Advanced Syntax
Lecture 10–11
Spring 2015 LAP
 Extraposition; heavy “NP” shift
 Split CP – far left of Clause
 Topicalization
 Focus
 Negative fronting
 Extraposition
Not wh-element moved to specifier CP; PP/CL (here, a Rel Clause) moves to end of Clause
She knocked [PP on the window] gently
→
She knocked tn gently [PP on the window]n
[DP A man [CP who I’d never seen before]] came in
→
[DP A man tm ] came in [CP whom I’d never seen before]m
– Case irrelevant (unlike in A-movement); landing site not argument position, i.e. non-A position
– more limited than other movements:
(a) where extraposed element can be extracted from
from both Obj and Subj:
I read [DP an article tm ] yesterday [PP about a Spanish woman]m
[DP an article tm ] appeared yesterday [PP about a Spanish woman]m
(b) what elements can be extraposed: PPs & CLs
Obj:
I shouted tm loudly [CP that students should please gather in the lecture hall] m
Rel CL from Obj: I met [DP a guy tm ] yesterday [CP who claimed to be the Dean]m
Rel CL from Subj: [DP a man tm ] arrived [CP who claimed to be the Dean]m
(note the two who’s above could be replaced by and he – shows what the real predicate is)
DPs not usu allowed to be extraposed:
*I met tm yesterday [DP a guy]m
*I read tm eventually [them]m
BUT: sometimes possible if DP long & complex enough:
Heavy “NP” Shift (NP = DP)
I saw tm yesterday [DP a woman who sold mussels from a wheelbarrow] m
He read tm eventually [DP many of the books on the reading list]m
Why extraposition happens: appears optional; structure grammatical w/o
I saw [a woman with a funny wheelbarrow] yesterday
vs.
I saw [a woman tm] yesterday [with a funny wheelbarrow]m
However, the wheelbarrow sentences not identical in meaning:
extraposed PP has end focus: informationally more important
 Split CP: Top, Foc, NegFronting (, , )
movement: “fronting”; expanding the left periphery (of the clause, that is, the IP)
CP
wo
Spec
C'
whqp
C
IP
that
3
if
Spec
I'
Subj
3
I
VP
6
 Topicalization: adjunction
you will see the zoo [in this town] →
what will you see ___ in this town →
In main clauses (such as these): Topic moves to left
[top in this town]m you will see the zoo tm
← moves left (of IP), but where?
[top in this town]m [CP whatk will you see tk tm]
in interrogatives, moves to position left of wh-element (which is in Spec CP):
Then, topic is adjoined to CP: ie moves not just left of IP but also left of CP
CP
2
Top
CP
2
whC'
In embedded clauses, however, the Topic (a) follows wh-element and (b) even follows C
(a) I asked [CP what [top in this town] you will see]
and not *I asked [CP [top in this town] what you will see
(b) I thought [CP that [top in this town] you will see the zoo]
and not *I thought [CP [top in this town] that you will see the zoo]
This must mean that (in embedded clauses) the Top is further downwards, ie is adjoined to IP:
VP
3
V
CP
3
whC'
3
C
IP
that
3
Top
IP
5 6
in this town
you will see /the zoo/
Recall VP fronting: VPs also topicalize:
I said we would visit the zoo and [VP visit the zoo]m we will tm
Remember: VP fronting as diagnostic showing that I is separate from VP, ie no such as “verb group”
Top is recursive (expected if adjoined)
[In this town]i [in summer]m I hardly think I could survive ti tm
 Focus
JOHNNY I wouldn’t trust
THE ZOO I would see [= It is Johnny… / It is the zoo…]
“fronting”: beginning of Clause;
similar to the Topic position BUT:
Topicalization
Johnny, || I wouldn’t trust
←
vs. →
Hung. Johnnyban – nem bíznék
– Comma indicates intonational difference
– Top = intonational unit, own stress; Clause also has own stress
– Interpretationally huge difference – conversational situation:
– Johnny already mentioned; sentence offers new information
Focus movement
JOHNNY_I wouldn’t trust
Hung. JOHNNYBANnem bíznék
– Focussed element within same
intonation unit, carries major stress
– known that I wouldn’t trust someone
– New info: JOHNNY is that person
– typically: correct sy saying,
‘I wouldn’t trust Bill’
– Topic = old info; rest (comment) = new
Johnny,
I wouldn’t trust
old
new
– Focus = new stuff; rest = old
JOHNNY I wouldn’t trust
new
old
Position of Focus?
