Prolific Domains
On the Anti-Locality of movement dependencies
| University of Cyprus
Standard conceptions of Locality aim to establish that a dependency between two positions may not span too long a distance. This book explores the opposite conception, Anti-Locality: Don’t move too close. The model of clause structure, syntactic computation, and locality concerns Kleanthes Grohmann develops makes crucial use of derivational sub-domains, Prolific Domains, each encapsulating particular context information (thematic, agreement, discourse). The Anti-Locality Hypothesis is the attempt to exclude anti-local movement from the grammar by banning movement within a Prolific Domain, a Bare Output Condition. The flexible application of the operation Spell Out, coupled with an innovative view on grammatical formatives, leads to a natural caveat: Copy Spell Out. Grohmann explores a theory of Anti-Locality relevant to all three Prolific Domains in the clausal layer as well as the nominal layer, and offers a unified account of Standard and Anti-Locality regarding clause-internal movement and operations across clause boundaries, revisiting successive cyclicity.
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 66] 2003. xv, 369 pp.
Publishing status: Available
© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Table of Contents
|
Preface
|
xiii
|
|
Abbreviations
|
xv
|
|
1. Locality in grammar
|
1–37
|
|
2. Rigorous Minimalism and Anti-Locality
|
39–103
|
|
3. Anti-Locality in anaphoric dependencies
|
105–131
|
|
4. Copy Spell Out and left dislocation
|
133–177
|
|
5. The Anti-Locality of clitic left dislocation
|
179–197
|
|
6. Prolific Domains in the nominal layer
|
199–225
|
|
7. Successive cyclicity revisited
|
227–291
|
|
8. A note on dynamic syntax
|
293–319
|
|
9. Final remarks
|
321–323
|
|
References
|
325–351
|
|
Name index
|
353–357
|
|
Language index
|
359
|
|
Subject index
|
361–369
|
“This book is an insightful, empirically rich and theoretically sophisticated investigation of locality of movement. It is a must read for anyone interested in this important topic.”
Zeljko Boskovic, University of Connecticut
“Grohmann's bold Anti-Locality Hypothesis, defined and richly illustrated in this book, has all the ingredients to become a major focus of theoretical debate in years to come.”
Cedric Boeckx, Harvard University
“Generative Grammarians have established the centrality of locality conditions in grammars. Expressions must be "close" to interact. Grohmann's work proposes (and subtly defends) a curious counterpart to this sort of restriction: close but not too close! This is a very interesting theoretical conjecture, one that fits snugly with leading minimalist intuitions and leads to many interesting empirical consequences. This is highly original and provocative work that is sure to have an impact on how linguists conceive of locality within UG.”
Norbert Hornstein, University of Maryland
Cited by
Cited by other publications
No author info given
2015.
In The Syntax of Multiple-queSentences in Spanish [Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 2],
Abels, Klaus & Ad Neeleman
2012. Linear Asymmetries and the LCA.
Syntax 15:1 ► pp. 25 ff.
Al-Horais, Nasser
2013. The Minimalist Program and its New Insight to the Concept of Universal Grammar.
Journal of Universal Language 14:2 ► pp. 79 ff.
Alexiadou, Artemis
2017.
In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Second Edition,
► pp. 1 ff.
Baier, Nico
2017. Antilocality and Antiagreement.
Linguistic Inquiry 48:2 ► pp. 367 ff.
Baltin, Mark
2012. Deletion versus pro-forms: an overly simple dichotomy?.
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 30:2 ► pp. 381 ff.
BARBIERS, SJEF, OLAF KOENEMAN & MARIKA LEKAKOU
2010. Syntactic doubling and the structure ofwh-chains.
Journal of Linguistics 46:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Barrie, Michael
2010. Noun incorporation as symmetry breaking.
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique 55:3 ► pp. 273 ff.
Barrie, Michael
2011.
In Dynamic Antisymmetry and the Syntax of Noun Incorporation [Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 84],
► pp. 53 ff.
