[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.In addition, discuss how the shell analysis of nominals briefly sketched in§9.9 could handle the syntax of the the following nominals:21 the return of the president from Ohio22 the president s return from Ohio23 the unwillingness of the chairman to admit responsibility24 the chairman s unwillingness to admit responsibility25 the decision by the chairman to admit responsibility26 the enemy s surrender of the city to the allies27 the surrender of the city to the allies by the enemy28 the city s surrender to the allies by the enemy29 the judge s instruction to the jury to acquit the defendant30 the withdrawal of troops from the occupied territories by the IsraelisIn relation to the merger of verbs and nouns with their internal arguments, assume that internal argumentsare canonically projected within VP/NP in the hierarchical order given by the Thematic Hierarchy below:31 THEME > other internal arguments > AGENT by-phrase argument > clausal argumentwhere > =  is projected higher up in the VP/NP structure than.This means that the first internal argument 262to be merged with a verb (as its complement) will be the lowest one on the hierarchy, and the second to bemerged (as its specifier) will be the second lowest  and so on.Finally, discuss the nature of the errormade with the italicised nominal by a Japanese learner of English who produced the following sentence:32 In this chapter, I would like to review the Rizzi s hypothesisHelpful hintsIn 11, take beyond reasonable doubt to be a PP which functions as an adjunct, and don t concern yourselfwith its internal structure.(In relation to this sentence and others, you might want to consider the issue ofwhether the relevant structures provide us with evidence about whether adjuncts adjoin to intermediate ormaximal projections.) In 11 and 12, take the that-clause to be a CP but don t concern yourself with itsinternal structure.In 21-24, assume that a THEME argument (like the president in 21/22) and anEXPERIENCER argument (like the chairman in 23/24) can be projected into the syntax either as a PPintroduced (and assigned accusative case) by the transitive preposition of, or as a DP containing anunvalued case feature.In 23/24/25/29, take the infinitival clause to admit responsibility/to acquit thedefendant to be a CP with a null complementiser and a null PRO subject, but don t concern yourself withthe internal structure of the relevant CP.In structures like 27/28/30, assume that where a noun has threeinternal arguments, two of them serve as specifiers to the same head (the one which is higher on thethematic hierarchy being positioned above the other), so that heads may have multiple specifiers (assuggested by Chomsky 1995).Model answer for 1The verb increase can be used not only as an transitive verb in sentences such as 1 above, but also as anintransitive verb in sentences such as:(i) The price will increase to 30 dollarsAccordingly, we can take increase to be an ergative predicate which has much the same syntax as the verbroll discussed in the main text.This would mean that 1 is derived as follows.The verb increase mergeswith its PP complement to 30 dollars to form the V-bar increase to 30 dollars; this V-bar in turn mergeswith the DP the price to form the VP (ii) below:(ii) VPDP V 'the priceV PPincrease to 30 dollarsIn accordance with the Thematic Hierarchy in 31, the THEME argument the price in (ii) occupies a higherposition within the structure than the GOAL argument to 30 dollars.On Chomsky s account of ergativestructures, the VP in (ii) subsequently merges with a causative light-verb ø with an external AGENTargument (= they).The light verb is -complete and hence serves as a probe, identifying the price as anactive goal (by virtue of its unvalued case-feature), and assigning it accusative case in accordance with(92) in the main text.Because the light-verb is affixal, the verb increase adjoins to it, so that at the end ofthe vP cycle we have the structure shown below:(iii) vP 263PRN v 'theyv VPø+increaseDP V 'the priceV PPincrease to 30 dollarsThe vP in (iii) is then merged with a T constituent containing will, and this assigns nominative case to thesubject they (since the two match in respect of their -features, albeit those of will are invisible).Since Thas an [EPP] feature, it triggers raising of the subject they to spec-TP [ Pobierz caÅ‚ość w formacie PDF ]