1Week 3b. ConstituentsCAS LX 522Syntax IConstituentsn Sentences are made of component parts, orconstituents.n Of course, there are the words, as we’veseen, but there is more structure than that.n Some words fit together into larger groups,that function in certain respects as a unit.n And those larger groups (constituents) canthemselves be parts of yet larger groups(constituents).Constituentsn The words that make up a sentence like…n The students did their syntax assignment.n …are grouped together into componentparts, constituents, which function togetheras a unit.n Among them, [the students], the do-ers,and [their syntax assignment], the done.Constituentsn Functioning as a unit…n The students did their syntax assignment.n The students did the crossword puzzle.n John did the crossword puzzle.n The crossword puzzle is what John did.n *Crossword puzzle is what John did the.n John likes the crossword puzzle.n John likes the jigsaw puzzle.n John likes the theater.Replacement testn A constituent is a group of words whichfunction as a unit. If you can replacepart of the sentence with anotherconstituent (the smallest constituentbeing a single word), this tells us thatthe replaced section of the sentence is aconstituent.n This isn’t foolproof, but it usually worksif you try to keep the meaning as closeas possible.Replacement testn The students left.n They left.n The students is a constituent.n The students ate the sandwiches.n They ate the sandwiches.n The students ate them.n The students dined.n [The students] [ate [the sandwiches]].2Sentence fragment testn Generally, only constituents can beused in the fragmentary response to aquestion.n Who ate the sandwiches?n The students. *Students ate the.n What did the students do?n Ate the sandwiches. *Ate the.n What did the students eat?n The sandwiches.n [The students] [ate [the sandwiches]].Trees, hierarchy, andconstituencyn [The students] [ate [the sandwiches]]The studentsatethe sandwichesSubstitutionn One of the ways we know a verb is a verb(category) is by observing that it can substitutefor other verbs.n Pat likes to sing. Pat likes to drive.n Pat bought a book. *Pat bought (a) sing.n Pat likes to eat sandwiches.n *Pat bought eat sandwiches.n So is eat sandwiches a verb?n Well, kind of, yes.n It’s a constituent, a phrase, that has theproperties a verb does. A verb phrase.VPn Why is eat sandwiches a verb phrase?n Well, presumably because eat is a verb.n The rock fell (off the wall).n #The rock jumped (off the wall).n The combination of eat and sandwichesforms a constituent that inherits theproperties of eat (and not of sandwiches).n The verb projects to VP.n The verb heads the VP.The making of a phrasen We’re trying to characterize ourknowledge of syntactic structure.n Our grammatical knowledge is a system(we can judge new sentences).n All things being equal, a theory in whichthe system is simpler (needed fewerassumptions) is to be preferred over atheory that entails more complex one.The making of a phrasen In that spirit, we know that a phrase differs froma word in that it contains words (or otherphrases).n We’ve seen that when words are combined intoa phrase, the phrase inherits the properties ofone of the things we combined. (The phrase hasa head).n Suppose: a phrase can arise from merging twowords together, with one taking priority. In away, attaching one word to another.3The making of a phrasen What will Pat do?n singn eat sandwichesn What does Pat like?n to eat sandwichesn to singn [to [eat sandwiches]]n So, a phrase can also arise from combining toand a verb phrase, to make a bigger phrase.Mergen So, let’s go for the simplest theory ofstructure we can (and only move awayfrom it if the simplest theory won’t work).n A phrase is a syntactic object formed bycombining (merging) two syntactic objects,with the properties inherited from one ofthem (the head of the phrase).n A word is a syntactic object.Trees and constituencyn Pat will eat lunch.Pateat lunchIV NPNP I¢IPwillVPX, X¢, XPn Let X stand for a category.n I, or V, or N, … doesn’t matter.n When we just have the word, the item from thelexicon, we write it as X.n If we combine two words (with Merge), thecombination inherits the properties of one ofthem (the head). We say that the properties of thelexical item project to the phrase.eat lunchV NX, X¢, XPn When X combines with another syntactic objectand does not determine the category of thecombined object, we write XP. The maximalprojection. It projects no further.n Where X is not a combined object (e.g., a word),we write X. We call this the head. The minimalprojection.n Did I write the rightthing over lunch?eat lunchV NPVPX, X¢, XPn The XP is what is usually called the phrase, e.g.,verb phrase (VP), the maximal projection of theverb.n An XP that combines with a head is called thecomplement. Below, lunch is the complement of eat.eat lunchV NPVP4Radford and the X(P)n To forestall confusion: lunch is both a minimalprojection and a maximal projection. It functionsas a phrase, an XP, but it has nothing in it but ahead, an X.n Since you need to write something, Radfordgenerally opts to write X for these X/XPs.eat lunchV NPVPRadford and the X(P)n In this class, and on my overheads, I will usually writeX/XP as XP. You should do the same, but you should beaware that Radford does it differently.n In general, this will depend on whether the properties weare focusing on are those of phrases (XPs) or heads (Xs).In these ambiguous cases, it will almostinvariably turn out thatthey act like phraseswith respect to what weare focusing on.eat lunchV NPVPRadford and the X(P)n Another similar comment pertains to the statusof IP below. It is an IP. It is not an I¢. It’s true thatit will be an I¢ after we combine Pat with the IP,but it isn’t yet. Cf. Radford p. 120.Pateat lunchIV NPN IPwillVPX, X¢, XPn In English, the head and the complement alwaysseem to come in that order: head-complement.n at lunch (P NP = PP)n eat lunch (V NP = VP)n will eat lunch (I VP = IP)n But here, languages differ.English is a head-first (orhead-initial) language.at lunchP NPPPX, X¢, XPn In Japanese, the head follows the complement.Japanese is head-final.n ringo-o tabeta (NP V = VP)apple aten toshokan de (NP P = PP)library atn This seems to be aparameter thatdistinguishes languages(the head parameter)toshokan deNP PPPX, X¢, XPn When a syntactic object is a projection of X,but is neither the maximal projection northe minimal projection,