Boeckx, Cedric & Kleanthes K. Grohmann
2007. Remark: Putting Phases in Perspective.
Syntax 10:2 ► pp. 204 ff.
Boeckx, Cedric & Norbert Hornstein
2005. On eliminating d-structure: the case of binominal each.
Syntax 8:1 ► pp. 23 ff.
Boskovic, Zeljko
2005. On the locality of left branch extraction and the structure of NP*.
Studia Linguistica 59:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Bošković, Željko
2008. On the operator freezing effect.
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 26:2 ► pp. 249 ff.
Bošković, Željko
2009. More on the no-DP analysis of article-less languages.
Studia Linguistica 63:2 ► pp. 187 ff.
Bošković, Željko
2014. Now I’m a Phase, Now I’m Not a Phase: On the Variability of Phases with Extraction and Ellipsis.
Linguistic Inquiry 45:1 ► pp. 27 ff.
Bošković, Željko
2016. Getting Really Edgy: On the Edge of the Edge.
Linguistic Inquiry 47:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Bošković, Željko
2017.
In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Second Edition,
► pp. 1 ff.
Branan, Kenyon
2018. Attraction at a Distance: Ā-Movement and Case.
Linguistic Inquiry 49:3 ► pp. 409 ff.
Bruening, Benjamin
2018. CPs Move Rightward, Not Leftward.
Syntax 21:4 ► pp. 362 ff.
Chocano, Gema
2008. Scrambling and the Survive Principle. By Michael T. Putnam. (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 115.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 2007. Pp. ix, 216. Hardcover. €105. doi:10.1017/S1470542708000081.
Journal of Germanic Linguistics 20:3 ► pp. 275 ff.
Clemens, Lauren
2019. Prosodic Noun Incorporation: The Relationship between Prosody and Argument Structure in Niuean.
Syntax 22:4 ► pp. 337 ff.
Cornilescu, Alexandra
2015.
In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2013 [Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory, 8],
► pp. 119 ff.
Cornilescu, Alexandra
2017.
In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Second Edition,
► pp. 1 ff.
Corver, Norbert
2017.
In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Second Edition,
► pp. 1 ff.
De Cat, Cécile
2007. French dislocation without movement.
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 25:3 ► pp. 485 ff.
den Dikken, Marcel & Balázs Surányi
2017. Contrasting Contrastive Left-Dislocation Explications.
Linguistic Inquiry 48:4 ► pp. 543 ff.
Di Sciullo, Anna Maria & Daniela Isac
2008. Movement Chains at the Interfaces.
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique 53:2-3 ► pp. 181 ff.
Emma Ticio, M.
2005. Locality and anti-locality in Spanish DPs.
Syntax 8:3 ► pp. 229 ff.
Erlewine, Michael Yoshitaka
2016. Anti-locality and optimality in Kaqchikel Agent Focus.
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 34:2 ► pp. 429 ff.
Fujii, Tomohiro
2013. Interpreting Thematic Relations Cyclically.
Syntax 16:4 ► pp. 311 ff.
Funakoshi, Kenshi
2012. On Headless XP-Movement/Ellipsis.
Linguistic Inquiry 43:4 ► pp. 519 ff.
Georgi, Doreen
2017. Patterns of Movement Reflexes as the Result of the Order of Merge and Agree.
Linguistic Inquiry 48:4 ► pp. 585 ff.
Giusti, Giuliana & Rossella Iovino
2016. Latin as a split-DP language.
Studia Linguistica 70:3 ► pp. 221 ff.
Grewendorf, Günther
2014.
In Bavarian Syntax [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 220],
► pp. 145 ff.
Grohmann, Kleanthes K.
2003. Successive Cyclicity under (Anti-)Local Considerations.
Syntax 6:3 ► pp. 260 ff.
HADDAD, YOUSSEF A.
2009. Copy Control in Telugu.
Journal of Linguistics 45:1 ► pp. 69 ff.
