Title: Episode 7b. Subjects, agreement, and case
1CAS LX 522Syntax I
- Episode 7b. Subjects, agreement,and case
- 6.1-6.3
2Historical interlude
- Back in the old days, people hypothesized that
Pat will eat lunch had a structure like this. - The subject NP Pat was in the specifier of IP
(what we call TP), and the VP contained only
the verb eat and the object NP lunch. - Pat got an Agent q-role by being in SpecIP, even
though the fact that there is an Agent q-role to
be had is determined by the verb down in the VP.
IP
NP Pat
I?
I will
VP
V eat
NP lunch
3Historical interlude
- Nevertheless, this predicts the normal word order
pretty well, and so it was hypothesized that the
verb simply assigned one of its q-roles directly
to SpecIP. - No big deal, syntax works in strange and
mysterious ways. - At a certain point, someone started thinking
about sentences like these - All the students will take the exam.
- The students will all take the exam.
- Its fairly clear here that all the students is
an NP, that it forms a coherent unit, a coherent
concept. All really belongs with the students.
IP
NP Pat
I?
I will
VP
V eat
NP lunch
4Historical interlude
- All the students will take the exam.
- The students will all take the exam.
- Back in the even older days, the hypothesis was
that there was a special rule that turned the
first sentence into the second. - The Quantifier Float rule would move all over to
the right, next to the VP. - all NP VP ? NP all VP
IP
NP Pat
I?
I will
VP
V eat
NP lunch
5Historical interlude
- Not all quantifiers are subject to Quantifier
Float - Quantifiers every, some, all, most, several,
many, both, four, - Every student will take the exam.Student will
every take the exam. - Several students will take the exam.Students
will several take the exam. - It works for both and allThe students will both
take the exam.The students will all take the
exam. - Whats a difference between every, some, several,
many and both, all?
IP
NP Pat
I?
I will
VP
V eat
NP lunch
6Historical interlude
- Upon further reflection, some enterprising
syntacticians hit upon the idea that rather than
floating all to its position next to VP, all
might instead have been left behind by a
subject that had moved. - will all the students take the exam.
- all the studentsi will ti take the exam.
- the studentsi will all ti take the exam.
- And why would all the students have been down
there? Well, that would simplify assignment of
q-roles.
IP
NP Pat
I?
I will
VP
V eat
NP lunch
7The VP-Internal Subject Hypothesis
- The verb (head of VP) can assign q-roles to other
things within the VP, which is a natural
explanation for how the choice of verb controls
whether an Agent q-role is assigned or not. - This idea became known as the VP-Internal Subject
Hypothesis.
IP
NP Pat
I?
I
VP
will
V?
ti
V eat
NP lunch
8The VP-Internal Subject Hypothesis
- For us, weve supposed from the beginning that
assignment of q-roles is necessarily local. This
may not seem like a very surprising hypothesis. - But it was at the time a rather unintuitive idea,
and so various people set out to see if some of
the predictions this makes are borne out in the
grammatical data.
IP
NP Pat
I?
I
VP
will
V?
ti
V eat
NP lunch
9The VP-Internal Subject Hypothesis
- It turns out that as people looked, there were
reasons to believe this. - The new analysis of Quantifier Float no longer
relies on an idiosyncratic rule of English, but
more general principles. - The assignment of q-roles can now be more
directly related to the properties of the verb. - And we can make sense of there constructions in a
more straightforward way.
IP
NP Pat
I?
I
VP
will
V?
ti
V eat
NP lunch
10Back to the present
Quantifier stranding is still often referred to
as quantifier float to this day, even though
the name no longer reflects the analysis.
- The basic components of the quantifier
stranding phenomenon are - All the students is a constituent. The students
is an NP inside all the students. - all NP the students
- Either all the students or just the students can
move to SpecTP, to satisfy the uN feature of
T. - So all the students and the students are both
NPs. - NP all NP the students
- So all is essentially a noun, but one that takes
an NP complement (all N, uN, ).
NP
all
NP
thestudents
11All the students will take the exam
- We start by building our vP.
- Merge the NP the exam and the V take (checks
uN on V) - Merge v and VP (HoP)
- Move V to v (checks uV on v)
- Merge the N all and the NP the students (checks
uN on all)
vP
v?
