Freezing Effects

XVIII Colloquium on Generative Grammar
Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa (Portugal)
17-19 April 2008
Freezing Effects
Ángel J. Gallego (CLT/UAB) & Juan Uriagereka (UMD)
<angel.gallego@uab.cat>
<juan@umd.edu>
Goals of the talk
1 - Discuss different cases of so-called “freezing (=island) effects”
2 - Reduce Rizzi’s sub-cases (i.e., Criterial Freezing) to Full Interpretation
1. Ways of ‘Clouding’ Chains
Chomsky’s (to appear) controversial analysis: edges are Probe-proof
- SPEC-v* subcase
(1) a.*[CP Of which cari C did [TP [the driver ti]j T [v*P tj v* cause a scandal] ] ]?
b. [CP Of which cari C was [TP [the driver ti]j T [vP v awarded tj a prize] ] ]?
[from Chomsky to appear]
- SPEC-C subcase
(2) a. ??[CP Whoi C do you wonder [CP [which picture of ti]j C Mary bought tj ] ]?
b. ??[CP Whoi C do you wonder [CP [which picture of ti]j C tj is on sale] ]?
[from Lasnik & Saito 1992:102]
(3) Chomsky’s (to appear)
Phase edges trigger a “freezing” effect
ProbeP
rp
Probe
...
v*P
to
DP
v*’
6 3
v*
...
1
XVIII Colloquium on Generative Grammar
Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa (Portugal)
17-19 April 2008
Rizzi (2006) implements the intuition by assuming “Criteria” satisfaction
has a freezing effect
(4) Criterial Freezing (first version)
A phrase meeting a criterion is frozen in place
[from Rizzi 2006:112]
Against ‘too-much’ A-bar checking (see Bošković 2005, Rizzi 2006, inter alii)
(5) a. *[CP Whoi ti thinks [CP that, which problemz, Mary hates tz ] ]?
b. *[CP Which booki C does Bill wonder [CP ti C she read ti ] ]?
(6)
ProbeP
rp
...
ForceP
qy
Force
FocP
qy
XP[F]
Foc’
6 ey
Foc[F]
FinP
wy
...
XP[F]
Torrego’s (1985) data and Rizzi’s (2006) follow-up
(7) [CP De qué autorai C no sabes [CP [qué traducciones ti]j C . . .
of what author not know-2SG what translations
. . . [TP tj han
ganado premios internacionales] ] ]?
(Spanish)
have-3PL won
awards international
‘Which author don’t you know what translated books by have won
international awards?’
[from Torrego 1985:31]
(8) ?[CP Di quale autorez C ti
domandi [CP [quanti
libri tz]i C . . .
of which author CL-you wonder-2SG how-many books
. . . [TP siano stati censurati ti] ] ]
(Italian)
be-3PL been censored
‘Which author do you wonder how many books by have been censored?’
[from Rizzi 2006:114]
Interim summary (1)
In some cases, “Criterial Freezing” effects can be circumvented
2
XVIII Colloquium on Generative Grammar
Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa (Portugal)
17-19 April 2008
Against ‘too-much’ A checking (see Lasnik & Boeckx 2006)
(9) *[CP C [TP Johni T seems [TP ti T is ill ] ] ]
Hyper-raising
Illicit Chains
(10) a. A → A (Hyper-raising)
b. A → A-bar (Improper Movement / Chain Uniformity)
c. A-bar → A (Improper Movement / Chain Uniformity)
d. A-bar → A-bar (Criterial Freezing)
Previous unifying accounts
(11) Anti-Locality (Abels 2003, Bošković 1994; Ghromann 2000; 2003)
Movement [for checking purposes] must be not too local (within the same
relevant domain, be it a phrase or a phase)
(12) Principle of Unambiguous Chain
Chains must be defined unambiguously
[from Boeckx 2003:13]
(13) Anti-Overcrowding Law
Chains/Phrases do not tolerate extra/duplicated members
[from Boeckx 2008:40]
2. Sub-Extraction or Aboutness Base-Generation
(14) [CP De qué autorai C no sabes [CP [qué traducciones ti]j C . . .
of what author not know-2SG what translations
. . . [TP tj han
ganado premios internacionales] ] ]?
(Spanish)
have-3PL won
awards international
‘Which author don’t you know what translated books by have won
international awards?’