Haddad, Youssef A.
2011. The syntax of Southern American English personal datives: An anti-locality account.
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique 56:3 ► pp. 403 ff.
Haegeman, Liliane
2014. West flemish verb-based discourse markers and the articulation of the speech act layer.
Studia Linguistica 68:1 ► pp. 116 ff.
Harizanov, Boris & Vera Gribanova
2019. Whither head movement?.
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 37:2 ► pp. 461 ff.
Holmberg, Anders, Michelle Sheehan & Jenneke van der Wal
2019. Movement from the Double Object Construction Is Not Fully Symmetrical.
Linguistic Inquiry 50:4 ► pp. 677 ff.
Hosono, Mayumi
2019. Verb Movement in Narrow Syntax.
Studia Linguistica 73:3 ► pp. 443 ff.
Huang, Nick
2018. Control complements in Mandarin Chinese: implications for restructuring and the Chinese finiteness debate.
Journal of East Asian Linguistics 27:4 ► pp. 347 ff.
Ihsane, Tabea
2013. EnPronominalization in French and the Structure of Nominal Expressions.
Syntax 16:3 ► pp. 217 ff.
ISHIHARA, YUKI
2013. NOMINALIZATION IN THE JAPANESE PREDICATE DOUBLING CONSTRUCTION.
ENGLISH LINGUISTICS 30:1 ► pp. 269 ff.
KIGUCHI, HIROHISA
2007. Construal by Syntactic Operations (N. Hornstein, Move! A Minimalist Theory of Construal).
ENGLISH LINGUISTICS 24:1 ► pp. 162 ff.
Kilbourn-Ceron, Oriana, Heather Newell, Máire B. Noonan & Lisa deMena Travis
2016.
In Morphological Metatheory [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 229],
► pp. 121 ff.
Klævik-Pettersen, Espen
2019. What is Germanic and what is not about Old French V2.
Linguistic Variation 19:1 ► pp. 141 ff.
Kosta, Peter & Diego Gabriel Krivochen
2014.
In Minimalism and Beyond [Language Faculty and Beyond, 11],
► pp. 236 ff.
Krivochen, Diego Gabriel
2016. Tokens vs. Copies: Displacement Revisited.
Studia Linguistica 70:3 ► pp. 250 ff.
KUMAR, CHANDAN
2020. NP/DP Parameter and Classifier Languages: A Case of Magahi.
The Journal of Indian and Asian Studies 01:01 ► pp. 2050005 ff.
Kupula, Mikko
2011. A Phase Extension Approach to Double Object Constructions - Evidence from Modern Greek*.
Studia Linguistica 65:2 ► pp. 147 ff.
Laenzlinger, Christopher
2015.
In Adverbs [Studies in Language Companion Series, 170],
► pp. 207 ff.
Larson, Bradley & Norbert Hornstein
2013. A Note on P-Stranding and Adjunct Extraction from Nominals.
Linguistic Inquiry 44:4 ► pp. 669 ff.
Marelj, Marijana
2011. Bound-Variable Anaphora and Left Branch Condition.
Syntax 14:3 ► pp. 205 ff.
MATSUMOTO, YOSUKE
2013. ON THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF PREPOSITION STRANDING IN ENGLISH.
ENGLISH LINGUISTICS 30:1 ► pp. 151 ff.
Meinunger, André
2009. Leftmost peripheral adverbs and adjectives in German.
The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 12:2 ► pp. 115 ff.
Merchant, Jason
2005. Fragments and ellipsis.
Linguistics and Philosophy 27:6 ► pp. 661 ff.
Ott, Dennis
2014. An Ellipsis Approach to Contrastive Left-Dislocation.
Linguistic Inquiry 45:2 ► pp. 269 ff.
Ott, Dennis
2015. Connectivity in left-dislocation and the composition of the left periphery.
Linguistic Variation 15:2 ► pp. 225 ff.
