LF Representations Research Articles

Remarks on some minimalist accounts for Binding

The present paper is a reassessment of the empirical and theoretical arguments presented by some of main minimalist accounts for binding. Some if these accounts assume that the binding principles are conditions on LF representations, others argue that they are derived by narrow syntax computations. Despite that, I present some observations indicating that there is not yet a satisfactory minimalist account for binding. The amounted evidence indicates that binding is derivational. However, pragmatics seems also engaged in building coreferentiality.

Agreement and the structure of relative clauses

The paper proposes an account of asymmetries in agreement patterns that obtain in restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses headed by hybrid agreement nouns d(j)eca ‘children’, braća ‘brothers’, and gospoda ‘gentry’ in Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian (BCS). We note that relative clauses headed by hybrid nouns display different possibilities of agreement morphology on the relative pronoun koji/a/e ‘which’, depending, on the one hand, on whether the relative clause is restrictive or non-restrictive and on the other, on the case of the relative pronoun. We argue that the observed differences are the result of a conspiracy of the following factors: (i) hybrid number-agreement nouns introduce a null plural pronoun unspecified for gender (Postal 1966; den Dikken 2001; Torrego and Laga 2015), (ii) all plural case forms of the relative pronoun except for nominative and accusative show full gender syncretism (Alsina and Arsenijević 2012b), and (iii) non-restrictive relative clauses involve a null definite pronoun and attach to the head noun higher than the restrictive relative clauses (Postal 1994; de Vries 2002; 2006). We maintain that the facts discussed in the paper argue against analyses which derive the differences between restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses from their LF representations, rather than from their overt syntax.

Relative readings of superlatives: Scope or focus?

I provide an analysis of the relative readings of superlatives on which the superlative morpheme -est is more constrained at LF than previously argued, yet the range of superlative readings available cross-linguistically is still accounted for. I argue that -est scopes outside the superlative DP only when necessary. I also provide empirical arguments that the focus structure of the sentence must be included in the LF representation of relative readings. In English, where -est only scopes DP-internally, we correctly predict the optionality of focus for relative readings. In Polish, where -est can also scope DP-externally, focus can be obligatory to disambiguate between the different LFs.

The logical-semantic content of subject: A configurational view from syntax and LF

AbstractThe paper raises the topic of what the functional and logical notion of subject is. It examines the syntax-semantic nature of Icelandic and Polish quirky subject constructions (subjectless clauses in which the initial DP bears oblique Case) with psych-verbs. Of main interest is the full vs. default agreement on V which nominative DPs and quirky subjects always trigger, respectively. We attempt to define the primitive notion of subject from two standpoints – its LF representation and how it is mirrored syntactically by the predication relation of the subject with respect to vP/VP and the proposition of the sentence in TP between the subject and T′. We discuss the semantic and configurational dependencies between quirky subjects and nominative DPs and vP and TP/CP. The paper investigates also the landing site for non-nominative initial DPs and argues for the Topic Phrase in the Left Periphery (Rizzi 1997) as a most natural candidate to host quirky subjects. Hopefully, the conclusions reached here may offer some way of bringing the notion of subject towards its more satisfactory understanding and description within the generative approach.

Word Order and Scope: Transparent Interfaces and the ¾ Signature

A recurring pattern of partial correlations between word order variation and scope possibilities (the ¾ signature) supports a particular view of economy constraints in syntax, with these properties: (1) There are economy conditions (soft constraints) that value a particular type of correspondence between LF and PF representations. (2) These constraints are unidirectional: LF (broadly construed) is calculated first and determines PF (surface word order). (3) Scope rigidity is a property not of languages but of specific configurations, and the distribution of rigidity effects is (largely) predictable from independent variation in the syntactic resources of various languages. We focus here on the interaction of these three assumptions and on the role of (2) in predicting the ¾ signature effect. We contrast our proposal with Reinhart’s (2005) Interface Economy model, in which economy conditions regulate a mapping that takes overt structure as its input and yields permissible interpretations.

A structural asymmetry in intervention effects

This paper documents a previously unnoted structural asymmetry among wh-phrases with respect to intervention effects. I show in a series of experiments (phonetic and syntactic) that in Korean (and potentially in Japanese and Turkish), only wh-phrases that are base generated in a structurally low position trigger intervention effects while wh-phrases generated in a high position do not. I show that these structural positions do not align with expectations from work on weak island effects: it is the syntactic position, not the semantic type, of the wh-phrase that matters. This result supports an important insight that the sensitivity to IEs does not necessarily depend on the argument-adjunct difference ( Rizzi, 1992; Miyagawa, 2002). I further show how these empirical contrasts are accounted for along the lines of the earlier work on intervention effects, which made use of structural constraints stated over LF representations.

