It is argued that convergence requirements related to linearization and morphological fusion interact with economy computations regarding applications of deletion, yielding a complex crosslinguistic pattern whereby chains in the general case have only their highest link phonetically realized, but they may also trigger pronunciation of a lower link or even pronunciation of multiple links if convergence so demands. The chapter starts by reviewing several pieces of evidence that show that the phonetic realization of copies is similar to the LF interpretive procedure in the sense that it allows activation of lower copies, as well as instances of " scattered deletion ", where different pieces of different chain links are realized. As a result, the chapter is able to explain a variety of complex phenomena that cannot be captured by trace theory. In addition, the issues regarding phonetic realization of copies are shown to be determined by conditions of the phonological component and not of syntax (movement) per se. copies structurally lower in the syntactic representation) may be phonetically realized. Chomsky 1986a).īased on previous work by Boškoviü (2001, 2002, 2004a,b) and Nunes (1999, 2004), this chapter discusses a considerable amount of evidence involving A-movement, A'-movement, head movement, and remnant movement that points to the conclusion that " traces " (i.e.
#Spanish linguist at mwm full
Therefore, if they move from an edge, the relevant interpretation at that edge (be it topic, focus, etc.) will be lost, as interpretations of the rele-vant kind (theta-roles, criterial-roles, etc.) cannot accumulate, which I ultimately attribute to a Principle of Interface Freezing, whose effects can be subsumed under the Principle of Full Interpretation (cf. Nevertheless, such XPs may be part of a configura-tion and thus receive an interpretation at the semantic component (cf. Gallego 2009, Epstein, Kitahara & Seely 2016), I claim that XPs in edge positions are not frozen in the narrow syntax (they can always move, unless affected by cyclic Transfer). Chomsky 2013, 2015), whereas the latter is simply syntactically vacuous. Chomsky 2000, Uriagereka 1999), coupled with Labeling Theory (cf. Instead, I submit that A-freezing (Chomsky’s 2000, 2001 Activity Condition) and A-bar freezing (Rizzi’s 2006 Crite-rial Freezing) should be dealt with by different principles: the former follows from an independently motivated rule of efficient computation (the application of cyclic Transfer cf. Chomsky 2013, 2015) or as the invisibility of X’ projections (cf. I argue that freezing (or halting) should not be seen as the consequence of an exocentric structure in which the heads of XP and YP share some feature (cf. This paper reconsiders so-called freezing effects within Chomsky’s (2004 and sub.) Phase Theory.
0 kommentar(er)
