Cover not available
Part of
Minimalism and Beyond: Radicalizing the interfaces
Edited by Peter Kosta, Steven L. Franks, Teodora Radeva-Bork and Lilia Schürcks
[Language Faculty and Beyond 11] 2014
► pp. 169–194

Chains in Minimalism

| Yokohama National University
| University of Maryland
This paper considers how the system identifies multiple occurrences of a syntactic object α as a chain, a set of copies. For Chomsky (1995, 2000, 2001), copies can arise only by movement (internal merge); lexical items introduced by external merge are stipulated to be distinct tokens, coded by indexation, or by introducing some other special concept of numeration, which violates the inclusiveness condition. We argue that this type/token dichotomy is unnecessary and that copies can be distinguished from repetitions in terms of syntactic context alone. This yields interesting situations where two arguments introduced by external merge may also be recognized as a chain, and we propose that obligatory control and parasitic gaps should be analyzed in exactly these terms.
Published online: 24 September 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.11.07mar
References (35)
References
Bošković, Željko and Nunes, Jairo. 2007. “The copy theory of movement: A view from PF.” In The Copy Theory of Movement, Norbert Corver and Jairo Nunes (eds), 13–74. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bowers, John. 2008. “On reducing control to movement.” Syntax 11: 125–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1982. Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government and Binding. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2000. “Minimalist inquiries: The framework.” In Step by Step: Essays on Minimalism in Honor of Howard Lasnik, Roger Martin, David Michaels and Juan Uriagereka (eds), 89–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2001. “Derivation by phase.” In Ken Hale: A Life in Linguistics, Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2008. “On phases.” In Foundational Issues in Linguistic Theory: Essays in Honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud, Robert Freidin, Carlos P. Otero, Maria Luisa Zubizarreta (eds), 133–166. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2013. “Problems of projection.” Lingua 130: 33–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam and Lasnik, Howard. 1977. “Filters and control.” Linguistic Inquiry 8: 425–504.Google Scholar
. 1993. “The theory of principles and parameters.” In An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, Joachim Jacobs, Arnim Von Stechow, Wolfgang Sternefeld and Theo Vennemann (eds), 506–569. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Citko, Barbara. 2005. “On the nature of merge: External merge, internal merge, and parallel merge.” Linguistic Inquiry 36: 475–497. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Collins, Chris. 1997. Local Economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Collins, Chris and Stabler, Edward. 2011. “A formalization of minimalist syntax.” Unpublished manuscript.
Engdahl, Elizabeth. 1984. “Parasitic gaps.” Linguistics and Philosophy 6: 5–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grinder, John. 1970. “Super equi-NP deletion.” In Papers from the Sixth Regional Meeting - Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago Linguistic Society (ed.), 297–317. University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Hale, Kenneth and Keyser, Samuel Jay. 1993. “On argument structure and the lexical expression of grammatical relations.” In The View from Building 20: Essays in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, Kenneth Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser (eds), 53–110. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hornstein, Norbert. 1998. “Movement and chains.” Syntax 1 (2): 99–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1999. “Movement and control.” Linguistic Inquiry 30: 69–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kasai, Hironobu. 2010. “Parasitic gaps under multiple dominance.” English Linguistics 27 (2): 235–269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kitahara, Hisatsugu. 2000. “Two (or more) syntactic categories vs. multiple occurrences of one.” Syntax 3 (3): 151–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kobele, Gregory. 2006. “Generating Copies: An Investigation into Structural Identity in Language and Grammar.” Ph.D. dissertation, UCLA.Google Scholar
Lasnik, Howard and Fiengo, Robert. 1974. “Complement object deletion.” Linguistic Inquiry 5: 535–571.Google Scholar
Martin, Roger. 1996. “A Minimalist Theory of PRO and Control.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
. 2001. “Null case and the distribution of PRO.” Linguistic Inquiry 32: 141–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, Roger and Uriagereka, Juan. 2008. “Competence for preferences.” In Gramatika Jaietan: Patxi Goenagaren Omenez (Grammar Festival: A Tribute to Patxi Goenaga), Xabier Artiagoitiak and Joseba Lakarrak (eds), 561–572. Bilbao: University of the Basque Country.Google Scholar
. 2013. “Equi redux.” In Deep Insights, Broad Perspectives: Essays in Honor of Mamoru Saito, Yoichi Miyamoto, Daiko Takahashi, Hideki Maki, Masao Ochi and Koji Sugisaki, Asako Uchibori (eds), 292–308. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar
Mercier, Romain, Kawai, Yoshikazu and Errington, Jeff. 2013. “Excess membrane synthesis drives a primitive mode of cell proliferation.” Cell 152 (5): 997–1007. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nunes, Jairo. 2004. Linearization of Chains and Sideward Movement. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, Peter. 1967. The Grammar of English Predicate Complement Constructions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
San Martin, Itziar and Uriagereka, Juan. 2002. “Infinitival complementation in Basque.” In Erramu Boneta: A Festschrift for Rudolf P. G. de Rijk, Xabier Artiagoitia, Patxi Goenaga and Joseba Lakarra (eds), 597–610. Bilbao: University of the Basque Country.Google Scholar
Uriagereka, Juan. 1997. “Formal and substantive elegance in the minimalist program.” In The Role of Economy Principles in Linguistic Theory, Chris Wilder, Hans-Martin Gärtner and Manfred Bierwisch (eds), 170–204. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
. 2008. Syntactic Anchors. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. Spell-Out and the Minimalist Program. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Williams, Edwin. 1980. “Predication.” Linguistic Inquiry 11: 208–238.Google Scholar
Zhou, Enhua H., Martinez, Fernando D. and Fredberg, Jeffrey J. 2013. “Cell rheology: Mush rather than machine.” Nature Materials 12: 184–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Chomsky, Noam
2024. Genuine explanation. In Rich Descriptions and Simple Explanations in Morphosyntax and Language Acquisition, ► pp. 15 ff. DOI logo
Mizuguchi, Manabu
2019. Ambiguous Labeling and Full Interpretation. Studia Linguistica 73:3 ► pp. 563 ff. DOI logo
Krivochen, Diego Gabriel
2016. Tokens vs. Copies: Displacement Revisited. Studia Linguistica 70:3 ► pp. 250 ff. DOI logo
Krivochen, Diego Gabriel
2023. Towards a theory of syntactic workspaces: neighbourhoods and distances in a lexicalised grammar. The Linguistic Review 40:2 ► pp. 311 ff. DOI logo
Rouveret, Alain
2015. Références bibliographiques. In Arguments minimalistes, DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 october 2024. 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.