NP
VP
v
all
NP
ltVgt
vagentuInfl,
Vtake
NP
thestudents
the exam
12All the students will take the exam
- We Merge the T will with vP (HoP)
- This values uInfl on v.
- Will is really a modal (present tense version of
would). - Policy Modals value uInfl features as
uInflnone(none meaning uninflected, but
still checked.)
T?
vP
T willuN,
v?
NP
VP
v
all
NP
ltVgt
vagentuInflnone,
Vtake
NP
thestudents
the exam
13All the students will take the exam
Is all the students closer to T than the students
is? Not if we define closer as we did, in terms
of c-command. Where X c-commands Y and Z, Y is
closer to X than Z is if Y c-commands Z.
- Now, there are two possibilities
- Move the NP all the students.
- Move the NP the students.
T?
vP
T willuN,
v?
NP
VP
v
all
NP
ltVgt
vagentuInflnone,
Vtake
NP
thestudents
the exam
14All the students will take the exam
- Now, there are two possibilities
- Move the NP all the students.
- Move the NP the students.
TP
T?
NP
vP
T willuN,
all
NP
v?
ltNPgt
thestudents
VP
v
ltVgt
vagentuInflnone,
Vtake
NP
the exam
15The students will all take the exam
- Now, there are two possibilities
- Move the NP all the students.
- Move the NP the students.
TP
T?
NP
vP
T willuN,
thestudents
v?
NP
VP
v
all
ltNPgt
ltVgt
vagentuInflnone,
Vtake
NP
the exam
16Expletive constructions
- An expletive is an element that can be in subject
position without having received a q-role from
anywhere. - It had been raining.
- There are fans rioting on Comm Ave.
- Weve seen it before. But there is also there,
which well concentrate on now. Neither means
anything, neither gets a q-role, both appear to
satisfy the uN feature of T. - Both can be used in other ways I saw it over
there.
17Expletive constructions
- There are fans rioting on Comm Ave.
- Fans are rioting on Comm Ave.
IP
TP
TP
NP there
I?
fans
there
T?
T?
I are
VP rioting
T
T
ProgP
ProgP
T
be
T
be
ltbegt
ltbegt
vP
vP
ltfansgt
fans
v?
v?
ltVgt
vVriot
ltVgt
vVriot
18Case
- Recall that pronouns in English show distinctions
in case - Subject pronouns are in nominative case
- Object pronouns are in accusative case
- I saw her. She saw me. They saw him.
- How can we ensure that this happens?
19Nom case
- Nominative subjects generally appear in the
specifier of a finite T. - Finite T is pretty much any kind of T except the
infinitive to marker. - We can treat case like we treated tense
inflection - Suppose T also has a ucasenom feature.
- Suppose nominative NPs have a ucase feature.
- Suppose the ucasenom on T can value ucase
on the NP, checking both. - So T needs a nom NP, and a nom NP needs T.
20Acc case
- Subjects check nominative case with T. Objects
have accusative case, which we can treat in the
same kind of way. - Suppose v has ucaseacc.
- Suppose accusative NPs have ucase
- Suppose the ucaseacc on v can value the
ucase feature on the NP, checking both. - Nominative case is a relation between (finite) T
and an NP, accusative case is a relation between
v and an NP.
21Notes on case
- Nominative case is associated with finite T.
- She will eat lunch.
- I want her to eat lunch.
- I expect her to eat lunch.
- Non-finite T is not associated with nominative
case. Its not actually associated with
accusative case either, but well come back to
that later. - Because NPs have an unvalued ucase feature, we
can suppose that pronouns always enter the
numeration the same way, and are valued based on
where they are Merged. - pronoun N, ucase,
22Notes on case
- Although in English we only see the morphological
effect of case on pronouns, we assume that all
NPs have an unvalued ucase feature. - Plenty of languages other than English show case
on all NPs, not just on pronouns. Case is
something that goes with being an NP. Its just
something you often dont hear in English. - Notational shortcuts
- nom is used for ucasenom (on T, or NP when
checked) - acc is used for ucaseacc (on v, or NP when
checked) - case is used for ucase (on an NP)
23Subject-verb agreement
- Recall that in English, the f- features of the
subject have an effect on the morphology of the
verb - Fans are rioting on Comm Ave.