[from Torrego 1985:31]
(15) Criterial Freezing (final version)
The Criterial Goal is frozen in place
[from Rizzi to appear]
(16) [CP WHi C . . . [DP RP [ ti ]] . . . ]
(Boeckx 2003)
3
XVIII Colloquium on Generative Grammar
Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa (Portugal)
17-19 April 2008
(17) Two structural patterns
a. [ [Verb DP] PP]
b. [ [Verb [DP PP]]
(18) a. Juan
Juan
‘Juan
b. Juan
Juan
‘Juan
Aboutness
non-Aboutness
sabe [CP que María fuma]
non-Aboutness
know-3SG that María smoke-3SG
knows that María smokes’
sabe [PP de María] [CP que fuma] Aboutness
know-3SG of María
that smoke-3SG
knows about María that she smokes’
(Spanish)
(Spanish)
(19) a. Juan sabe [de María][CP[qué novelas de Cortázar]i ha leído ti] (Spanish)
Juan know-3SG of María what novels by Cortázar have-3SG read
‘About María, Juan knows which novels by Cortázar she has read’
b. *[CP De qué escritori C sabe
Juan [de María] . . .
of what writer
know-3SG Juan of María
. . . [CP [qué novelas ti]j C ha
leído tj] ] ?
(Spanish)
what novels
have-3SG read
‘Which writer does Ana know about Luis which novels by he has read?’
(20) a. [CP [ De qué hijo suyo]i C sabes
que. . .
of what son his
know-2SG that
(Spanish)
. . . ha
leído [CP todo padre [qué novelas ti] ] ]?
have-3SG read
every father what novels
‘Which son of his do you know which novels by has every father read?’
b. (*)[CP [De qué hijo suyo]i C sabes [CP [qué novelas ti] C . . .
of what son his
know-2SG what novels
. . . ha
leído todo padre] ] ?
(Spanish)
have-3SG read every father
‘Which son of his do you know which novels by has every father read?’
A-bar minimality / A-over-A effect
(21) . . . X . . . [α . . . [γ . . . β . . . ] ]
Two cases to consider
(A) . . . X . . . , [α . . . [γ . . . β . . . ][+TOPIC] ][+TOPIC] , . . .
(B) a.
b.
c.
d.
. . . X . . . , [α . . . [γ . . . β . . . ][+FOCUS] ][+TOPIC] , . . .
. . . X . . . , [α . . . [γ . . . β . . . ][+WH] ][+TOPIC] , . . .
. . . X . . . , [α . . . [γ . . . β . . . ][+RELATIVE] ][+TOPIC] , . . .
etc.
4
XVIII Colloquium on Generative Grammar
Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa (Portugal)
17-19 April 2008
- (B) Case
(22) a. *[CP De qué escritori C te
parece [CP C que, [las novelas ti ]j . . .
of what writer
CL-to-you seem-3SG that, the novels,
. . . lo
van
a tj hacer
millonario] ]?
(Spanish)
CL-him go-3PL to
make-INF millionaire
‘Which writer does it seem to you that the novels by are going to make
him rich?’
b. *[CP De qué pintori C te
parece [CP C que, [los cuadros ti ]j, . . .
of what painter CL-to-you seem-3SG that, the paintings,
. . . los
detesto tj ] ]?
(Spanish)
CL-them hate-1SG
‘Which painter does it seem to you that the paintings by I hate?’
[from Gallego 2007:358]
- (A) Case
(23) a. ??[CP De Javier Maríasi, C me
parece [CP C que, [las novelas ti]j . . .
of Javier Marías,
CL-me seem-3SG that the novels
. . . las
han
sobrevalorado tj] ]
(Spanish)
CL-them have-3PL overrated
‘Javier Marías, it seems to me that, the novels by, people have overrated them’
b. *[CP De Scorsesei, C me
parece [CP C que, [muchas películas ti]j . . .
of Scorsese
CL-me seem-3SG that, many movies,
. . . aún no he
visto tj] ]
(Spanish)
yet not have-1SG seen
‘Scorsese, it seems to me that, many movies (by him), I have not seen (any) yet’
(24) a. Ana, a María, el secreto, se
lo
dijo.
Ana to María the secret CL-her CL-it told-3SG
‘Ana, to María, the secret, she already told’
b. A María, Ana, el secreto, se
lo
dijo.
to María Ana the secret CL-her CL-it told-3SG
‘To María, Ana, the secret, she already told’
c. El secreto, Ana, a María, se
lo
dijo.
the secret Ana to María CL-her CL-it told-3SG
‘The secret, Ana, to María, she already told’
(Spanish)
(Spanish)
(Spanish)
In situ sub-extraction
(25) a. ?[CP Whoi C did you buy [what pictures of ti] ] ] ]?
b. [CP Which actressi C did you buy [which pictures of ti] ] ] ]?
