| 63 |
Two structures for English restrictive relative clauses
|
|
|
|
In: http://edocs.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/volltexte/2009/12819/pdf/SAUERLAND_TWO_STRUCTURES_FOR_ENGLISH_RESTRICTIVE_RELATIVE_CLAUSES.pdf (2000)
|
|
Abstract:
Consider the example (1): The question is whether the head of the relative clause—tigers in (1)—stands in a transformational relationship to the relative clause internal argument position occupied by a trace. Though some of the literature also views the determiner the is part of the head, really the central question of the debate is the transformational relation of head and relative clause internal trace. (1) The tigers ︸ ︷ ︷ ︸ head (NP) that I saw t at Ueno ︸ ︷ ︷ ︸ relative clause were cute. Both possible position—that there’s a transformational relationship and that there isn’t— received support. The later negative position is what want to call following Carlson (1977) the Matching Hypothesis, which claims that there’s no direct transformational relationship between the head NP and the relative clause internal trace position. Instead an empty operator raises from the relative clause internal position to the initial position of the relative clause, and mediates the semantic relationship between the relative clause internal position and the head. The other possible position—that there’s a transformational relationship— together with the generally held assumption that Movement is the only transformational rule amounts to the Raising Hypothesis: The head NP (or sometimes DP) starts out DP starts out in the relative clause internal position, and moves to its surface position. ∗I would like to thank the following people for their comments on this research: Noam Chomsky, Danny Fox, Winfried Lechner, Jon Nissenbaum, the seminar participants at Tübingen University in Winter 1999/2000 and the audience of the Second Asian GLOW conference at Nanzan University. This paper was written in a hurry and I apologize for all mistakes, which are all my fault. As I was finishing up this paper, I received the journal issue containing (Safir 1999), which on first examination seems to me to be quite
|
|
URL: http://edocs.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/volltexte/2009/12819/pdf/SAUERLAND_TWO_STRUCTURES_FOR_ENGLISH_RESTRICTIVE_RELATIVE_CLAUSES.pdf
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.550.6611
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
| 69 |
Why variables? [Online resource]
|
|
|
|
In: Pius Tamanji, Masako Hirotani, and Nancy Hall (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 29 29 (1999) 1, 323-337
|
|
Linguistik-Repository
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 72 |
Illusive Scope of Universal Quantifiers
|
|
|
|
In: http://coe-sun.kuis.ac.jp/~uli/si.ps.gz (1997)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 74 |
The Late Insertion of Germanic Inflection
|
|
|
|
In: http://coe-sun.kuis.ac.jp/~uli/morph.ps.gz (1996)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 76 |
Early features [Online resource]
|
|
|
|
In: Papers in minimalist syntax, ed. Robert Pensalfini and Hiroyuki Ura, MIT Working Papers In Linguistics, volume 27.1995 (1995) 27, 223-242
|
|
Linguistik-Repository
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 77 |
The lemmings theory of case [Online resource]
|
|
|
|
In: Paper presented at the Seventh Student Conference in Linguistics (SCIL 7), University of Connecticut, April 1995. (1995)
|
|
Linguistik-Repository
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 78 |
Codistributivity and Reciprocals
|
|
|
|
In: http://coe-sun.kuis.ac.jp/~uli/wecol94.ps.gz (1994)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 79 |
The representation of reciprocals in grammar [Online resource]
|
|
|
|
In: Preprint, später in: ESCOL '94 : proceedings of the Eleventh Eastern States Conference on Linguistics (1994), 270-281
|
|
Linguistik-Repository
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|
|
