Two Structural Cases of Double Object Constructions in Minimalist Syntax

Abstract

The Journal of Studies in Language 27.2, 307-327. Chomsky (1981, 1986), claims that in DOCs the first object, which is adjacent to the verb, is assigned structural Case; the second object, which is thematically restricted, is assigned inherent Case. Chomsky`s inherent Case assumption successfully explains that in English DOCs only the indirect object can be passivized. However, it fails to explain languages (such as Mandarin Chinese) in which only the direct object can be passivized and languages (such as Kinyarwanda) in which either the indirect object or the direct object can be passivized. This paper pursues the possibility that the two objects in DOCs are assigned structural Case. we assume that in active sentences little v and applicative V have the Case assigning ability and check the structural Case of the indirect object and the direct object respectively. In passive sentences, our assumption is that passive morpheme absorbs either the Case assigning ability of little v or the applicative V in a given language. At last, we examine how the Case features of the two objects in active and passive DOC sentences are checked off under Chomsky`s (2000) Agree operation from a cross-linguistic perspective.