Ott, Dennis & Mark de Vries
2016. Right-dislocation as deletion.
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 34:2 ► pp. 641 ff.
Panagiotidis, E. Phoevos
2010. REVIEWS - Glyn Hicks, The derivation of anaphoric relations (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 139). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2009. Pp. xii+309..
Journal of Linguistics 46:2 ► pp. 508 ff.
Pankau, Andreas
2018. The Matching Analysis of relative clauses: an argument from antipronominal contexts.
The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 21:2 ► pp. 189 ff.
Pesetsky, David
2017.
In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Second Edition,
► pp. 1 ff.
Phoevos Panagiotidis, E. & Theodore Marinis
2011. Determiner spreading as DP-predication*.
Studia Linguistica 65:3 ► pp. 268 ff.
Putnam, Michael T.
2020.
In New Trends in Language Acquisition Within the Generative Perspective [Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics, 49],
► pp. 3 ff.
Putnam, Michael T. & Marjo van Koppen
2011. All there is to know about the alls-construction.
The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 14:2 ► pp. 81 ff.
Radford, Andrew & Eiichi Iwasaki
2015. On Swiping in English.
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 33:2 ► pp. 703 ff.
Ritter, Elizabeth & Martina Wiltschko
2014. The composition of INFL.
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 32:4 ► pp. 1331 ff.
Schneider-Zioga, Patricia
2007. Anti-agreement, anti-locality and minimality. The syntax of dislocated subjects.
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 25:2 ► pp. 403 ff.
Shushurin, Philip
2018.
In Pronouns in Embedded Contexts at the Syntax-Semantics Interface [Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy, 99],
► pp. 145 ff.
Sichel, Ivy
2018. Anatomy of a Counterexample: Extraction from Relative Clauses.
Linguistic Inquiry 49:2 ► pp. 335 ff.
Simpson, Andrew & Binh Ngo
2018. Classifier syntax in Vietnamese.
Journal of East Asian Linguistics 27:3 ► pp. 211 ff.
SLABAKOVA, ROUMYANA
2015. The effect of construction frequency and native transfer on second language knowledge of the syntax–discourse interface.
Applied Psycholinguistics 36:3 ► pp. 671 ff.
SLABAKOVA, ROUMYANA & MARÍA DEL PILAR GARCÍA MAYO
2015. The L3 syntax–discourse interface.
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 18:2 ► pp. 208 ff.
Struckmeier, Volker
2014. Ja doch wohlC? Modal Particles in German as C-related elements.
Studia Linguistica 68:1 ► pp. 16 ff.
Talić, Aida
2015. Adverb extraction, specificity, and structural parallelism.
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique 60:3 ► pp. 417 ff.
Talić, Aida
2019. Upward P-cliticization, accent shift, and extraction out of PP.
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 37:3 ► pp. 1103 ff.
te Velde, John R.
2017. Temporal adverbs in thekiezdeutschleft periphery: Combining late merge with deaccentuation for v3.
Studia Linguistica 71:3 ► pp. 301 ff.
Thiersch, Craig
2017.
In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Second Edition,
► pp. 1 ff.
van Gelderen, Elly, David K. Barnhart, Kanavillil Rajagopalan, Edward J. Vajda, Kleanthes K. Grohmann & Anthony P. Grant
2006. Reviews.
<i>WORD</i> 57:2-3 ► pp. 249 ff.
Yoshida, Masaya, Tim Hunter & Michael Frazier
2015. Parasitic Gaps licensed by elided syntactic structure.
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 33:4 ► pp. 1439 ff.
Zhang, Niina Ning
2016. Identifying Chinese dependent clauses in the forms of subjects.
Journal of East Asian Linguistics 25:3 ► pp. 275 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 01 june 2020. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
Subjects
BIC Subject: CFK – Grammar, syntax
BISAC Subject: LAN009000 – LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES / Linguistics / General
U.S. Library of Congress Control Number: 2003055681