We provide the first detailed description and analysis of the syntax of the understudied Greek split reciprocal reconstruction. As in other languages, the reciprocal appears to be bipartite consisting of a quantificational distributor ('the one') and a reciprocator ('the other'). We show that, in Greek, this bipartiteness runs deep: the two parts are syntactically independent, with the reciprocator having the syntax of a Condition A anaphor, and the distributor behaving as a floating quantifier. Once we turn to how these elements establish relations between themselves and their antecedent, we find that Greek reciprocals resist a movement- or Agree-based analysis, since both elements can occur in positions inaccessible to movement/Agree. Given that the reciprocator can occur in embedded subject position, the Greek data also argue against recent attempts to reduce the binding domain to phases, instead supporting a more traditional definition of the binding domain in terms of the smallest XP containing the anaphor and a subject. Finally, we show that the morphosyntactic properties of the bipartite construction can be connected to independent properties of its two component parts and that these can, in turn, be related to interpretive aspects of reciprocity.
There is no consensus in the literature on the analysis of phrasal comparatives. Both reduced clause analyses, in which the standard phrase contains elided clausal structure, and direct analyses, in which the standard of comparison is a direct complement to the standard marker, have been proposed. This paper argues for a direct analysis of the phrasal comparative in Malagasy, an Austronesian language spoken on the island of Madagascar. Evidence for the direct analysis comes from the lack of overt clausal comparatives, Binding Theory, scope, and Malagasy-specific characteristics of the standard. The conclusion contributes to the rapidly expanding picture of cross-linguistic variation in comparative syntax.
Two fundamental tasks of syntactic inquiry are to identify the elementary structure-building operations and to determine what properties they have and why. This article aims to bring us closer to those goals by investigating Merge. Two recent definitions of Merge are evaluated. It is argued that both have significant strengths but also some drawbacks, and that set-theoretic definitions of Merge in general face conceptual problems. It is proposed that Merge is not set-theoretic but graph-theoretic in nature: the syntactic objects it operates on and creates are (bare-phrase-structure-compliant) phrase-structure trees. Two new formal definitions of Merge are proposed and evaluated. One obeys the No-Tampering Condition but makes it unclear why Merge(alpha,beta$$ \alpha, \beta $$) satisfies only one selectional feature of alpha$$ \alpha $$, not all of them. The other accounts for that observation but narrowly violates the No-Tampering Condition. The larger picture that emerges is one in which Merge is a graph-theoretic, not a set-theoretic, operation.
Recent research suggests that verb echo answers (VEAs) to a polar question in Japanese are derived by sluicing: the V head moves to C, and the complement of C, TP, undergoes deletion, stranding the verbal complex in C. Two pieces of evidence are provided for the view: adjunct inclusive interpretation and voice mismatch, neither of which is conclusive, as shown here. One consequence of the sluicing analysis is that VEAs reverse scope. We show that the semantic shift has nothing to do with the scope reversal. Our conclusion is that VEAs are unambiguously derived by multiple applications of argument ellipsis. We also advance an alternative explanation of the obligatory wide scope for focus phrases.
Whether syntactic head movement exists in Japanese has been hotly debated because of the strictly head-final character of the language. This paper addresses this issue, focusing on data regarding null adjuncts. We demonstrate that the head-stranding ellipsis (HSE) analysis of null adjuncts is not conclusive. To achieve this, we show that null adjuncts are more widely observed than the HSE analysis predicts. Specifically, we provide a new set of data that challenges Funakoshi's (2016) generalization regarding null adjuncts, which he claims his verb-stranding VP-ellipsis analysis explains. We also present a novel observation that some null adjuncts take scope over negation, contrary to what the HSE analysis predicts. Furthermore, we show that null adjuncts are derived even if the verb does not raise. Given these findings, we explore alternative analyses of null adjuncts that do not assume head movement. In particular, we discuss the pragmatic enrichment analysis as well as the adjunct ellipsis analysis, and suggest that the distribution of null adjuncts is better analyzed by a pragmatic account in line with Landau (2023). This paper concludes that any arguments for head movement based on the HSE analysis of null adjuncts are inconclusive at best.
This paper offers a critique of the cyclic linearization account of Cantonese dislocation recently advocated by Lee (2021). It shows that the ordering-based analysis encounters a number of nonobvious problems when compared with the existing parallel-chain account (Lai, 2019) and that the latter can be maintained under a broadened empirical landscape. The discussion bears on the development of a general theory of dislocation.