Mechanizing metatheory in a logical framework

AbstractThe LF logical framework codifies a methodology for representing deductive systems, such as programming languages and logics, within a dependently typed λ-calculus. In this methodology, the syntactic and deductive apparatus of a system is encoded as the canonical forms of associated LF types; an encoding is correct (adequate) if and only if it defines acompositional bijectionbetween the apparatus of the deductive system and the associated canonical forms. Given an adequate encoding, one may establish metatheoretic properties of a deductive system by reasoning about the associated LF representation. The Twelf implementation of the LF logical framework is a convenient and powerful tool for putting this methodology into practice. Twelf supports both the representation of a deductive system and the mechanical verification of proofs of metatheorems about it. The purpose of this article is to provide an up-to-date overview of the LF λ-calculus, the LF methodology for adequate representation, and the Twelf methodology for mechanizing metatheory. We begin by defining a variant of the original LF language, calledCanonical LF, in which only canonical forms (long βη-normal forms) are permitted. This variant is parameterized by asubordination relation, which enables modular reasoning about LF representations. We then give an adequate representation of a simply typed λ-calculus in Canonical LF, both to illustrate adequacy and to serve as an object of analysis. Using this representation, we formalize and verify the proofs of some metatheoretic results, including preservation, determinacy, and strengthening. Each example illustrates a significant aspect of using LF and Twelf for formalized metatheory.

Attributive Comparative Deletion

Comparatives are among the most extensively investigatedconstructions in generative grammar, yet comparativesinvolving attributive adjectives have received a relativelysmall amount of attention. This paper investigates a complexarray of facts in this domain that shows that attributivecomparatives, unlike other comparatives, are well-formed onlyif some type of ellipsis operation applies within thecomparative clause. Incorporating data from English, Polish,Czech, Greek, and Bulgarian, we argue that these facts supporttwo important conclusions. First, violations of Ross's LeftBranch Condition that involve attributive modifiers should notbe accounted for in terms of constraints on LF representations(such as the Empty Category Principle), but rather in terms ofthe principle of Full Interpretation at the PF interface. Second,ellipsis must be analyzed as deletion of syntactic material fromthe phonological representation. In addition, we present newevidence from pseudogapping constructions that favors anarticulated syntax of attributive modification in which certaintypes of attributive modifiers may occur outside DP.

LF WH-islands and the minimal scope principle

The present paper argues that Nishigauchi's (1990) argument for an LF Subjacency Condition is incorrect. It is argued that the relevant facts should be accounted for in terms of a condition on LF representations, which I call the Minimal Scope Principle. My argument crucially depends on the assumption, advanced by Saito (1992), that scrambling can be undone at LF. The large-scale pied-piping hypothesis advanced by Nishigauchi (1990) is also examined and shown to be correct in the light of the Minimal Scope Principle and Takahashi's (1993) economy condition.

Projection and Phrase Structure

Perfect Syntax dispenses with the idea of externally forced imperfections in syntax. This article presents a system of principles relating (L) LF representations and lexical items that aims to be compatible with this assumption. The core of this theory is that phrase structures are viewed as projection lines (lexical items and their projections) linked by an Insert relation. This explains uniqueness and locality of projection, the fact that phrases and nonphrasal elements can immediately dominate each other only when they are part of the same projection line, and most effects of the “target projects” requirement. I attribute a residue to the Generalized Projection Principle, for which I also provide an explanation. In addition, I explore various consequences of the present approach for the Move/Chain relation.

Overt Scope Marking and Covert Verb-Second

In this article I investigate certain phenomena relating to superiority, the Empty Category Principle (ECP), and scope. I propose a chain-based scope-marking convention and a new analysis of adjunction, and hypothesize that English is a covert verb-second grammar. The analysis is couched within checking theory and ultimately within the bare theory of phrase structure. I propose category-neutral(-ized) LF representations, displaying VP-recursion but lacking functional heads and their projections, and I suggest that this, in turn, allows significant simplification of index-sensitive head government conditions appearing in many contemporary formulations of the ECP.

A Global Economy Analysis of Weak Crossover

Reinhart (1993a,b), developing work by Golan (1993), argues that this condition, the condition, should be relativized to interpretation. This relativization does not apply to all effects, such as the skipped landingposition condition or other conditions (cf. Chomsky 1992:(9)), but just to economy effects, which involve a violation of the shortest link condition. The proper formulation of global of this type should state that one convergent derivation blocks another, if it has shorter links, and results in an interpretively equivalent LF representation. Derivations resulting in non-equivalent LFs are not compared, hence cannot block each other. Superiority, as in (1), is an example of a shortest link violation:

Clausal pied piping: A problem for GB

To summarize, then, the distribution of clausal pied piping data seems to obey the descriptive constraint (41), repeated here. (41) Clauses with lexical subjects cannot be pied piped. In earlier sections of this paper, it was shown that pied piped clauses with PRO subjects appear to yield well-formed S-structure and LF representations, in accordance with their grammatical status. I have suggested that the exclusion of pied piped clauses with [+WH] subjects should be handled by the ECP, given the LF derivation proposed in section 2. But the exclusion of pied piped clauses with [−WH] lexical subjects poses a problem for the GB framework assumed here. Moreover, the proposals considered in section 5 were also shown to be unable to account for the entire array of data. It is hoped that future research will provide a more comprehensive account of the paradigm represented by (1)–(2) above.