Feature Inheritance and Vacuous Movement

Sakamoto, Akihiko

doi:10.9793/elsj.29.2_316

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is so because an additional application of the Move operation, which would displace who from the Spec of the matrix TP to the Spec of the matrix CP (i.e., the final position of who in Figure 1), would violate the Vacuous Movement Hypothesis, which was originally proposed by George (1980) and Chomsky (1986) and which states that "vacuous movement, i.e., a movement operation whose effect cannot be observed, should not be allowed" (Ishii 2004: 187). In such a configuration, where who remains in the Spec of the matrix TP, the [iwh] feature is transferred from C to T under Sakamoto's (2012) proposal of Feature Inheritance, which is an operation that transfers the features of a clausal edge, i.e., [iwh] in our case, to a position which "enables feature valuation to be implemented in one derivational position" (Sakamoto 2012: 323). That is, who checks both its [ucase] feature and its [uwh] feature in one fell swoop against T. According to Sakamoto (ibid.…”

Section: The Use Of Relative Pronouns Favours Raisingmentioning

confidence: 99%

English Raising Predicates and (Non-)Finite Clauses

Lenardič¹,

Ilc²

2019

Fluminensia (Online)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ljubljana Gašper Ilc, PhD, Faculty of Arts, Ljubljana pregledni članak UDK 811.111'367.3 rukopis primljen: 14. listopada 2018.; prihvaćen za tisak: 4. srpnja 2019.In this paper, we present a diachronic and synchronic analysis of raising and extraposition constructions in the historical Brown Corpus and the more contemporary English Web Corpus 2015. We begin by establishing two diachronic facts: first, raising constructions are used much more frequently than their semantically equivalent extraposition variants, and second, the distribution of raising and extraposition remains -rather exceptionally in comparison to other structures allowing for finite/non-finite variation -diachronically consistent from the beginning of the 20 th century to 2015. We then supplement this unique diachronic distribution with an analysis of the most recent corpus data, which shows that the choice between the two semantically equivalent constructions is governed by distinct structural factors unique to each construction. Concretely, we show that the raising construction is frequently used as a relative clause, whereas the extraposition variant generally resists such a syntactic role. By contrast, we show that a prominent factor in favour of extraposition relates to the negative marker, which is placed with similar frequency both in the matrix and in the embedded clause of the extraposition construction in contrast to the raising variant, which uses the negative marker almost exclusively in the matrix clause. Lastly, we show that extraposition constructions contain modal verbs in the matrix clause more frequently than the raising variants and we tie this observation to the idea that the clausal composition of the extraposition construction is structurally more suited for expressing tentativeness. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Ovaj rad dostupan je za upotrebu pod međunarodnom licencom Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.

show abstract

Section: The Use Of Relative Pronouns Favours Raisingmentioning

confidence: 99%

English Raising Predicates and (Non-)Finite Clauses

Lenardič¹,

Ilc²

2019

Fluminensia (Online)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Third, this paper adopts the Vacuous Movement Hypothesis(Chomsky (2013),Sakamoto (2012) andTanigawa (2017)). Specifi cally, this paper assumes the derivation in (29b, c) for wh-subject questions such as (29a).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Agreement, Labeling and Sentential Subjects

Tanigawa

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The author would like to express his gratitude to Nobu Goto and Miki Obata for their valuable comments and suggestions on earlier versions of this paper. The author is also grateful to anonymous EL reviewers for their helpful questions and comments. Thanks also go to Pino Cutrone and Brien Datzman for their help in stylistic improvement. Needless to say, all remaining errors and inadequacies are the author's responsibility.

show abstract

Feature Inheritance and Vacuous Movement

Cited by 2 publications

References 24 publications

English Raising Predicates and (Non-)Finite Clauses

English Raising Predicates and (Non-)Finite Clauses

Agreement, Labeling and Sentential Subjects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About