- A fan is rioting on Comm Ave.
- While were here, we might as well account for
this as well. It is also an agreement relation,
between the subject and, eventually, the verb.
24Subject-verb agreement
- The verb gets its tense inflection specified by T
when, e.g., the tensepres feature of T values
the uInfl feature of v. - Since the subject already agrees with T (the
nom feature of T checks the case feature of
the subject), well incorporate subject agreement
into this process. - Notice that we still want this agreement to be
mediated by T (sometimes it values, e.g., Perf) - They have been reading novels.
- She has been reading novels.
25Subject-verb agreement
- Suppose then that T has a uf feature as well.
- The subject has (interpretable) f-features that
value the uf feature of T. - Fans are rioting on Comm Ave.
- T T, uN, uf, nom
- fans N, fpl, case
- So, once T is in the structure, c-commanding fans
in SpecvP, we get - T T, uN, ufpl, nom
- fans N, fpl, nom
26Subject-verb agreement
- Finally, we suppose that the (checked) ufpl
feature of T, also values a uInfl feature on a
lower v (or Perf, or Prog). - The rules of pronunciation will tell us that a v
with the verb riot adjoined to it sounds like - riots if v has the feature uInflpres,sg
- riot if v has the feature uInflpres,pl.
- Notice that T values a uInfl feature all at
once, with any relevant feature(s) it has (so,
tense and f-features both).
27She likes them
- So, lets walk through it.
- We start by merging like and the 3pl pronoun.
VP
NPpronounN, f3pl, case
VlikesV
28She likes them
- v v, uN, uInfl, uV, acc
- We Merge v with VP (HoP).
- The acc on v matches, values, and checks the
case on the pronoun, checking itself as well.
v?
VP
v v, uN, uInfl, uV, acc
NPpronounN, f3pl, acc
VlikesV
29She likes them
- The V moves up to adjoin to v to check the uV
feature of v.
v?
VP
v
NPpronounN, f3pl, acc
ltVgt
v v, uN, uInfl, uV, acc
VlikesV
30She likes them
- The V moves up to adjoin to v to check the uV
feature of v. - The 3sg feminine pronoun is Merged to check the
uN feature of v.
vP
v?
NPpronounN, f3fsg, case
VP
v
NPpronounN, f3pl, acc
ltVgt
v v, uN, uInfl, uV, acc
VlikesV
31She likes them
- The T is Merged with vP (HoP).
- T has the features T, tensepres, uf, uN,
nom. - The nom feature of T matches, values, and
checks the case feature of the pronoun,
checking itself in the process.
T?
TT, tensepres, uf, uN, nom
vP
v?
NPpronounN, f3fsg, nom
VP
v
VlikesV
NPpronounN, f3pl, acc
ltVgt
v v, uN, uInfl, uV, acc
32She likes them
- The f3fsg feature of NP values and checks the
uf feature of T.
T?
TT, tensepres, uf3fsg, uN, nom
vP
v?
NPpronounN, f3fsg, nom
VP
v
VlikesV
NPpronounN, f3pl, acc
ltVgt
v v, uN, uInfl, uV, acc
33She likes them
- The uf3fsg and tensepres features of T
value and check the uInfl feature of v.
T?
TT, tensepres, uf3fsg, uN, nom
vP
v?
NPpronounN, f3fsg, nom
VP
v
VlikesV
NPpronounN, f3pl, acc
ltVgt
v v, uN, uInflpres3fsg, uV, acc
34She likes them
- Finally, the NP is moved up and Merged with T? in
order to check the EPP feature (the uN
feature) of T.
TP
NPpronounN, f3fsg, nom
T?
TT, tensepres, uf3fsg, uN, nom
vP
v?
ltNPgt
VP
v
VlikesV
NPpronounN, f3pl, acc
ltVgt
v v, uN, uInflpres3fsg, uV, acc
35She likes them
- All uninterpretable features are checked, the
pronunciation rules give us she likes them.
TP
NPpronounN, f3fsg, nom
T?
TT, tensepres, uf3fsg, uN, nom
vP
v?
ltNPgt
VP
v
VlikesV
NPpronounN, f3pl, acc
ltVgt
v v, uN, uInflpres3fsg, uV, acc
36?