Interim summary (2)
a. When the relevant verb is used, “Criterial Freezing” effects cannot be
circumvented, regardless of the featural nature of the displaced
constituents.
b. Leaving the would be island in situ does help circumvent “Criterial
Freezing.”
5
XVIII Colloquium on Generative Grammar
Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa (Portugal)
17-19 April 2008
3. “Criterial Freezing” under “Full Interpretation”
“Criterial Freezing” Redux
(26) The EPP position of a phase Ph is assigned INT(erpretation).
[from Chomsky 2001:33]
(27) Principle of Unambiguous Chain
Chains must be defined unambiguously
[from Boeckx 2003:13]
(28) Principle of Full Interpretation
Convergence condition requiring elements to have a uniform
(appropriate) interpretation at the interfaces
[form Chomsky 1986b; 1993]
Full Interpretation at PF and LF
(29) [CP C [TP <John> T was [vP v arrested <John>] ] ]
(see Nunes 2004)
(30) a. Which pictures of himself and herself did John and Mary think I saw ?
b. *Which pictures of himself and herself did John think Mary saw?
A formal or an interpretive effect?
(31) a. Mi
domandavo [CP quale RAGAZZAi C avessero scelto ti] . . .
CL-me wonder-1SG which GIRL
had-3PL chosen
. . . non quale ragazzo.
(Italian)
not which boy
‘I wonder which GIRL they had chosen, not which boy’
domandavo [CP ti avessero suelto ti] . . .
b. *[CP Quale RAGAZZAi C mi
which GIRL
CL-me wonder-1SG
had-3PL chosen
. . . non quale ragazzo.
(Italian)
not which boy
‘Which GIRL do I wonder had chosen, not which boy?
[from Rizzi 2006:113]
(32) *Me
pregunto [CP han
elegido a qué CHICA] . . .
CL-me wonder-1SG have-3PL chosen to what girl
no a qué chico.
not to what boy
‘I wonder what GIRL they have chosen, not what boy’
(Spanish)
6
XVIII Colloquium on Generative Grammar
Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa (Portugal)
17-19 April 2008
4. Conclusions
-
This presentation has argued that the data noted by Lasnik & Saito
(1992), in fact first discussed by Esther Torrego, are ruled out due to
interface constraints (ultimately related to Chomsky’s MST/PFI), not
freezing effects of the A-bar type.
-
The fact that minimalism (can) offer an interface (and not featurechecking) driven way to formulate what Rizzi calls Criterial Freezing is
–we believe– a much welcome result. This is so because it reinforces
the minimalist thesis that descriptive technology associated to the socalled “first factor” (UG) can be recast in “third-factor” terms.
REFERENCES
Abels, Klaus. 2003. Successive Cyclicity, Anti-Locality, and Adposition Stranding, PhD
dissertation, UConn.
Boeckx, Cedric. 2003. Islands and Chains. Stranding as Resumption. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
Boeckx, Cedric. 2006. Bare Syntax. Ms., Harvard University. [to appear in UOP]
Boeckx, Cedric. 2007. Understanding Minimalist Syntax. Lessons from Locality in
Long-Distance Dependencies. Malden: Blackwell.
Boeckx, Cedric. in press. Aspects of the Syntax of Agreement. London: Routledge.
Boeckx, Cedric & Youngmi Jeong. 2004. The fine structure of intervention in syntax.
In Issues in Current Linguistic Theory: A Festschrift for Hong Bae Lee, ed. by
Ch. Kwon & W. Lee. Seould: Kyungchin, 83-116.
Bošković, Željko. 1994. D-Structure, θ-Criterion, and movement into θ-positions,
Linguistic Analysis 24: 247-286.
Bošković, Željko. 2005. On the Operator Freezing Effect. Ms., University of
Connecticut.
Bošković, Željko & Daiko Takahasi. 1998. Scrambling and Last resort. Linguistic
Inquiry 29: 347-66.
Broeckhuis, Hans. 2005. Extraction from subjects: some remarks on Chomsky's “On
phases.” In Organizing Grammar: Linguistic Studies in Honor of Henk van
Riemsdijk, ed. by H. Broekhuis et al. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 5968.
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris
Publications.