Foci & wh- questions do not occur together:
* JOHNNY who would trust
or
* who JOHNNY would trust
Focus fronting – unlike Topic – is not recursive
→ one fronted focus per clause: *[in THIS town] [the ZOO] we will see
If both Focus and wh-question must be used in same Clause, Focus must be indicated by stress, not movement
who would trust JOHNNY
[in response to smb asking who would trust Bill →
meaning it’s Johnny that you should be interested in (who would trust him), not Bill]
If there seems to be complementary distribution between Foci & wh-phrases,
then Focus in Spec CP, where wh- phrases?
NO: again, in embedded clauses, Focus follows the C: I said [that [ JOHNNYm I would trust tm]]
VP
3
V
CP
said
3
C'
3
C
IP
that
3
Foc
IP
5
6
JOHNNY
I would trust
THE ZOO
I will see
Has similar position to Topic: adjoined to IP (as above)?
NO: if both Topic & Focus were adjoined to IP
(Focus and Topic are compatible), then any order would be OK
BUT Topic must precede Focus
I said that [top in this town] [foc THE ZOO] I will see
*I said that [foc THE ZOO] [top in this town] I will see
Focus sits after C but before Subject, so presumably between CP and IP
So far: it seems that Topic must he higher than Focus
Where exactly do Topic and Focus go?
 Negative fronting
also moves element “in front of” Clause: involves negative phrases (of various categories)
– [NegP never in my life] have I been to that zoo
– [NegP no one] did he speak to
even more like wh-movement: accompanied by SAI (unlike topicalization & focus fronting)
negative element moves sits where? – Spec of CP?
NO:
I said [that [NegP never in my life] have I been to that zoo]
fronted Neg follows C; cannot be in Spec CP
Adjoined to IP, like this?
VP
3
V
CP
said
3
C'
3
C
IP
that
wo
NegP
IP
6
6
never in my life have I been…
have can’t be in IP!
NO: the SAI shows that there must be a head position to the left of the IP and the right of the NegP, ie between
them, that can accommodate the inverted Aux:
so: NegP is moved to Spec of this “Inversion Phrase”, which comes between C & IP
and the head of this phrase accommodates the inverted auxiliary
CP
3
C'
ei
C
“InvP”
that
wo
NegP
<Spec>
6
never in my life
Inv'
wo
“Inv”
IP
<head>
6
have
I __ been…
This is logical: after all negative inversion differs from the inversion that accompanies wh-movement:
unlike in wh- movement, it also takes place in embedded CLs:
I claimed that [“InvP” [not a single penny] [had [I seen] ] ]
Topic: solution
Topic, then, adjoins to highest phrase possible (= “highest that it finds”):
to the CP in main Clauses
(in this town what will I see)
CP
3
Top
CP
3
Spec
C'
3
C
IP
6
in embedded clauses, to the “InvPhrase” if it is present;
if not present, then to IP*
(that in this town never have I seen…)
(that in this town I have never seen the zoo)
CP
3
C'
ei
C
InvP
that
wo
Top
“InvP”
6
wo
in this town
NegP
6
never (…)
Inv'
3
Inv
IP
have
6
I _ been…
*which is what we started out with (repeated here):
CP
3
whC'
3
C
IP
that
3
Top
IP
5 6
in this town
you will see /the zoo/
!!! Fronted Negative: in complementary distribution with Focus:
*I said that [NEG under no circumstances] [FOC the zoo] will I see in this town
exactly as bad as: *I said that [FOC the zoo] [NEG under no circumstances] will I see in this town
(SAI applying in both cases)
Again, Focus & Neg can only be together if Focus is expressed w/ intonation but w/o movement:
I said that [under no circumstances] would I see [the zoo] in this town
This complementary distribution is significant (more than that between the Focus and the wh-phrase):
Focus & fronted Neg occupy the same position – same landing site: Spec of “InvP”
since this “InvP” serves as landing site for fronted Focus → it is a Focus Phrase,
headed by abstract Focus head (this is where the Aux moves):
CP
3
C'
ei
C
FocP
that
wo
XP
6
the zoo
Summary:
3 items – Top – Foc – Neg
No diagram has Green and Blue
Can be multiople copies of Top
Top can combine with Foc
Neg can only combine with Top
Foc'
wo
Foc
IP
6
I will see
Dislocation:
Left and right dislocation (“copy”, not move: no gap in Clause where topic could have moved from)
Informal / spoken L
Left Dislocation (LD) – introduces (usu lexical DP) Topic, the Dislocated Topic;
then clause with pronoun; DP = antecedent for the pronoun (italicized)
[The man my father works with in Boston], he's going to go to the police
[Her father], he's Armenian, and [her mother], she's Greek
[That leather coat], it looks really nice on you
[Jamie], normally, you put him in his cot and he’s asleep right away
[Paul], in this job that he’s got now, when he goes into the office, he’s never sure
where he’s going to be sent
[The white house on the corner], is that where she lives?
[Your sister], is she coming too?
