Cover not available
Part of
Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 10: Selected papers from 'Going Romance' 28, Lisbon
Edited by Ernestina Carrilho, Alexandra Fiéis, Maria Lobo and Sandra Pereira
[Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 10] 2016
► pp. 211–232

EPP and ECP revisited

The role of labeling

| University of Geneva, University of Siena

In the GB framework, EPP and ECP are stated as two independent principles, but they both attribute a special status to the subject position of clauses: subjects are obligatory, and they are not possible extraction sites (unless special conditions are met). This common core suggests the possibility of establishing a closer link between the two properties (Chomsky 2015, Rizzi 2015b). In this paper I would like to revisit EPP and ECP in terms of certain cartographic assumptions on clause structure, the notion of criterial freezing, and the possibility of deriving the freezing effects from labeling.

Keywords: cartography, criteria, ECP, EPP, freezing effects, labeling, subjects, syntax
Published online: 8 December 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/rllt.10.11riz
References
Belletti, Adriana
1990 Generalized Verb Movement. Turin: Rosenberg & Sellier.Google Scholar
2001 “Inversion as focalization”. In Subject Inversion in Romance and the Theory of Universal Grammar, ed. by Aafke Hulk and Jean-Yves Pollock, 60–90. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2004 “Aspects of the Low IP Area”. In The Structure of CP and IP: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. 2, ed. by Luigi Rizzi, 16–51. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2009 Structures and Strategies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Belletti Adriana, Elisa Bennati and Antonella Sorace
2007 “Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: evidence from near native Italian”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 25 (4): 657–689. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berthélot, Frédérique
2016 Doctoral Dissertation. University of Geneva.Google Scholar
Bianchi, Valentina and Cristiano Chesi
2012 “Subject Islands and the Subject Criterion”. in Enjoy Linguistics! Papers offered to Luigi Rizzi on the occasion of his 60th birthday , Electronic Festschrift, [URL].
Bošković, Želiko
2008 “On the Operator Freezing Effects”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26: 455–496. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bresnan, Joan
1976 “On the form and functioning of transformations”. Linguistic Inquiry 7: 3–40.Google Scholar
Calabrese, Andrea
1986 “Some Properties of the Italian Pronominal System: An Analysis Based on the Notion of Thema as Subject of Predication”. In Tema-Rema in Italiano, ed. by H. Stammerjohann, 25–36. Tuebingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna
2004 “Towards a cartography of subject positions”. In The structure of CP and IP: The cartography of syntactic structures, Vol. 2, ed. by Luigi Rizzi, 115–165. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
1981 Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
1995 The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2000 “Minimalist inquiries”. In Step by step: Minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, ed. by R. Martin, D. Michaels and J. Uriagereka, 89–155. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2013 “Problems of Projection”. In Lingua, 130, Special Issue “Core Ideas and Results in Syntax”: 33–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 “Problems of Projection: Extensions”. In Structures, strategies and beyond – Studies in honour of Adriana Belletti, ed. by E. Di Domenico, C. Hamann and S. Matteini, 3–16. John Benjamins: Amsterdam. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam and Howard Lasnik
1977 “Filters and Control”. Linguistic Inquiry 8: 425–504.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo
1999 Adverbs and Inflectional Heads. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, Samuel D., Hisatsugu Kitahara and T. Daniel Seely
2015 “What do we wonder is not syntactic?” In Explorations in Maximizing Syntactic Minimization, Chapter 11, ed. by Samuel D. Epstein, Hisatsuguru Kitahara and T. Daniel Seely, 222–240. Oxford: Routledge.Google Scholar
Grewendorf, Guenther, and Wolfgang Sternefeld
(eds.) 1990 “Introduction.” In Scrambling and Barriers. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koopman, Hilda and Dominique Sportiche
1982 “Variables and the Bijection Principle”. The Linguistic Review 2: 139–160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lasnik, Howard and Mamoru Saito
1992 Move Alpha, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Manzini, M. Rita and Leonardo M. Savoia
2005 I dialetti italiani e romanci. Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso,Google Scholar
Moro, Andrea
2000 Dynamic Antisymmetry. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Nicolis, Marco
2005 On pro Drop, Doctoral dissertation, University of Siena.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, David
1970 Deep and Surface Structure Constraints in Syntax. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Poletto, Cecilia
2000 The Higher Functional Field. Evidence from Northern Italian Dialects. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi
1982 Issues in Italian Syntax. Dordrecht: Foris Publications. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1986 “Null Objects in Italian and the Theory of pro ”. Linguistic Inquiry, 17.3: 501–557.Google Scholar
1990 Relativized Minimality. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1997 “The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery”. In Elements of Grammar, ed. by Liliane Haegeman, 281–337, Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004 “Locality and Left Periphery”. In Structures and Beyond. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. 3, ed. by Adriana Belletti, 223–251. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2006 “On the Form of Chains: Criterial Positions and ECP Effects”. In On Wh Movement, ed. by L. Cheng, N. Corver, 97–133. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2011 “On Some Properties of Criterial Freezing”. In The Complementizer Phrase, ed. by E.P. Panagiotidis, 17–32. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2015a “Cartography, Criteria, and Labeling”. In Beyond Functional Sequence- The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol 10, ed. by U. Shlonsky, 314–338. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015b “Notes on Labeling and Subject Positions”. In Structures, strategies and beyond – Studies in honour of Adriana Belletti, ed. by E. Di Domenico, C. Hamann and S. Matteini, 17–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 “Labeling, maximality, and the head – phrase distinction”. The Linguistic Review 33 (1): 103–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi and Ur Shlonsky
2007 “Strategies of Subject Extraction”. In Interfaces + Recursion = Language? Chomsky's Minimalism and the View from Syntax-Semantics, ed. by H.-M. Gärtner and Uli Sauerland, 115–160. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi and Guglielmo Cinque
2016 “Functional categories and syntactic theory”, Annual Review of Linguistics, 2: 139–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi and Giuliano Bocci
2015 “The left periphery of the clause – Primarily illustrated for Italian”, to appear in the Blackwell Companion to Syntax, II edition.Google Scholar
Shlonsky, Ur
2014 “Subject positions, subject extraction, EPP and the Subject Criterion”. In Locality, ed. by E. Aboh, M.T. Guasti, I. Roberts, 58–85. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sobin, Nicolas
2002 “The Comp-trace effect, the adverb effect and minimal CP”. Journal of Linguistics 38, 527–560. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stowell, Timothy
1981 Origins of Phrase Structure. PhD dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Felser, Claudia & Janna-Deborah Drummer
2022. Binding Out of Relative Clauses in Native and Non-native Sentence Comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 51:4 ► pp. 763 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2021. Romance Interrogative Syntax [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 266], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 march 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.