Chomsky, Noam. 1986a. Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, Noam. 1986b. Knowledge of Language. Its Nature, Origin, and Use. New
York: Praeger.
Chomsky, Noam. 1993. A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory. In The View from
Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, ed. by K.
Hale & S. J. Keyser. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1-52.
Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist Inquiries: The Framework. In Step by Step. Essays
on Minimalist Syntax in Honour of Howard Lasnik, R. Martin, ed. by D.
Michaels et al. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 89-155.
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by Phase. In Ken Hale: A Life in Language, ed. by
M. Kenstowicz. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1-52.
Chomsky, Noam. 2005. Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry 36: 1-22.
Chomsky, Noam. 2007. Approaching UG from below. In Interfaces + Recursion =
Language? Chomsky’s minimanlism and the view from syntax-semantics, ed.
by U. Sauerland & H-M. Gärtner. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1-30.
Chomsky, Noam. to appear. On Phases. In Foundational Issues in Linguistic Theory,
C. ed. by Otero et al. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7
XVIII Colloquium on Generative Grammar
Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa (Portugal)
17-19 April 2008
Chomsky, Noam & Howard Lasnik. 1993. The Theory of Principles and Parameters. In
Syntax: Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung - An
International Handbook of Contemporary Research (vol. I), ed. by J. Jacobs et
al. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 506-570.
Etxepare, Ricardo & Myriam Uribe-Etxebarria. 2005. In-situ wh-phrases in Spanish:
locality and quantification, Recherches linguistiques de Vincennes 33.
L'architecture propositionnelle, la syntaxe de la périphérie gauche.
Gallego, Ángel J. 2007. Phase Theory and Parametric Variation, PhD dissertation,
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.
Grohmann, Kleanthes. 2000. Prolific peripheries: a radical view from the left, Ph.D.
Dissertation, UMD.
Grohmann, Kleantes. 2003. Prolific domains, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hale, Ken & Samuel J. Keyser. 2002. Prolegomenon to a Theory of Argument
Structure, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hornstein, Norbert. 2001. Move! A Minimalist Theory of Construal. Oxford:
Blackwell.
Kayne, Richard. 1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kayne, Richard. 2002. On some Prepositions that Look DP-internal: English of and
French de, Catalan Journal of Linguistics 1: 71-115.
Lasnik, Howard. 1999. Chains of arguments. In Working minimalism, ed. by S. Epstein
& N. Hornstein, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 189-215.
Lasnik, Howard. 2001. Subjects, objects, and the EPP. In Objects and other subjects,
ed. by W. Davies & S. Dubinsky. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 103-121
Lasnik, Howard & Cedric Boeckx. 2006. Long NP-Movement. In The Blackwell
Companion to Syntax (vol. 3), ed. by M. Everaert & H. van Riemsdijk. Oxford:
Blackwell, 109-130.
Lasnik, Howard & Mamoru Saito. 1992. Move α: conditions on its applications and
outputs, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Lasnik, Howard & Juan Uriagereka (with Cedric Boeckx). 2005. A Course in Minimalist
Syntax. Foundations and Prospects. Oxford: Blackwell.
Nunes, Jairo. 2004. Linearization of Chains and Sideward Movement, Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press.
Rizzi, Luigi. 1990. Relativized Minimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Rizzi, Luigi. 2004. Locality and Left Periphery. In Structures and Beyond. The
Cartography of Syntactic Structures (vol. 3), ed. by A. Belletti. Oxford, New
York: Oxford University Press, 223-251.
Rizzi, Luigi. 2006. On the Form of Chains: Criterial Positions and ECP Effects. In WhMovement: Moving on, ed. by L. Cheng & N. Corver, Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press, 97-133.
Rizzi, Luigi. to appear. On Some Properties of Criterial Freezing. In The
Complementiser Phase: subjects and wh-dependencies, ed. by E. Phoevos
Panagiotidis, Oxford, New York: OUP.
Rizzi, Luigi & Ur Slonshky. 2007. Strategies of Subject Extraction. In Interfaces +
Recursion = Language? Chomsky’s minimanlism and the view from syntaxsemantics, ed. by U. Sauerland & H-M. Gärtner. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter,
115-160.
Starke, Michael. 2001. Move Dissolves into Merge: A Theory of Locality. Doctoral
dissertation. University of Geneva.
Takahashi, Daiko. 1994. Minimality of Movement. Doctoral dissertation, University of
Connecticut.
Torrego, Esther. 1985. On Empty Categories in Nominals. Ms., U.Mass Boston.
8