[That new motorway they were building], is it open yet? ← clause can be interrogative
[Walking into that room], it brought back loads of memories ← LD item = itself a clause
[Going round museums and art galleries], it’s what mum and dad like doing
[Her], it really would be nice if she too could come along
[Me], I never discuss politics
←
← LD item =pronoun
LDCs commonly refer to the Subject, Object, Prepos’l Object, or Object complement, in the clause:
[Owen], he’s my favourite nephew
[Joe], I’ve never seen him at a single football match this season
[Anita], you should at least feel sorry for her (=/= vocative!)
[‘The Great Maurice’], they used to always call him that, didn’t they?
LDCs may be complex, with semantically connected DPs linked together, leading to the DP which
is the Subject (or some other constituent!) of the clause:
DP1
DP2
[Madge],
[one of the secretaries at work],
[My friend Janet],
[His cousin in London], [her boyfriend],
[My wife],
(Subj )DP3
her daughter got married last week
her sister
has just emigrated to Brazil
his parents bought him a Ford Escort
somebody stole her handbag last night
Most of these do not occur in written English, and though they may look odd when written, they are normal,
frequent, and pass without comment
– Left Dislocated item always in Acc Case (visible if pronoun: Me, I…),
irrespective of case of associated position within clause – can be Genitive also, cf above
– Contrast this to Topicalization: here, case of Topic determined by position it moves out of:
himm , you guys know [I don’t like tm ]
hem , you guys know [ tm doesn’t like me]
Right Dislocation (RD) – afterthought: speaker realizes message must be clarified
He can be very judgmental, [the old man]
He’s amazingly clever, [that dog of theirs]
They’re incredibly nice, [our neighbours]
He’s Armenian, [her father]
More complex DPs can also form RDCs:
It never occurred to me, the danger I was in
That was our only chance of a holiday, that weekend in Rome seeing Rita
– Lexical DP to right of CL; pronoun is antecedent of this DP
– Left Disclocation puts DP early; Right D has DP that explains reference of early pronoun
– In simplest cases, DP & pronoun both Subj
RDCs most typically DPs, but may also be PPs/clauses:
I put it there, [on the fridge]
I find it very frustrating that, [not being able to remember people’s names]
RDCs may occur in interrogative clauses:
Are they both at university, [your brother’s kids]?
RDCs typically refer back to Subject in the clause but can refer to Objects, complements, and adjuncts:
It’s a speciality of the region, [that]
They’re lovely potatoes, [these]
They’re an odd couple, [those two]
They look good down there, don’t they, [those tiles]?
She’s a great tennis player [Hiroko] is, isn’t she?
It’s not nice juice, [that] isn’t
She’s never had one before, [a mosquito bite]
That’s what I like most, [people with real team spirit]
← refer to Subject
← refer to Object
I reckon we’d been there before as children, don’t you, [to Devon]?
← refer to adjunct
Two operations that look like subtypes of or similar to these:
He’s very judgmental, [Hanna’s father] is
← not just DP right-dislocated but is also repeated; Right Dislocated DP accompanied
by Aux in the same form/polarity as in the main clause:
He’s very judgmental, is [Hanna’s father]
← even more informal; DP right-dislocated; inversion!
It’s an exciting place, [Hong Kong] is
They’re from all over the world, [those photos] are
She hasn’t been here before, [Judith] hasn’t
It’s not very good, [that cake] isn’t
A: What are you going to have?
B: I can’t decide
A: I’m going to have a burger with chilli sauce, [I] am
B: Mm yeah, it’s a speciality here, [the chilli sauce] is
RDC frequently occur with tag questions (underlined) and can be placed before or after the tag:
They do take up a lot of time, I suppose, [kids], don’t they?
It’s not easy to eat, [spaghetti], is it?
← tag after RD item
They do take up a lot of time, I suppose, don’t they, [kids]?
It’s not easy to eat, is it, [spaghetti]?
← RD item after tag
– where just a name involved (and makes sense pragmatically), such dislocated DP (at the front
or the back of the clause) could also be a vocative
Vocative: DP used to directly address listener (= name, title, term of endearment; at the front or end)
[Paul], could you help us?
This is for you, [Daddy]
Could you help us, [Paul]?
[Daddy], this is for you
He always makes a lot of fuss, [Charlie]
[Charlie], he always makes a lot of fuss
← [Charlie] = vocative or Dislocated Subject
(im)possibility of coindexing
Hem always makes a lot of fuss, Charliem
Hem always makes a lot of fuss, Charliek
 (Right) Disloc
 (“right”) Vocative
Telling Vocative from Dislocation in spoken English: Charlie, he always makes a lot of fuss
Right Disloc (but not Voc) may have slight pause before: He always makes a lot of fuss, | Charlie