7 - After Government and Binding Theory (Update of Chapter 6)

Abstract

The tradition in syntax called government and binding (GB) theory has been transformed by Chomsky, with a number of rather different, sustained efforts to keep structures and mechanisms to a minimum, avoiding the notion of “government.” The simpler structure of these recent “minimalist” proposals has facilitated algebraic and logical studies, situating these proposals with respect to other traditions. GB theory provides constituent structure with the mechanisms of X-bar theory: projecting each head of category X to an intermediate phrase X’ that may contain a complement phrase YP, so that X’= [X,YP], and then projecting X further to a maximal projection XP that may contain a specifier phrase ZP, so that XP = [ZP,X’]. Following Muysken and others, Chomsky observes that this theory simply encodes the fact that certain properties of phrases X’ and XP are determined by the category of the head X. The general tendency towards simpler mechanisms in minimalist syntax has allowed substantial and rigorous comparisons of proposals, both within the Chomskian tradition and across traditions. Particularly significant is the convergence of minimalist mechanisms and proposals in the tradition of tree adjoining grammar: Minimalist grammars are “mildly context sensitive” in Joshi's sense, and are naturally formalized by grammars that are very similar to other well-understood, mildly context-sensitive formalisms. It is conceivable that, with further results of this sort, minimalism will bring the rich empirical and theoretical currents of Chomskian syntax into a more accessible form, beginning an era of more sophisticated language studies that transcend traditional and disciplinary boundaries.