Generalized inversion and theory of agree
Name
320456950-MIT.pdf
Description
Full printable version
Size
8.82 MB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum (MD5)
a518c69e04652fde832feddbeca4985e
Author(s)
Wu, Hsiao-hung Iris
Advisor(s)
Noam Chomsky, Danny Fox, David Petesky and Norvin Richards.
Date Issued
2008
Publisher
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Abstract
In this thesis I examine some of the fundamental questions surrounding inversion structures. I first provide an analysis of Locative Inversion. I show that the mixed A- and A- syntactic behavior of the fronted PP in English could be derived once we understand how the featural composition of locative phrases influences on the Probe-Goal relation between C and the postverbal DP. In particular, I argue that there is a correlation between syntactic categories of locative phrases and typological differences in the syntactic patterns in Locative Inversion: in Mandarin Chinese, Chichewa, Kinande and Gungbe, locatives are (or can be) represented by nominal categories (i.e. equipped with complete cp-features) and these locatives exhibit pure A-properties in Locative Inversion; in English and Sesotho, however, they are characteristically represented by non-nominal categories and the locative phrases are thus forced to undergo two-step movement from an Aposition to an A-position as avoidance of intervention effects in the Agree system.I also discuss a variety of (generalized) inversion constructions, including English Quotative Inversion, Sentential Subject and French Stylistic Inversion. In these constructions I show that since a cp-deficient constituent moves to [Spec, TP], additional operations (such as topicalization) have to take place so as to destroy the potentially offending structure created by the fronted defective elements.
(cont.) Specifically, I suggest that these are related constructions because they all display a mixture of A- and A- properties.Finally I focus on the generalization concerning the placement restrictions of arguments by Spell-Out, in particular the principles that force argument externalization from the vP and VP. I argue that argument externalization is motivated by Case-related concerns.
Description
Thesis (Ph. D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy, 2008.
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 158-165).
Subjects
Linguistics and Philosophy.
MIT Department
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Linguistics and Philosophy
Terms of Use
M.I.T. theses are protected by
copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but
reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written
permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.
copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but
reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written
permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.
Persistent DSpace Link
