Academic literature on the topic 'Government-binding theory (Linguistics)'

This thesis deals with two aspects of operators within the framework of Government and Binding theory; (i) how they are assigned their scope, and (ii) how they are licensed. In an attempt to answer these questions, the relation of Move $ alpha$ (such as scrambling, NP-movement, and wh-movement) to the scope of operators and the licensing of wh-elements, negative polarity items, and adverbs are examined. It is argued that scope assignment is dictated by the Scope Principle and the Empty Category Principle. It is also argued that licensing of operators is determined by the Feature-Dependent Item Criterion. These principles and criterion make use of the concept of Government Theory Compatibility, which is built into Relativized Minimality. It is suggested that this concept should be characterized in terms of a set of lexical features. The approach advocated here accounts for the interpretive and distributional behavior of operators without recourse to parameterization of LF principles.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy, 1986.<br>Includes bibliographical references (v. 3, leaves 575-581).<br>This thesis is concerned with developing an account within the Government and Binding (GB) theory of the grammaticality of such structures as (1), and exploring the implications of this account for the theory of empty categories, chains, and scope. The hallmark characteristic of such grammatical S-Structure representations as (1) is that the anaphor is outside the c-command domain of its understood antecedent. The basic anaphoric effect is termed connectivity. 1) [which of each other's friends][did the men see t]? Chapter 1 is a brief overview of the necessary definitions presumed in the thesis, and an outline of the subsequent chapters. Chapter 2 introduces a large body of data which must be treated on a par with (1), and reviews and criticizes several existing proposals which have been made to account for (1). The chapter argues that the binding theory must apply to structures having the essential form of (1). We demonstrate that no treatment which involves lowering the anaphor into the c-command domain of the antecedent via "reconstruction" operations, or involves applying the Binding Theory at a level at which WH movement is not represented, can be maintained. Chapter 3 develops a revision of the binding theory, focusing on Condition A, which is capable of treating all the connectivity data in a unified way. The major formal construct proposed in the chapter is the chain accessibility sequence, essentially a path of nodes through which the potential antecedents for an expression are accessed. The revised binding theory is defined in terms of such sequences; as the name implies, the notion chain plays a prominent role. This approach to connectivity is developed in the spirit of the Path theory of Kayne (1983) and Pesetsky (1982). We also discuss properties of structures of the form of {l), but where the constituent containing the anaphor is predicative in nature. We shall see that the predicative nature of the constituent significantly constrains the possibilities of assigning the anaphor an antecedent. This chapter adopts, and argues in favor of, the Linking theory of binding introduced by Higginbotham (1983). Chapter 4 focuses on the theory of empty categories, arguing that it is desirable to construct the theory so that no empty categories bear binding features (the features[+/- anaphoric] and[+/- pronominal] are thus restricted to overt categories). This proposal, which I term the No Features Hypothesis, departs from the characteristic treatment of ECs in GB theory. The chapter adopts Brody's (1985) proposals concerning the distribution of PRO and NP-trace. We adopt, and later extend, the Local Binding Condition (LBC) on A chains, argued by Rizzi (1982) to constrain the well-formedness of A chains. We reformulate it in terms of Linking theory, as the Chain Obviation Condition (CCC), and argue that it holds of all chain types. This is shown to be a principle with considerable generality, subsuming the LBC, Condition C of the binding theory, and the anti-c-command condition on linking. Adopting the COC, along with the NFH, allows the elimination of the class R-expression from the inventory of binding types. It will be shown that the anti-c-command condition on parasitic gaps derives directly from the CCC, with no stipulations. The chapter concludes with a defense of the proposal that the theory of anaphora must recognize anaphoric dependence and obviation as separate relations (as argued by Lasnik (1976), (1981), and Higgginbotham (1985)). Chapter 5 discusses constraints on the interpretation of sentences in which a quantificational NP is the antecedent of an NP-trace which it does not c-command. These considerations lead us to formulate a constraint on movement operations. The chapter also argues that the operations of WH-movement and QR are strictly ordered in the LF component.<br>by Andrew Barss.<br>Ph.D.

This dissertation investigates, within a Government-Binding framework, the licensing mechanisms which regulate the distribution of sentence-internal constituents. It is proposed that the licensing requirements apply across components, in the spirit of the Projection Principle of Chomsky (1981). Under the extended view of licensing proposed here ("Universal Licensing"), maximal projections must comply with the appropriate licensing requirements at every syntactic level of representation.<br>This allows for a more constrained model of grammar, under which a number of facts follow in a principled way; this is the case particularly with respect to constructions involving null operators. Thus, from the D- and S-Structure conditions on null operator licensing, we derive the cross-linguistic as well as the language-internal distribution of resumptive pronouns. Furthermore, some of the well-known, but so far stipulated, constraints on parasitic gap (PG) constructions are shown to follow from general principles: we explain for instance the fact that PGs must be sanctioned at S-Structure, as well as the inability of adjunct movement to license PGs.<br>The consequences of Universal Licensing on the distribution of PGs are examined with particular reference to adnominal PGs in French genitival relatives. It is shown that the properties displayed by these little-studied ("double dont") constructions, in conjunction with the Universal Licensing Principle, shed significant light on a number of issues, among which the thematic structure of nominals, and the nature of the locality constraints on null operator identification.

Thesis (M.A.)--West Virginia University, 1999.<br>Title from document title page. Document formatted into pages; contains v, 54 p. : ill. Vita. Includes abstract. Includes bibliographical references (p. 51-53).

This thesis explores the connection between linguistic theory, as embodied in a version of the Government - Binding (GB) model of syntax, and the parameter-setting theory of language acquisition. In Chapter 2, it is argued that by incorporating the criterion of epistemological priority, syntactic theory can move closer towards becoming a plausible model of language acquisition. A version of GB theory is developed which adopts this criterion, leading to several modifications, including the derivation of X-bar theory from more "primitive" grammatical sub-components, and a revision of the Projection Principle. This model is converted into a procedure for phrase-structure acquisition, employing sets of Canonical Government Configurations and Percolation Principles to map Case- and θ-relations onto phrase-structure trees. The chapter ends with a discussion of the "missing-subject" stage in the acquisition of English. Chapter 3 concerns auxiliaries. It is argued that parametric variation in auxiliary systems can be reduced to levels of association between INFL and V. The question of irregularity is dealt with through the Designation Convention of Emonds (1985), which makes a distinction between open- and closed- class grammatical elements, and a Parallel Distributed Processing model of learning. The last part of the chapter investigates the learning of the English auxiliary system, and in particular the errors known as "auxiliary overmarking". Chapter 4 investigates the syntax of Subject Auxiliary Inversion (SAI)-type rules. An account of inversion is developed based on the theory of predication, in which inversion-inducing elements are treated as "A'-type" subjects which must be linked to AGR in order to satisfy conditions on Predicate-licensing. A parametrization is developed based on the cross-linguistic examination of SAI-type rules. Chapter 5 concerns the acquisition of SAI. It is argued that there are no invariant "stages" in the development of inversion; rather, a proportion of children misanalyze (WH + contracted auxiliary) sequences as (WH + AGR-clitic) sequences and formulate grammars in which SAI is unnecessary. A "two-tiered" theory of syntactic acquisition is proposed to account for the observed developmental patterns.<br>Arts, Faculty of<br>Linguistics, Department of<br>Graduate