1Week 10b. VP shellsCAS LX 522Syntax ISmall clausesn Last time we talked about “small clauses” like:n I find [Bill intolerable].n I consider [Bill incompetent].n I want [Bill off this ship]. (Immediately!)n Let’s talk about a few more aspects of smallclauses and infinitival complements that mightmake the discussion more convincing.Small clauses vs.infinitival complementsn All of the small clause examples from last time seem tobe able to be paraphrased as examples with infinitival (tobe) complements as well.n I find [AP Bill intolerable].n I find [IP Bill to be intolerable].n So, we might wonder if small clauses are really justinfinitival complements with a “silent” to be.To be or not to ben Suggestive against the idea that small clauses arereally camouflaged IPs, it turns out that there’s adifference in meaning between the “smallclauses” and “infinitival complements”.n I found the table to be three-legged.n I found the table three-legged.n I found him to be 6-feet tall.n I found him 6-feet tall.n I found her to be amused by cartoons.n I found her amused by cartoons.To be or not to ben I found the chair comfortable.n I found the table three-legged.n The semantic distinction is very subtle, butit feels like I found DP AP means that theonly evidence for DP being AP is asubjective judgment, not independentlydeterminable. Still, there is a difference.Small clausesn Also, not all small clauses are of this sort,though. Consider:n I saw [him fall].n I saw [them upset].n I saw [her in the garden].n There’s no to be missing in any of these.2Small clausesn So, I saw her in the gardenwould look like this.VV¢VPII¢DPP¢PPDPinhertjsee[past]DPPIPDPjIthe gardenECMn Bill finds me to beintolerable.VV¢VPII¢DPI¢IPDPimetjfind[pres]ItiIPDPjBillAAPVPVDPbeintolerabletoECMn Bill wants for me toeat cake.VV¢VPII¢DPI¢IPDPimetjwant[pres]IcakeIPDPjBillVV¢VPDPDPtieattoCCPforPassives againn Another thing that argues infavor of the “ECM” analysis ofhow embedded subjects ofsmall clauses and infinitivalsubjects check Case features:n Recall how the active sentenceBill ate the sandwich relates tothe passive sentence Thesandwich was eaten.DPthesandwichVeatVPI[past]I¢IPqqDPBillPassives againn The sandwich was eaten.n In the passive, the verb hashad its external q-roleremoved (and with it, theability to check objectiveCase), so the Themeargument moves into SpecIP,satisfying the EPP (andchecking Case).DPjthesandwichVeatenVPVi+IwasI¢qVtiVPIPDPtjAnd, speakingof dolphins…n I consider them tobe intelligent.n Consider assigns twoq-roles, the externalExperiencer q-role,and the internalProposition q-role.n I checks Nom Casewith the subject,consider checks ObjCase with them.VV¢VPII¢DPI¢IPDPithemtjconsider[pres]ItiIPDPjIAAPVPVDPbeintelligentto3And, speakingof dolphins…n They are consideredto be intelligent.n Passivizing considerremoves the externalExperiencer q-role,and the ability tocheck Obj Case.VVPVPVj+II¢VI¢IPDPti¢tjconsideredareItiIPDPjtheyAAPVPVDPbeintelligenttoTT TT T TT TT TGiving trees to ditransitivesn You may recall ourdiscussion of q-theory,where we triumphantlyclassified verbs ascoming in three types:n Intransitive (1 q-role)n Transitive (2 q-roles)n Ditransitive (3 q-roles)n Theta roles go toobligatory arguments,not to adjuncts.Giving trees to ditransitivesn You may also recall that webelieve that trees are binarybranching, where:n Syntactic objects are formedby Merge.n There’s just one complementand one specifier.n And our discovery thatsubjects should start outwithin the projection of theirpredicate, so that q-roleassignment is strictly local(assigned to either acomplement or a specifier).Giving trees to ditransitivesn Fantastic, except that thesethings just don’t fittogether.n We know what to do withtransitive verbs.n But what do we do withditransitive verbs? We’reout of space!OBJV¢VVPSUBProblems continue…n I showed Mary to herself.n *I showed herself to Mary.n I introduced nobody to anybody.n *I introduced anybody to nobody.n This tells us something about therelationship between the direct andindirect object in the structure. (What?)4Problems continue…n The OBJ c-commands the PP.But how could we draw a treelike that?n Even if we allowed adjuncts toget q-roles, the most naturalstructure would be to make thePP an adjunct, like this, but thatdoesn’t meet the c-commandrequirements.OBJVPSUBV¢V¢VPP*Some clues from idiomsn Often idiomatic meanings are associatedwith the verb+object complex—themeaning derives both from the verb andthe object together.n We take this as due to the fact that theverb and object are sisters at DS.n Bill threw a baseball.n Bill threw his support behind the candidate.n Bill threw the boxing match.Idioms in ditransitivesn In ditransitives, it seems like this happenswith the PP.n Beethoven gave the Fifth Symphony to the world.n Beethoven gave the Fifth Symphony to his patron.n Lasorda sent his starting pitcher to the showers.n Lasorda sent his starting pitcher to Amsterdam.n Mary took Felix to task.n Mary took Felix to the cleaners.n Mary took Felix to his doctor’s appointment.So V and PP are sisters…n Larson (1988) took this as evidence thatthe V is a sister to the PP at DS.n Yet, we see that on the surface the OBJcomes between the verb and the PP.n Mary sent a letter to Bill.n Where is the OBJ? It must c-command thePP, remember. Why is the V to the left ofthe OBJ at SS?PPV¢VWhere’s the V? Where’s the OBJ?n We already know how to deal with thiskind of question if what we’re talkingabout is the verb coming before thesubject in Irish, or the verb coming beforeadverbs in French…n The answer: The verb moves over the OBJ.But to where?PPV¢VWhere’s the V? Where’s the OBJ?n Larson’s answer to this is obvious,in retrospect. If we’re going to havebinary branching and threepositions for argument XPs (SUB,OBJ, PP), we need to have anotherXP above the VP.n Since the subject is in the specifierof the higher XP, that must be a VPtoo.n Ditransitive verbs really come in twoparts. They are in a “VP shell”structure.PPV¢VVPOBJv¢vvPSUB5Where’s the V? Where’s the OBJ?n The higher verb is a “light verb” (we’ll write itas vP to signify that)—its contribution is toassign the q-role to the subject. The lower verbassigns the q-roles to the OBJ and the PP.n Bill gave a book to Mary and a record to Sue.n Bill gavei [VP a book ti to Mary] and [VP a record ti to Sue].PPV¢VVPOBJv¢vvPSUBSending a letter to Billn So
View Full Document
![Nom from finite T no case from nonfinite T (T [inf], M to)](https://media.gradebuddy.com/documents/386389/7a3e15e0-7507-4825-a32d-f3e6fb67d2eb.png)
Unlocking...