Unformatted text preview:

Seth Cable Semantics and Generative Grammar Fall 2011 Ling610 1 Quantificational DPs, Part 3: Covert Movement vs. Type Shifting 1 1. Introduction Thus far, we’ve considered two competing analyses of sentences like those in (1). (1) Sentences Where a Quantificational DP is not in Subject Position a. Barack likes every boy. b. Joe likes some boys. (2) The Movement Account (Syntactic Account) While sentences like those in (1) are pronounced with the quantificational DPs in object position, their semantics is derived from a more abstract structure where the quantificational DP has undergone (covert / silent / ‘invisible’ ) movement. a. Pronounced Form: / bəɹɑk lɑjks ɛvɹi bɔj / b. Surface Structure: [ Barack [ likes [ every boy ] ] ] b. Logical Form: [ [ every boy ] [ 1 [ Barack likes t1 ] ] ] (3) The Type-Shifting Account (Semantic Account) In sentences like (1), the quantificational DP is not of type <et,t>, but of type <eet,et>. There is a phonologically empty type-shifting operator (SHIFTQD) which can combine with the determiner every to create a derived <et, <eet, et>> determiner. [[ SHIFTQD ]] = [ λd<et, <et,t> : [ λg<et> [ λf<eet> [ λye : d(g)( [ λze : f(z)(y) = T] ) ] ] ] ] (4) Burning Question Is there any way to empirically decide which of these analyses is correct? (5) The Truth • There is no obvious answer as to which is the better of the two analyses. • Both analyses face problems, but the problems they face are different. • Both analyses have been adjusted to deal with the sorts of problems they face, to the point that the debate is really over entire frameworks (or ‘world-views’, really…) 1 These notes are based upon the material in Heim & Kratzer (1998: 193-238).Seth Cable Semantics and Generative Grammar Fall 2011 Ling610 2 2. Some Advantages of the Movement Account over the Type-Shifting Account We will first examine some advantages that the movement account offers over the type-shifting account (as currently formulated). We will then take a look at some outstanding problems for the movement account (ones that the type-shifting account isn’t necessarily immune to, either). 2.1 Verbs with More than One Argument Consider the sentence in (6a). The movement account is able to interpret it by hypothesizing that it has the LF in (6c). (6) Quantificational DPs in Ditransitive Structures a. Sentence: Barack gave every book to Joe. b. Hypothesized SS: [S Barack [VP [VP gave every book ] to Joe ] ] c. Hypothesized LF: [S’’ [DP every book] [S’ 1 [S Barack gave t1 to Joe ] ] ] (7) Crucial Problem (for Type-Shifting Account) Our type shifting operator in (3) is not able to interpret the SS in (6b). • It seems that that every book in (6a,b) is the first argument of give. • To interpret every book in-situ, then, it must take an <eeet> function as argument. • However, ‘SHIFTQD’ in (3) will only yield a DP of type <eet, et>, not <eeet, eet>. (8) Solution (for Type-Shifting Account) We introduce the following, new type-shifting operator: [[ SHIFTQD2 ]] = [ λd<et, <et,t> : [ λg<et> [ λf<eeet> [ λye : [ λxe : d(g)( [ λze : f(z)(y)(x) = T] ) ] ] ] ] (9) The Criticism (for Type-Shifting Account) • The movement account is already straightforwardly able to interpret (6a). • The type-shifting account has to introduce a new operator to interpret (6a).Seth Cable Semantics and Generative Grammar Fall 2011 Ling610 3 2.2 Pronominal Binding In the last unit, we saw that sentences like (10a) can receive a ‘bound reading’ like that in (10b). (10) Binding by Quantificational Subjects a. Every man loves the woman who loves him. b. For all x, if x is a man, then x loves the unique y such that y is a woman and y loves x. We also saw that, under our theory of binding, we could only derive the ‘bound reading’ in (10b) from the movement LF in (11a). The LF in (11b) will only be assigned a referential reading. (11) Movement and Binding a. LF Receiving the Bound Reading of (10a) [ [Every man] [ 1 [ t1 loves [ the woman who loves him1 ] ] ] ] b. LF Receiving the Referential Reading of (10a) [ [ Every man ] [ loves the woman who loves him1 ] ] (13) The Challenge for the Type-Shifting Account • It looks like we need to assume some variety of ‘invisible movement’ in order to obtain the bound-reading of (10a). • So, why not suppose that such movement is also at play in examples like (1)? (14) The Obvious Answer to the Challenge: A Different Syntax/Semantics for Binding The challenge in (13) stems from the assumption that only movement can introduce the lambda operators that effectuate pronominal binding… … so maybe we’re just wrong about that… 2.3 Antecedent Contained Deletion (The ‘Gold Standard’) For many folks, the key empirical argument for covert movement of quantificational DPs is the phenomenon of ‘Antecedent Contained Deletion’. (15) Initial Observation Regarding VP-Ellipsis Ellipsis of a VP can only take place is there is some ‘matching VP’ in the context. a. Dave went to school, and I did too. ( = I went to school.) (≠ I went to work )Seth Cable Semantics and Generative Grammar Fall 2011 Ling610 4 If the generalization in (15) is correct, then what are we to make of the following sentences? (16) Antecedent Contained Deletion (ACD) a. Dave read every book Phil did. b. Dave saw something Phil didn’t. (17) The Nature of The Elided VPs If we were to ‘spell out’ the elided VPs in (16), they would intuitively be the following. a. Dave read every book Phil [ read t1 ] b. Dave saw something Phil didn’t [ see t1 ] (18) The Crucial Question Where is the ‘matching VP’ in (16)/(17)? In the surface forms in (17), there is no other VP of the form ‘[ read/saw t1 ]’! (19) The Solution (Movement Account) The movement account provides a solution to the puzzle in (18). Note that the LFs derived from the surface forms in (17) would have to be as follows: a. [ [ every book [ Phil [ read t1 ] ] ] [ 2 [ Dave [ read t2 ] … ] b. [ [ something [ Phil didn’t [ see t1 ] ] ] [ 2 [ Dave [ saw t2 ] … ] Key Observations • The LFs in (19) will be assigned the correct T-conditions for (16)/(17) • In these


View Full Document
Download Quantificational DPs, Part 3
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Quantificational DPs, Part 3 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Quantificational DPs, Part 3 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?