In "Subordination and Binary Branching", a recent (2023) Syntax paper, Ad Neeleman and colleagues proposed a new analysis of subordination. The main aim of this paper is to refute that analysis, using data from the coordination of unlike categories and unlike grammatical functions. Additionally, building on Neeleman et al.'s observations about the arbitrarily n-ary-not just binary-nature of coordination, I sketch a more Minimalist approach to subordination and coordination that is devoid of the problems that Neeleman et al.'s analysis faces, but otherwise covers a similar range of data. On this approach, "subordination" is a synonym of "result of PairMerge" and "coordination" is a synonym of "result of SetMerge", where SetMerge is understood as an operation creating an arbitrary set, as opposed to the usual more specialized Merge operation, which creates a binary set.
Russian polar particle li is usually analyzed as a second position clitic, constrained to appear at the linearly second position in the clause. I suggest that this requirement is a consequence of head movement: li is generated in & sum;-a polarity projection-merged directly above the associated polar constituent (X). This constituent must head-move and left-adjoin to li. The complex head (X+li) is largely equivalent to a wh-word: at later stages of the derivation, it is attracted to the left periphery of the clause. li can be seen as an analog of a wh-morpheme, which merges with different morphemes to form a wh-word. Treating X+li as a complex head allows us to reduce the second position requirement of li to the left edge requirement on the X+li, a requirement often postulated for wh-words. I provide further evidence for the & sum; hypothesis by showing the complementarity of li and negation.
Pseudosluicing diagnostics have played an important role in wider debates about sluicing. Sluicing is the term used to describe the deletion of an embedded clausal constituent, which leaves only a wh-phrase overt. Genuine sluicing requires syntactic or semantic identity between the sluiced clause and its antecedent, contrasting with pseudosluicing, in which pro-drop creates the appearance of a sluice but no identity is required. The underlying structure of sluicing in several Austronesian languages has been argued to be pseudoclefts, which involve a nominal wh-predicate and a headless relative clause argument. Both Malagasy and Nukuoro have been analysed as having pseudocleft sluicing, and on the basis of this, claims about the type of identity required in sluicing have been made. Both analyses rely on diagnostics that rule out the possibility of pseudosluicing. This paper reexamines the pseudosluicing diagnostics used for Malagasy and Nukuoro and concludes that they have been insufficiently controlled for. This is supported by data from Madurese showing that pseudosluicing diagnostics are inconclusive in these Austronesian languages. Language-internal support is needed for such diagnostics, especially as they play an important role in the conclusions drawn from Austronesian languages on the wider identity requirement for sluicing. Three language-specific diagnostics are given which are successfully able to identify pseudosluicing in Madurese.
In Standard Italian, restructuring clauses are characterized by apparently optional transparency effects in the choice of the clausal perfect auxiliary. In the perfect periphrasis, the auxiliary associated with the modal verb can be either HAVE or the one corresponding to the lexical verb (BE or HAVE). In this paper, I argue that there is no true optionality: different auxiliaries show up because the modal verb can select complements of different sizes. Assuming that auxiliary selection is a form of person Agree, different complement sizes determine different Agree domains. In particular, the "transparent" auxiliary results from a vP complement, while a TP complement leads to HAVE insertion.
In this article I present an analysis of split questions (SQs) in Modern Standard Arabic. I argue that this construction is best analyzed as a biclausal articulation, where two clauses are meditated by a special relation of coordination dubbed "Specifying Coordination." Contrary to the previous literature on SQs, I maintain, on empirical and conceptual grounds, that SQs are best derived in a movement-free fashion by treating them as a constellation of two well-motivated operations in the grammar: ellipsis and coordination. If on track, the merit of this proposal is to derive peripheral phenomena, such as SQs, from core principles of the grammar.
Drawing on evidence from the scope patterns and the availability of negative polarity item (NPI) licensing of the negation marker ma-, we show that NegP is realized in Ewe (Tongugbe) agentive nominals. We conclude that agentive nominals accommodate sentential negation, posing a challenge to previous assumptions. The implication of this work is that agent nominalizations can be more verb-like than what has been reported in the literature. We further examine where the Ewe agentive suffix -la resides in syntax based on the argument structure of the predicates realized inside agentive nominals.
We use fieldwork data about cross-clausal scrambling in Balkar (Turkic) to clarify the nature of movement and its constraints. Balkar has a variety of embedded nominalized clauses, with different subject cases and possibilities for movement. Clauses with nominative (nom) subjects permit cross-clausal object extraction but not subject extraction. In contrast, clauses with accusative subjects permit both such movements, although movement of the subject is required for object extraction. Finally, clauses with genitive subjects permit only subject extraction. We argue that these facts provide evidence for the following proposals: (i) multiple specifiers are usually possible provided that tucking-in applies; (ii) the highest of a phase's multiple specifiers is privileged for accessibility; (iii) movement is constrained by anti-locality (a ban on short movements); and (iv) Balkar DPs do not permit multiple specifiers. These factors are intertwined informatively in Balkar, and are supported by additional facts about possessors, binding, and covert movement.
