Lecture 6 ~ More on X-bar Phrases and Argument/Modifiers
Syntax I~ 330 02.20.09 Moulton
1. The trials of one-replacement
NP {(D)/(NP’s)} N’ N’ N’ PP
N’ AP N’
N’ N (PP) (CP) -- I have added a PP here in anticipation…
(1) There are two blue books on the shelf.
ME: Can you get me the blue book off the shelf? YOU: There are two. Which one?
ME: The one with a bookmark.
“one” = “blue book” = N’1
therefore: there must be a tree that puts blue and book together to the exclusion of with a bookmark.
Our PSRs allow that. 1 N’ N’ PP 2 N’ AP N’
(2) There are two books with a bookmark on the shelf.
ME: Can you get me the book with a bookmark off the shelf. YOU: There are two. Which one?
ME: The blue one.
“one” = book with book mark” = N’
therefore: there must be a tee that puts book and with a bookmark together to the exclusion of blue. Our PSRs allow that. 1 N’ AP N’
2 N’ N’ PP
Now for the messy part.
(3) There are two blue books on the shelf. (One of these is a book of riddles). ME: Can you get me the blue book off the shelf?
YOU: There are two. Which one? ME: *The one of riddles.
“one” ≠ “blue book”
1
Therefore, there is no tree that putS blue together with book to the exclusion of of riddles.
Of riddles, then, must be introduced by the N’ N PP rule, since that will prevent there from being a constituent that is blue book. (I.e. this rule is intrinsically – necessarily, by its design – ordered wrt (must apply “after”) all the N’ … N’ … rules.
This is what you should take away from one replacement. Certain PPs in noun phrases cannot be attached higher than adjectives (or other PPs). These ones are as low as you can go…attached below the smallest/lowest N’.
Now for the skepticism:
(4) There are two books on the shelf.
ME: Can you get me the book off the shelf? YOU: There are two. Which one?
ME: ?The one of riddles.
If this is ok – and I agree it might be – then what do we say?
An Answer:
One can replace just N.
But one cannot replace non-constituents, and this is where the real point of all this is.
In blue book of riddles there is NO TREE that allows us to put blue and book together to the exclusion of of riddles, that’s why one can never replace blue book and leave of riddles.
A side note:
I think there are cases where one replacement definitely never lets one replace just an N…we have to look to nouns that have PPs after them which are pretty much identical to their related verbs.
(5) *I will listen to a long explanation of this problem, only if you give a short one of that problem.
Something must tell us that one cannot replace explanation and leave that problem. This would follow if one cannot replace just N.
In sum: we have evidence that of riddles, and of that problem are attached lower (and must be!) than with a bookmark and blue and short.
2. What’s the difference: Argument vs. Modifier
Of riddles, of this problem are arguments (of book and explanation, respectively) With a bookmark, blue, short are modifiers
These terms – especially when it comes to things that go with nouns – are very slippery. We’ll see things get a little easier with verbs. Let’s assume that we have a handle on the difference in meaning here…(we don’t) … and then use these two PPs as further tests for X-bar phrase structures.
This makes several predictions given our X-bar theory of NP:
i. Only one Argument per head, but recursively many modifiers:
(6) a. *I read the book of riddles of poems.
b. I read the book with a red cover of high value on the bookshelf. (note: some modifier PPs have of)
ii. Argument > Modifier:
(7) a. I read the book of riddles with a bookmark.
b. *I read the book with a bookmark of riddles. (only good if the bookmark has riddles)
iii. Modifiers can occur in any order
(8) a. I read the book with a bookmark with a red cover. b. I read the book with a read cover with a bookmark.
iv No conjoining modifiers with arguments
(9) a. the book of poems and of riddles.
b. the book with a red cover and with a bookmark in it. c. *the book of poems and with a red cover.
You cannot conjoin arguments and modifiers and then make that conjunction go with the noun – the conjoined phrases couldn’t be both a sister to the head and a sister to the X-bar level.
More on argument/modifier distinctions in noun phrases: nouns related to verbs:
(10)
a. student [of Physics]
b. a student [with long hair]
(11)
a. i. He is [a student of Physics].
ii. = He is [studying Physics].
b. i. He is [a student with long hair].
ii.
≠
He is [studying long hair].
Extraposition
Adjuncts are less tightly bound to the head noun than complements. This can be seen by the fact
that it is possible to extrapose adjuncts PPs but not possible to extrapose complement PPs.
Preposing
Complements and Adjuncts behave differently with respect to preposing.
(13)
a. [What branch of Physics] is Jack a student of?
b. * [What kind of hair] is Paco a student with?
(Note that Complements and Adjuncts go in opposite directions with respect Extraposition and
Preposing.)
Co-occurrence Restrictions
Heads place significant restrictions (i.e.
subcategorise
) on what can appear as their complement.
(14)
Arguments
a. a student of Physics
b. * a boy of Physics
c. * a girl of Physics
d. * a teenager of Physics
e. * a goth of Physics
No similar restrictions are imposed on adjuncts.
(15)
Modifiers
a. a student with long hair
b. a boy with long hair
c. a girl with long hair
d. a teenager with long hair
e. a goth with long hair
Generalization: heads are more closely related to their complements than to their adjuncts.
Subcategorization restrictions hold only between a head and its complement, not between a head
and its adjuncts.
3. Verb Phrases
Analogous to one-replacement, there are several process that allow certain portions of the verb phrase to be replaced. The conditions under which this happens looks a lot like one-replacement. There are several versions of verb replacement.
i. Do so (too) – replaces V’ and but not V.
(16) John ate the soup quickly, and Mary did so slowly. Do so = ate the soup = V’
(17) *John dropped the soup, after Mary did so the tableware.
So: do so cannot replace the part of the V that doesn’t include the soup/the tableware
ii. Ellipsis. The other is silence replacement test for V’ involves not a word, but silence, which will be designated with “Δ” in what follows. This process is called VP (or V’) ellipsis.
(18) a. Although Sally shouldn’t Δ, Jerry must leave town. Δ = “leave town”
b. Although Sally can carelessly Δ, Jerry must carefully read Donne. Δ = “read Donne”
c. Because Jerry frantically read Aspects after dinner, Sally did Δ just before class. Δ = “frantically read Aspects”
(19) a. *Although Sally shouldn’t Δ Chicago, Jerry must leave New York. Δ = “leave”
b. * Although Sally didn’t Δ that she was tired, Jerry said that he would sleep. Δ = “say”
c. * Although Sally didn’t Δ about George, Jerry will carelessly talk about Sal. Δ = “carelessly talk”
My favorite one:
(20) I remembered Tuesday Friday. I did so Friday.
I did so Tuesday Friday.
So sometimes NPs can sit outside the smallest V’. (We won’t write this in our PSRs)
What’s the difference: Friday is a modifier (“when” the remembering happened); Tuesday is an argument (“what” was remembered).
So we should change these rules to:
