Remarks on take home Exam
Remarks for Take-home portion of Exam-1: Why Move? Ling 610/CSUN Linguistics/Galasso
As you prepare to discuss theoretical reasons for Movement (move-α , a d for theoreti al o strai ts
on movement, consider as way to incorporate in your essay the following main points:
Reference paper: https://www.academia.edu/6508606/Why_Move_Reference_Paper_Exam-1_
Some points to consider:
1. Radford (Chapter 7: p. 281) discusses why a Spec-Head relation may no longer be valid given the
following sentence below: e.g., There were awarded several prizes.
Note ho of e pleti e i sert passi e o stru ts the er /Head ere ust agree ith the true
su je t se eral prizes lo er do i the tree. The problem is that two constituents are not within a
Spec-Head relation. This caused Chomsky to reduce the role of Spec-Head agreement relations and
rather turn to c-Command relations. However, an argument can be made (e.g., Miyagawa) that
expletive there starts out within VP (as part and parcel of the true subject) and then raises up to
Spec TP. [TP __were [VP awarded there several prizes]]. If e pleti e there origi ates lose to its
subject, then an argument can be made the Spec-Head relation is restored and that Case is already
assigned to expletive before it moves up to spec of TP. Also consider Merge over Move constructs:
e.g., [TP__ was [VP there a man in the garden]]
Su h a stor also pro ides a a ou t for there re ei i g so e kind of case, as well as VPISH
considerations. Try to tease out the two distinctions between (i) expletives either directly
inserting/merging in Spec of T, versus (ii) expletive raising from VP to TP.
2. This tension between items either being moved/Move from lower down in the tree, vs. being
directed inserted/Merge from out of the lexicon can be a nice point of departure regarding your
essa i to Wh Mo e? (Look into Merge over Move from class notes).
3. Other things to consider regarding constraints on Movement could include rationale between
main verb movement (as in French) vs. English main verb non-movement. In this sense, consider
why English Auxiliary verbs such as Do, Be, Have (which get no theta-role assignment) might in
fact allow to be directly inserted into T (without V-to-T raising).
4. Look into Radford (Chapter 2) Functional Head Constraint, and all the work on conditions
pertaining to minimal vs maximal projections (e.g., gapping, cleft sentences, co-ordination,
fragment condition, etc.)
See Note on Tense (§5) regarding English (affix) vs French (featural).
https://www.academia.edu/6191790/A_Note_on_Merge_Tense_week_6
As you prepare to discuss theoretical reasons for Movement (move-α , a d for theoreti al o strai ts
on movement, consider as way to incorporate in your essay the following main points:
Reference paper: https://www.academia.edu/6508606/Why_Move_Reference_Paper_Exam-1_
Some points to consider:
1. Radford (Chapter 7: p. 281) discusses why a Spec-Head relation may no longer be valid given the
following sentence below: e.g., There were awarded several prizes.
Note ho of e pleti e i sert passi e o stru ts the er /Head ere ust agree ith the true
su je t se eral prizes lo er do i the tree. The problem is that two constituents are not within a
Spec-Head relation. This caused Chomsky to reduce the role of Spec-Head agreement relations and
rather turn to c-Command relations. However, an argument can be made (e.g., Miyagawa) that
expletive there starts out within VP (as part and parcel of the true subject) and then raises up to
Spec TP. [TP __were [VP awarded there several prizes]]. If e pleti e there origi ates lose to its
subject, then an argument can be made the Spec-Head relation is restored and that Case is already
assigned to expletive before it moves up to spec of TP. Also consider Merge over Move constructs:
e.g., [TP__ was [VP there a man in the garden]]
Su h a stor also pro ides a a ou t for there re ei i g so e kind of case, as well as VPISH
considerations. Try to tease out the two distinctions between (i) expletives either directly
inserting/merging in Spec of T, versus (ii) expletive raising from VP to TP.
2. This tension between items either being moved/Move from lower down in the tree, vs. being
directed inserted/Merge from out of the lexicon can be a nice point of departure regarding your
essa i to Wh Mo e? (Look into Merge over Move from class notes).
3. Other things to consider regarding constraints on Movement could include rationale between
main verb movement (as in French) vs. English main verb non-movement. In this sense, consider
why English Auxiliary verbs such as Do, Be, Have (which get no theta-role assignment) might in
fact allow to be directly inserted into T (without V-to-T raising).
4. Look into Radford (Chapter 2) Functional Head Constraint, and all the work on conditions
pertaining to minimal vs maximal projections (e.g., gapping, cleft sentences, co-ordination,
fragment condition, etc.)
See Note on Tense (§5) regarding English (affix) vs French (featural).
https://www.academia.edu/6191790/A_Note_on_Merge_Tense_week_6