This paper examines a nominal linker (known as reverse Ezafe) in the Caspian language Gilaki. It is shown that the nominal linker in Gilaki is in fact the realization of two different morphosyntactic elements with distinct properties. In doing so, we also highlight the differences between reverse Ezafe and Ezafe, found in Persian and other Iranian languages. This study has implications for the typology of nominal linkers, leading to the conclusion that superficially similar linking elements, both within a language and across languages, may in fact have different syntactic properties and as such should be analyzed as distinct phenomena.
Although various works on African American English (AAE) offer significant and insightful analyses of the semantic interpretation of its aspectual elements, including in particular stressed remote past BIN and habitual be ( be hab ), the syntactic analysis of these elements is problematic. BIN and be hab are claimed to be invariant lexical elements with fixed semantic values, and to not interact with INFL (Tense) as auxiliaries do, thus not displaying subject–verb agreement or undergoing any operations typical of finite auxiliaries. However, considerations including syntactic positioning, accompanying auxiliaries, patterns of verb affixation, and the formation of active and passive sentences point instead to BIN and be hab being in most instances phonetic manifestations of any of the various ordinary auxiliary verbs be (progressive, passive, and copular), elements of the system of auxiliaries common to both AAE and Mainstream American English (MAE). The surface forms BIN and be are sufficient to trigger their special meanings in logical representation. Semantically dedicated lexical elements are unnecessary. The various interpretations of sentences containing these forms are due to constructional semantic interpretation of various combinations of surface elements. This analysis further reveals the existence of another AAE innovation, a fourth auxiliary verb be unique to AAE indicating simple past.
This paper examines the way in which scope-taking of again interacts with word order in the English particle verb alternation. Small-clause approaches to the particle verb alternation differ from most competing approaches in taking both verb-particle-object and verb-object-particle orders to contain a result state-denoting small clause. An expectation of this approach on a structural approach to again ambiguity is that both orders should admit restitutive again readings. Results from a controlled judgment survey of 73 North American English speakers bear out this prediction.
Bare nominals in Wolof can occur in the object position and they must be adjacent to the verb that subcategorizes for them. This is a property usually attributed to pseudo noun incorporation (PNI). However, there are two circumstances under which this adjacency requirement is obviated: a DP is introduced between the subject and the PNI-ed object, or the latter is (A) over bar -moved. While these are disparate phenomena, a dependent case analysis of nominal licensing can account for PNI in Wolof. I assume that all nominals must be licensed with case, with case assignment being calculated in terms of dependent case. If this is not possible, a last resort strategy arises, namely surface adjacency with the verb. This analysis provides a unified analysis of PNI in Wolof.
In this paper, we provide a comparative analysis of three constructions that occur with perception verbs like ver ("see") in Spanish: infinitives, gerunds, and so-called pseudorelative clauses. We analyze several phenomena regarding the transparency status of the embedded inflected or uninflected clause, such as the availability of long (i.e., matrix) passive, short (i.e., embedded) passive, the occurrence of modal verbs, embedded negation, and left-peripheral fronting. Our data from acceptability judgment tasks and a Spanish corpus led us to postulate that, albeit their surface similarities, the three examined constructions have different syntactic structures, reflected by their structural integration and the phasal versus nonphasal status of the embedded clause: We argue that gerunds are secondary predicates, while pseudorelatives and infinitives are complements of the perception verb. With respect to the latter two configurations, pseudorelatives are defective CPs (and thus weak phases) that allow (finite) raising-to-object, but not raising-to-subject. Infinitives, on the other hand, show interspeaker variation with respect to their structural size as voiceP or TP, accounting for variable acceptability judgments.
Previous works have explored the options of Pair Merging R and v as well as T and C, respectively, yielding R-v and T-C with various consequences. This paper proposes that v and T can yield the complex head v-T, an amalgam formed by external Pair Merge. Some empirical ramifications for the verb cluster and the middle field in German are explored. If tenable, the current approach supports the idea that heads can Merge freely, either by internal or external Set Merge, as well as by internal or by external Pair Merge.
Two structure-building operations are currently posited in minimalist theory: an operation forming sets (set merge), and an operation forming ordered pairs (pair-merge). I argue that pair-merge is sufficient to generate syntactic relations, so set merge, also called simple merge, should be eliminated from syntactic theory on grounds of simplicity. This conclusion requires reevaluating the relationship between structure-building and labeling of constituents for the expression of syntactic relations, because labeling plays a crucial role in this comparison of theories according to the simplicity metric. An existing labeling hypothesis, specifically Chomsky's Labeling Algorithm, is shown not to have any advantage claimed for it by comparison with the just pair-merge hypothesis proposed here. An advantage of the only pair-merge hypothesis is that it provides a more principled origin for the inherent asymmetry in the c-command relation that does not follow from a theory that includes set merge.
