Sideward Movement of Subjects in the Past Participle Clauses: A Minimalist Approach

Anoushe, Mazdak Anoushe

doi:10.22059/jolr.2016.59411

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Mazdak Anoushe Anoushe

Assistant Professor of General Linguistics, Terhan University

https://doi.org/10.22059/jolr.2016.59411

Abstract

Once DS is abandoned in the Minimalist framework and structure building is carried out by merge, multiple root syntactic objects in a single derivational step are not only allowed in principle, but must indeed be employed in some derivations in order for the extension condition to be satisfied. The crucial aspect of this theoretical model is that it permits instances of sideward movement, whereby a given constituent moves from a syntactic object K to an independent syntactic object L. Following Hornstein and Nunes (2014), the present study examines the sideward movement of the subject in the Persian past participle clauses assuming that these non-finite adverbial adjuncts hang below the vP of main clauses. As in these structures the subjects of the adjunct clauses are understood as being the same as the subjects of the matrix clauses, it will be argued that the head T in this language has a strong EPP feature that triggers movement of an overt or covert subject into its Specifier. Based on these assumptions, a DP has to move sideways from the subject position of the participle clause to merge with the main vP allowing the external theta-role of the matrix verb to be discharged. In the next step, the same DP moves upward to the Specifier of TP to satisfy the EPP feature of the main clause. Sideward movement also provides an escape hatch for the subject to have its case checked. Were this constituent not to move, the derivation would crash at LF as it could not get its uninterpretable case feature checked within the adjunct clause.

Keywords

References

انوری، حسن و حسن احمدی گیوی (1367). دستور زبان فارسی 2، ویرایش دوم. تهران: فاطمی.

انوری، حسن و یوسف عالی عباس‌آباد (1385). فرهنگ درست‌نویسی سخن. تهران: سخن.

انوشه، مزدک (1389). رویکردی مشخصه‌بنیاد به فرایندهای مبتداسازی و تأکید در زبان فارسی. پژوهش‌های زبانی. 1(1): 1-28.

درزی، علی و شجاع تفکری رضایی (1389). پوچ‌واژه در فارسی. پژوهش‌های زبان‌شناسی، 2: 57-73.

درزی، علی و مزدک انوشه (1389). حرکت فعل اصلی در فارسی. زبان‌پژوهشی، 2(3): 21-55.

صحرایی، رضا و رقیه کاظمی‌نهاد (1385). تأملی در ساخت مجهول فارسی امروز. مجلۀ دانشکدۀ ادبیات و علوم انسانی دانشگاه شهید باهنر کرمان. 20 (17): 77-97.

فرشیدور، خسرو (1386). دستور مفصل امروز. تهران: سخن.

شریعت، محمدجواد (1364). دستور زبان فارسی. تهران: اساطیر.

Adger, D. 2003. Core Syntax, a Minimalist Approach. Oxford: OUP.

Alexiadou, A. & E. Anagnostopoulou. 1998. Parametrizing AGR: word order, V-movement and EPP checking. Natural language and Linguistic Theory, 16 (3): 491-539.

Anagnostopoulou, E. 2006. Clitic Doubling. In M. Everaert and H. V. Riemsdijk (Eds.). The Blackwell Companion to Syntax (I:519-581). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Barrie, M. & E. Mathieu. 2014. Head Movement. In: Carnie, A., Y. Sato, and D. Siddiqi (Eds.). The Routledge Handbook of Syntax (133-149). NY: Routledge.

Boeckx, C., N. Hornstein, & J. Nunes. 2010. Control as Movement. Cambridge: CUP.

Cheng, L. 2007. Verb copying in Mandarin Chinese. In: N. Corver and J. Nunes (Eds.). The Copy Theory of Movement (151-174). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.

Chomsky, N. 1995. The Minimalist program. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Cinque, G. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads, A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. NY: OUP.

Collins, Ch. 2001. Economy conditions in syntax. In: M. Baltin and Ch. Collins (Eds.). The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory (45-61). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Collins, Ch. 2005. A Smuggling Approach to the Passive in English. Syntax, 8: 81-120.

Corver, N. & J. Nunes. 2007. The Copy Theory of Movement. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.

Drummond, Alex. 2009. How Constrained is Sideward Movement? General’s Paper. University of Maryland, College Park.

Folli, R., H. Harley, & S. Karimi. 2005. Determinants of event type in Persian complex predicates. Lingua, 115: 1365–1401.

Hornstein, N. 2001. Move! a minimalist theory of construal. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Hornstein, N. 2009. A Theory of Syntax. Cambridge: CUP.

Hornstein, N. & J. Nunes. 2014. Minimalism and control. In: Carnie, A., Y. Sato, and D. Siddiqi (Eds.). The Routledge Handbook of Syntax (239-263). NY: Routledge.

Hornstein, N., J. Nunes, & K. K. Grohman. 2005. Understanding Minimalism. Cambridge: CUP.

Karimi, S. 2005. A Minimalist Approach to Scrambling: Evidence from Persian. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Larson, R. 1988. On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry, 19: 335–91.

Lasnik, H. 2001. Derivation and representation. In: M. Baltin and Ch. Collins (Eds.). The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory (62-88). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Nunes, J. 2001. Sideward movement. Linguistic Inquiry, 32: 303–344.

Nunes, J. 2004. Linearization of chains and sideward movement . Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.

Nunes, J. 2012. Sideward Movement: Triggers, Timing, and Outputs. In: M. Uribe-Etxebarria and V. Valmala (Eds.). Ways of Structure Building (114–142). Oxford: OUP.

Roberts, I. 2001. Head movement. In: M. Baltin and Ch. Collins (Eds.). The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory (113-147). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Language Research

Sideward Movement of Subjects in the Past Participle Clauses: A Minimalist Approach

References

References

Volume 7, Issue 1
September 2016
Pages 1-20

Sideward Movement of Subjects in the Past Participle Clauses: A Minimalist Approach

References

References

Volume 7, Issue 1September 2016Pages 1-20

Volume 7, Issue 1
September 2016
Pages 1-20