This highly original monograph treats movement operations within the Minimalist Program. Jairo Nunes argues that traces are not grammatical primitives and that their properties follow from deeper features of the system, and, in particular, that the phonetic realization of traces is determined by linearization computations coupled with economy conditions regarding deletion. He proposes a version of the copy theory of movement according to which movement must be construed as a description of the interaction of the independent operations Copy, Merge, Form Chain, and Chain Reduction. Empirical evidence to support this claim includes instances of "sideward movement" between subtrees in a derivation. According to this analysis, the linearization of chains in the phonological component constrains sideward movement so that it is possible to account for standard properties of multiple gap constructions, including parasitic gap and ATB constructions, without construction-specific operations or principles that are not independently motivated. Theoretical linguists will find Linearization of Chains and Sideward Movement of great interest both theoretically and empirically. The version of the copy theory of movement proposed by Nunes will stir debate and shape future research in the field.

Assuming the general framework of the Minimalist Program of Chomsky 1995, this article argues that Move is not a primitive operation of the computational system, but rather the output of the interaction among the independent operations Copy, Merge, Form Chain, and Chain Reduction (deletion of chain links for purposes of linearization). The crucial aspect of this alternative model is that it permits constrained instances of sideward movement, whereby a given constituent ''moves'' from a syntactic object K to an independent syntactic object L. This version of the copy theory of movement (a) provides an explanation for why (some) traces must be deleted in the phonological component, (b) provides a cyclic analysis for standard instances of noncyclic movement, and (c) accounts for the main properties of parasitic gap and across-the-board extraction constructions.

This paper attempts to provide a minimalist analysis of CED effects (see Huang 1982) in terms of derivational dynamics in a cyclic system. Assuming Uriagereka's (1999) Multiple Spell-out system, we argue that CED effects arise when a syntactic object K that is required at a given derivational step has become inaccessible to the computational system at a previous derivational stage, when the chunk of structure containing K was spelled out. Assuming Nunes's (1995Nunes's ( , 1998 analysis of parasitic gaps in terms of sideward movement, we argue that standard parasitic gap constructions do not exhibit CED effects because K manages to move to a different derivational workspace before the structure containing it is spelled out. Finally, we provide an account of the cases where parasitic gap constructions appear to show CED effects by relying on cyclic access to the numeration, along the lines proposed by Chomsky (1998).

Understanding Minimalism, first published in 2005, is an introduction to the Minimalist Program - the model of syntactic theory within generative linguistics. Accessibly written, it presents the basic principles and techniques of the minimalist program, looking firstly at analyses within Government and Binding Theory (the Minimalist Program's predecessor), and gradually introducing minimalist alternatives. Minimalist models of grammar are presented in a step-by-step fashion, and the ways in which they contrast with GB analyses are clearly explained. Spanning a decade of minimalist thinking, this textbook will enable students to develop a feel for the sorts of questions and problems that minimalism invites, and to master the techniques of minimalist analysis. Over 100 exercises are provided, encouraging them to put these skills into practice. Understanding Minimalism will be an invaluable text for intermediate and advanced students of syntactic theory, and will set a solid foundation for further study and research within Chomsky's minimalist framework.

The Movement Theory of Control (MTC) makes one major claim: that control relations in sentences like 'John wants to leave' are grammatically mediated by movement. This goes against the traditional view that such sentences involve not movement, but binding, and analogizes control to raising, albeit with one important distinction: whereas the target of movement in control structures is a theta position, in raising it is a non-theta position; however the grammatical procedures underlying the two constructions are the same. This book presents the main arguments for MTC and shows it to have many theoretical advantages, the biggest being that it reduces the kinds of grammatical operations that the grammar allows, an important advantage in a minimalist setting. It also addresses the main arguments against MTC, using examples from control shift, adjunct control, and the control structure of 'promise', showing MTC to be conceptually, theoretically, and empirically superior to other approaches.