Extraposition+ (lecture 16)

472 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
472
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Extraposition+ (lecture 16)

  1. 1. Extraposition
  2. 2. <ul><li>Homework Assignment 15: CP Extraposition </li></ul><ul><li>1. We have seen that there are Complementizer Phrases (CPs) that consist of a Complementizer (C) and an S and occur in subject and direct object position in larger sentences, and also as complements to Nouns and Adjectives. </li></ul><ul><li>2. Our grammar now generates the following sentences. (If it doesn't, fix it so that it does.) Show their derivations. </li></ul>
  3. 3. <ul><li>That the farmer knew that the pig was sick explains his eagerness for it to be sold to his neighbor. </li></ul><ul><li>[ CP that the farmer knew [ CP that the pig was sick]] explains [ NP his eagerness [ CP for [ S NP to sell it to his neighbor ]]  (Passive) </li></ul><ul><li>[ CP that the farmer knew [ CP that the pig was sick]] explains [ NP his eagerness [ CP for [ S it to be sold to his neighbor ]] </li></ul>
  4. 4. <ul><li>That there were computers stolen by the employees has not been proved by the investigators. </li></ul><ul><li>The investigators [ AUX PRES] not have [ CP that [ the employees [ AUX PAST] steal computers ]]  (Passive twice) </li></ul><ul><li>[ CP that [ computers [ AUX PAST] be steal+en by the employees ]] [ AUX PRES] not have be [ VP prove+en by the investigators]  (There) </li></ul><ul><li>[ CP that [ there [ AUX PAST] be computers steal+en by the employees ]] [ AUX PRES] not have be [ VP prove+en by the investigators]  (V raising) </li></ul><ul><li>[ CP that [ there [ AUX PAST be ] computers steal+en by the employees ]] [ AUX PRES have ] not be [ VP prove+en by the investigators]  (T hopping) </li></ul><ul><li>[ CP that [ there [ AUX PAST be+ PAST] computers steal+en by the employees ]] [ AUX have+ PRES] not be [ VP prove+en by the investigators]  (T hopping) </li></ul>
  5. 5. <ul><li>For there to be a pig found in the yard would annoy Louise. </li></ul><ul><li>[ CP for NP to find a pig in the yard] would annoy Louise  (Passive) </li></ul><ul><li>[ CP for a pig to be foun d in the yard] would annoy Louise  (There) </li></ul><ul><li>[ CP for there to be a pig found in the yard] would annoy Louise </li></ul>
  6. 6. <ul><li>2. The examples below illustrate a new construction. </li></ul><ul><li>(4) That pigs can fly is not obvious. </li></ul><ul><li>(5) It is not obvious that pigs can fly. </li></ul><ul><li>(6) That there might be life on other planets scares me. </li></ul><ul><li>(7) It scares me that there might be life on other planets. </li></ul><ul><li>(8) That the more conservative candidate would win became clear. </li></ul><ul><li>(9) It became clear that the more conservative candidate would win. </li></ul><ul><li>(10) For there to be a pig found in the yard would annoy Louise. </li></ul><ul><li>(11) It would annoy Louise for there to be a pig found in the yard. </li></ul>
  7. 7. <ul><li>Notice that the ‘it’ in these sentences is not the referential pronoun (call it it0 ); It is also not the “Weather it” of it’s raining (call it it1 ), which will be encountered later in this problem. Let us call it it2 . </li></ul>
  8. 8. <ul><li>At first glance it looks as if these sentences are produced directly by the Phrase Structure rules, without any modification. Let us call this Hypothesis A. Show how one or two of the odd-numbered sentences would be generated under this hypothesis. </li></ul>
  9. 9. <ul><li>Hypothesis A : </li></ul><ul><li>You would put it in subject position, and you would generate a VP final CP, using the rules </li></ul><ul><li>S -> NP AUX VP. </li></ul><ul><li>VP  V AP CP </li></ul><ul><li>[ S it [ AUX PRES] not [ VP be obvious [ CP that pigs can fly]]] </li></ul>
  10. 10. <ul><li>3. An alternative hypothesis would be that the odd-numbered sentences are derived from the even-numbered ones by a transformation, called “CP Extraposition”. Formulate a provisional statement of this transformation. We will call this Hypothesis B. </li></ul>
  11. 11. <ul><li>[ S CP AUX VP]  [it AUX VP+CP] </li></ul>
  12. 12. <ul><li>Make sure the new grammar does not generate ungrammatical things like: </li></ul><ul><li>(12) *It scares me the pig. </li></ul><ul><li>(13) *It is not obvious the aerial ability of pigs. </li></ul>
  13. 13. <ul><li>Our rule doesn’t generate these sentences because it applies only to CP in subject position. </li></ul>
  14. 14. <ul><li>4. The following provide an argument against Hypothesis A: </li></ul><ul><li>(14) *Harvey is not obvious that pigs can fly. </li></ul><ul><li>(15) *That there might be life on other planets scares me that there might be life on other planets. </li></ul><ul><li>(16) *The embarrassment would annoy Louise for there to be a pig found in the yard. </li></ul>
  15. 15. <ul><li>First, figure out how the grammar can account for the badness of (14-16). HINT: It has something to do with thematic roles. </li></ul><ul><li>Then explain why these examples provide an argument against Hypothesis A. </li></ul>
  16. 16. <ul><li>The it can be subject only when the subject role is assigned to the extraposed CP. </li></ul><ul><li>When there is a real NP in subject position and a subject NP, there are too many arguments, not enough roles. E.g. </li></ul>
  17. 17. <ul><li>The solution is not obvious. </li></ul><ul><li>THEME </li></ul><ul><li>*Harvey is not obvious [that pigs can fly]. </li></ul><ul><li>THEME *--- </li></ul><ul><li>or </li></ul><ul><li>*Harvey is not obvious [that pigs can fly] </li></ul><ul><li>*--- THEME </li></ul><ul><li>There is only one THEME to be assigned, but two arguments that need to get roles. </li></ul>
  18. 18. <ul><li>*That there might be life on other planets scares me that there might be life on other planets. </li></ul><ul><li>*The embarrassment would annoy Louise for there to be a pig found in the yard. </li></ul><ul><li>Same story here. Why? </li></ul>
  19. 19. <ul><li>Examples like the following provide another argument against Hypothesis A: </li></ul><ul><li>(17) That it snows at the north pole is known by everybody. </li></ul><ul><li>(18) It is known by everybody that it snows at the north pole. </li></ul><ul><li>What is that argument? </li></ul>
  20. 20. <ul><li>These are passives. In the corresponding actives, there is no it in object position, but these have it in subject position. Where did it come from? </li></ul><ul><li>It is known by everybody [ CP that it snows at the north pole] </li></ul>
  21. 21. <ul><li>Everybody knows [that it snows at the north pole]  (Passive) </li></ul><ul><li>[that it snows at the north pole] is known by everybody  (Extraposition) </li></ul><ul><li>it is known by everybody [ that it snows at the north pole ] </li></ul>
  22. 22. <ul><li>If passive is derived by transformation, then extraposition has to be derived by transformation ! </li></ul>
  23. 23. <ul><li>A third argument against Hypothesis A has been lurking in the data that we have already seen: </li></ul><ul><li>(19) Trucks are heavy. </li></ul><ul><li>(20) *It are heavy trucks. </li></ul><ul><li>(21) *It is heavy trucks. </li></ul><ul><li>(22) *It scares me the pig. </li></ul><ul><li>(23) *It is not obvious the aerial ability of pigs. </li></ul><ul><li>What is that argument? </li></ul>
  24. 24. <ul><li>We can’t just assign the subject thematic role to a post-verbal argument and have it to fill the subject slot. </li></ul><ul><li>There is a correlation between it in subject position and CP in extraposed position – it is restricted to those verbs that allow CP to be subjects in the first place. </li></ul>
  25. 25. <ul><li>5. The facts below show something about how the transformation developed under Hypothesis B should be formulated: </li></ul><ul><li>(24) It shouldn't scare me that there might be life on other planets, but it does. </li></ul><ul><li>What does that show you? </li></ul>
  26. 26. <ul><li>VP deletion shows that the extrapose CP is attached to VP. </li></ul><ul><li>Why? </li></ul>
  27. 27. <ul><li>6. Now show derivations for the following, which should be generated by the grammar as you have revised it: </li></ul><ul><li>Isn’t it obvious that pigs can't fly? </li></ul><ul><li>That it can be shown that one pig flew does not prove that every pig can fly. </li></ul>
  28. 28. <ul><li>[ CP that pigs can fly] [ AUX PRES] be not obvious  (Extraposition) </li></ul><ul><li>it [ AUX PRES] be not obvious [ CP that pigs can fly]  (V raising, contraction of not to n’t ) </li></ul><ul><li>it [ AUX PRES be n’t] obvious [ CP that pigs can fly]  (SAI) </li></ul><ul><li>[ AUX PRES be n’t] it obvious [ CP that pigs can fly]  (T-hopping) </li></ul><ul><li>[ AUX be+PRES+n’t] it obvious [ CP that pigs can fly] </li></ul>
  29. 29. <ul><li>[ CP That NP can show [ CP that one pig flew]] [ AUX PRES] not prove that every pig can fly  (Passive) </li></ul><ul><li>[ CP That [ CP that one pig flew] can be show+ en ] [ AUX PRES] not prove that every pig can fly  (Extraposition) </li></ul><ul><li>[ CP That it can be show+ en [ CP that one pig flew] ] [ AUX PRES] not prove that every pig can fly  (T hopping, do support) </li></ul><ul><li>(Leaving out some details) </li></ul>
  30. 30. <ul><li>Extra credit </li></ul><ul><li>Can CP Extraposition move a CP from one clause into another clause? (We say ‘Is CP Extraposition clause-bounded or not?’) </li></ul>
  31. 31. <ul><li>Start out with a CP that is the subject of an S. </li></ul><ul><li>[ CP That pigs can fly] is not obvious. </li></ul><ul><li>Make this sentence a CP that is the subject of another S. </li></ul><ul><li>(b) [ CP2 That [ CP1 that pigs can fly] is not obvious]] bothers me. </li></ul>
  32. 32. <ul><li>We can extrapose CP1 to the VP of obvious . </li></ul><ul><li>(c) [ CP2 That [ it is not obvious [ CP1 that pigs can fly ]]] bothers me. </li></ul>
  33. 33. <ul><li>We can extrapose CP2 to the VP of bother. </li></ul><ul><li>(d) it bothers me [ CP2 that [ CP1 that pigs can fly] is not obvious] </li></ul>
  34. 34. <ul><li>We can do both extrapositions, CP1 to obvious and CP2 to bother . </li></ul><ul><li>(e) It bothers me [ CP2 that it is not obvious [ CP1 that pigs can fly ]] </li></ul>
  35. 36. <ul><li>What happens when we move CP1 to bothers . </li></ul><ul><li>[ CP2 That [ CP1 that pigs can fly] is not obvious]] bothers me.  </li></ul><ul><li>[ CP2 That it is not obvious]] bothers me [ CP1 that pigs can fly] </li></ul><ul><li>*That it is not obvious bothers me that pigs can fly. </li></ul>
  36. 37. <ul><li>Conclusion: Extraposition is ‘clause-bounded’ – the CP in subject position can only attach to its own VP, not a higher VP. </li></ul>

×