Incomplete Category Fronting

Müller, Gereon

doi:10.1007/978-94-017-1864-6

Cited by 217 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(29) Hebrew (Landau 2006: 37) Liknot et ha-praxim, hi kanta. to.buy acc the-flowers she bought 'As for buying the flowers, she bought (them One possible analysis of data like these is that a VP containing the trace of the verbal head has been moved to SpecCP (Müller 1998). Under the present assumptions, however, such headless VP fronting is underivable because post-syntactic head movement comes too late to create a headless VP that could be fronted in syntax.…”

mentioning

confidence: 82%

“…When the VP moves to SpecCP, the trace of the object DP inside that VP is moved out of the c-command (i.e. binding) domain of its antecedent and is therefore no longer bound by it (for discussion see Müller 1998). This problem also translates into Copy Theory.…”

Section: Excursus: Arbitrary or Triggered Choice Of Order?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consider German first, where V fronting as illustrated in (37) involves remnant VP movement rather than Ā-head movement (den Besten & Webelhuth 1990;Grewendorf & Sabel 1994;Koopman 1997;Müller 1998;Hinterhölzl 2002). (37) German (Diedrichsen 2008: 221) Waschen tut er das Auto nie.…”

Section: Frontingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although similar to the notion of parallel chains suggested in Chomsky (2008) and developed in Aboh (2006); Aboh & Dyakonova (2009) the current proposal differs in that the two movements do not take place simultaneously but rather sequentially. In VP fronting, one of these movements is Ā-movement of the VP into SpecCP, where the verb moves as part of the VP, whereas the other is head movement of the verb to v and/or T. In V fronting, there are two different kinds of movement into SpecCP: (i) the verb either moves as part of a remnant VP that has been evacuated by the internal argument(s) (see den Besten & Webelhuth 1990;Grewendorf & Sabel 1994;Koopman 1997;Müller 1998Müller , 2014Takano 2000;Abels 2001;Hinterhölzl 2002;Aboh & Dyakonova 2009;Bondaruk 2012) or (ii) the verb undergoes Ā-head movement as has first been suggested by Koopman (1984) (see also van Riemsdijk 1989;Larson & Lefebvre 1991;Holmberg 1999;Fanselow 2002;Landau 2006;Vicente 2007Vicente , 2009Harbour 2008;Bastos-Gee 2009). Vicente (2007Vicente ( , 2009 shows that this latter kind of Ā-head movement is not in conflict with current ideas about how movement works, but is rather a logical extension of them.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Doubling and <i>do</i>-support in verbal fronting: Towards a typology of repair operations

Hein

2017

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most known languages seem to follow the intuitive and economical implication that if they show a repair such as verb doubling or do-support when just the verb is fronted, they also show that same repair when the verb is fronted together with its internal argument(s) (provided that the language has both types of fronting). In this paper, I present data from Asante Twi, where the verb is doubled in the former case but there is do-support in the latter instead. I argue that the attested patterns can be accounted for under the Copy Theory of Movement by introducing different orders of the operations Chain Reduction (CR) and head movement (HM) at PF (analogous to what Schoorlemmer 2012 proposed for Chain Reduction and Local Dislocation). CR either bleeds HM giving rise to consistent do-support (as in German) or counterbleeds it leading to consistent verb doubling (as in Hebrew). The Asante Twi pattern is a result of the interaction of the bleeding order with Ā-head movement, where the bleeding effect of the order is neutralised by the inability of Ā-head movement to form chains, which is rooted in the Chain Uniformity Condition (Chomsky 1995). The account provides a unified minimalist analysis of verb doubling and do-support in verbal fronting, which derives all attested patterns but correctly precludes the derivation of the unattested reverse Asante Twi pattern.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 82%

Section: Excursus: Arbitrary or Triggered Choice Of Order?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Frontingmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Doubling and <i>do</i>-support in verbal fronting: Towards a typology of repair operations

Hein

2017

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Under a strict interpretation of the PBC, head movement is also banned because the head of the chain in head movement cannot c‐command its trace. Likewise, remnant movement would never be permissible, because it leaves an unbound trace within a remnant category (see Müller 1996, 1998). Importantly, to the best of my knowledge, there is no ‘‘uncontroversial’’ case of downward or sideward movement attested in human language (cf.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scrambling to the Edge

Hiraiwa¹

2010

Syntax

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been well known since Saito 1989 that scrambling in Japanese is subject to the Proper Binding Condition (PBC; see Fiengo 1977). As I will show, remnant movement in Japanese is heavily constrained, and in fact, no remnants created by scrambling or topicalization can be moved over extracted elements. This article argues that the alleged cases for the PBC in Japanese should be reconsidered in favor of elimination of the PBC, and its effects should be derived from the architecture of the narrow syntax: interactions between Cyclic Multiple Spell-Out, the Phase Impenetrability Condition, and a refined mechanism of probing. Specifically, I argue that scrambling in Japanese uniformly targets the edge of a phase. Under this theory, ÔÔremnant movementÕÕ just reduces to an artifact, and it follows that there is no special constraint on remnant movement per se. I will demonstrate that my theory brings significant new empirical advantages and that the same mechanism provides a unified account for various unexplained constraints on scrambling. 3 The principle (31) is reminiscent of the A-over-A Principle (see Ross 1967). Further investigation of how much they are similar and dissimilar and whether they can be unified is left for future research.

show abstract

Freezing Effects

Corver¹

2006

The Blackwell Companion to Syntax

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Incomplete Category Fronting

Cited by 217 publications

References 57 publications

Doubling and <i>do</i>-support in verbal fronting: Towards a typology of repair operations

Doubling and <i>do</i>-support in verbal fronting: Towards a typology of repair operations

Scrambling to the Edge

Freezing Effects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About