LING2001 Lecture 16: LECTURE 16 X-BAR THEORY 4; FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES
Thursday, 27 April 2017
LECTURE 16
X-BAR THEORY 4: FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES
-Determiner phrases
•So far we have said that determiners are specifier
-But specifiers are phrases: XP > (YP) X’
-In fact, in X-bar theory, everything that is not a head is a phrase
-Determiners behave like heads:
•*These the boys
-Only one can occur at a time
-Same behaviour as N (head) in the NP
•Determiner as ‘non-head’ stands out in the whole framework
-Proposal: the determiner heads its own phrase (DP); Np is within DP
•Functional head (Abney 1987)
-DP/NP
•(1) has singular/plural feature of N projected to the phrase level
-Number marking passes upward
-The demonstrative determiner ‘this/these’ also shows number marking
•(2) has an alternative analysis:
-Determiner is source of number marking
-Top phrase is a DP
-Lexical entry for ‘this’ identifies it as singular
!1
(1)
(2)
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Thursday, 27 April 2017
•Number marking on D passes upward to higher node
•Forces nominal to agree in number
-Otherwise clash with feature of top node
•Analysis in (2) has NP complement of D: sister of head
•Other evidence for DP analysis:
-Representation of possessive NPs
-Remember that “ ’s “ is a clitic
•Attaches to the last word of a NP, no matter what part of speech it is
I saw the woman next door’s children.
What was that guy who retired last month’s name?
The student I lent the book to’s room mate said she’d left.
The cake she made’s icing was too runny.
•“ ’s “ is also in complementary distribution with determiners
-*I saw the woman next door’s the children
-Possessive NPs
•Determiners OK with both NPs when possession expressed with “of”
-* the woman next door’s the children
-The children of the woman next door
•So it looks like “ ’s “ and “the” are two instances of the same thing: a determiner
•With DP we can represent the possessive phrase as follows:
-Possessor: “the woman next door” is the leftmost phrase (YP) under XP
(here DP)
•Specifier
-Head of the whole DP phrase is “ ’s “
!2
possessor
possessed
XP
à
(YP) X’
X’ à(ZP) X’ or X’ (ZP)
X’ àX (WP)
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Thursday, 27 April 2017
•Determiner
-Specifier DP is now a phrase
•Lower DP
-Specifiers will also be subjects
-Summary of DPs so far
•Proposal that NPs are within a larger phrase, the DP
-Features of DP and NP must agree
•Enables representation of possessive constructions in English
-Possessor is in the Spec of DP
-“ ’s “ is D
-Thing possessed is NP complement to D
-DP hypothesis
•Useful to represent complex structure of nominals in some languages
-Ex/ Zapotec, Black 1984 - Det-like elements on both sides of Head
•Zapotec can have a quantifier before N, a demonstrative and a possessor after N; can’t
put them in one Det slot
•Generally, use of DP more consistent with the framework
-What about DPs without determiners?
•Nouns without D:
!3
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
Determiner phrases: so far we have said that determiners are speci er. But speci ers are phrases: xp > (yp) x". In fact, in x-bar theory, everything that is not a head is a phrase. Determiners behave like heads: *these the boys. Only one can occur at a time. Same behaviour as n (head) in the np: determiner as non-head" stands out in the whole framework. Proposal: the determiner heads its own phrase (dp); np is within dp: functional head (abney 1987) Dp/np (1) (2: (1) has singular/plural feature of n projected to the phrase level. The demonstrative determiner this/these" also shows number marking: (2) has an alternative analysis: Lexical entry for this" identi es it as singular. Thursday, 27 april 2017: number marking on d passes upward to higher node, forces nominal to agree in number. Otherwise clash with feature of top node: analysis in (2) has np complement of d: sister of head, other evidence for dp analysis:
