and PPs usually aren’t.
The EPP
With the Theta Criterion in our toolbox, let’s take
a look at a special kind of sentence (which will
turn out to tell us something important about
syntax).
n
every q-role in the q-grid is assigned to exactly one
argument.
every argument is assigned exactly one q-role.
The second half protects us against superfluous
arguments. But it’s hard to evaluate this if we
don’t know what an argument is.
n
*Billi coughed the shopping cart?.
n
The q-criterion:
Given the q-Criterion and the fact that rain
doesn’t have any q-roles to assign, what’s
it doing there? And why doesn’t it violate
the q-Criterion?
As to the first question, the conclusion that
syntacticians have come to is that the it is
there due to a separate constraint, which
goes by the name EPP.
The EPP
n
The EPP
All clauses have subjects.
n
The idea is that there must be something in the
subject position (SpecIP) of every clause.
n
Because rain has no arguments (no q-roles), a special,
contentless pronoun (it) has to be inserted to in
order to have a grammatical sentence. This kind of
“empty it” is called an expletive or a pleonastic
pronoun. It is not an argument (in this use).
7