Abstract
In his first approach to recursion in clausal embedding, Chomsky (1957) postulates a proform in the matrix clause linked to an independently constructed clause that, via an application of the generalised transformation, eventually becomes the matrix verb’s complement. Chomsky (1965) replaces this with a direct clausal embedding analysis, with clausal recursion in the base component of the grammar. I argue here that, while direct clausal recursion is certainly needed, an update to the Chomsky’s (1957) approach (minus the application of the generalised transformation) deserves a prominent place in syntactic theory as well. The discussion is based on data from Dutch, German, and Hungarian. This paper addresses the role of presuppositionality in the context of clausal coordination, the analysis of the so-called wh-scope marking construction, and the importance of Agree in connection with a subordinate clause’s transparency or opacity to extraction. Central in the analysis is a perspective on the structure of the verbal phrase which accommodates two discrete structural positions for the object.
Highlights
In this paper,1 I will present an analysis of clausal subordination that mobilises both direct recursion and a proform-based strategy, each addressing different subspecies of embedding of a clause within a larger clause
The grammar countenances the possibility of base-generating a proform in the higher of the two object positions (SpecVP) and associating the subordinate clause to this proform, in the spirit of (1b): this is what happens in (7b), with factive matrix verbs
Bridge-verb constructions can mimic the structure in (7b), but the proform in (8b) has properties that are very different from those of the occupant of SpecVP in (7b): instead of being an argument, it serves as a secondary predicate for the CP, which in (8b)
Summary
In the first approach to recursion in clausal embedding in the transformational-generative framework (see [1]), the matrix clause contained a proform linked to an independently constructed clause that, after association with the proform and subsequent elimination of this proform via the generalised transformation, ended up serving as the subordinate clause. (1) sums this up. In the first approach to recursion in clausal embedding in the transformational-generative framework (see [1]), the matrix clause contained a proform linked to an independently constructed clause that, after association with the proform and subsequent elimination of this proform via the generalised transformation, ended up serving as the subordinate clause. In [2], Chomsky abandons this proform-based approach to clausal recursion, and substitutes it with a direct clausal embedding analysis: the matrix verb selects the subordinate clause directly as its object, in the base component, which includes a base rule rewriting VP as V + S’. I will present an analysis of clausal subordination that mobilises both direct recursion and a proform-based strategy, each addressing different subspecies of embedding of a clause within a larger clause. The empirical discussion will be based on data from Dutch, German, and Hungarian.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
