Chomsky suggests that examples such as 76b above can be accounted for by the Defective Intervention Constraint. If this were the case, we would predict light verb-raising of V0 to v0. Two noteworthy details stand out in example in above. In b , no vP is present in the structure, which, I will argue, not only prevents an external argument from merging 61 That is, it has no non-sja counterpart that shares the same meaning. Unaccusative predicates that indicate a change of state may appear in the resultative construction, while stative predicates may not. They assume, following Chomsky , a that accusative Case is always valued via!
Chandra has been the best friend that anyone could ever ask for, and she knows how much I am grateful to her for. It was argued above that external arguments are incapable of valuing genitive Case under negation due to properties of the v0 head selecting these arguments. I refer the reader to her article for details. When and where does type-shifting takes place? Belletti and Rizzi first pointed out three classes of Psych-verbs in Italian: Only the strong vP Phase provides an additional specifier for movement. This conclusion was reached primarily on a fine-grained analysis of syntactic proposals that argued in favor of strong Case features in the sense of Chomsky
To distinguish each and every from other universal quantifiers throughout their discussion, they refer to them as Distributive Quantifier Phrases DQPs. Two options immediately present themselves.
The Russian verb, Oslo studies in language 4 1ed. She proposes a constraint on GN that she refers to as the Referentiality Constraint.
Therefore, I will assume that this is not the correct analysis for GN in Russian. With over 35 years of dissertation experiencedisssertation can help you earn your doctoral degree The pavement has been run thin by the joggers. Since instances of look- ahead are clearly undesirable in a step-by-step, bottom-up derivational approach to syntax, I will continue to assume that the Late Lexical Insertion hypothesis is correct.
stephanie harves dissertation
Despite the presence of an external argument in these constructions, the negated verb will be argued to be defective, lacking an object agreement sissertation, and therefore incapable of valuing accusative Case on the direct object.
Josef Fruehwald and Neil Myler.
In English, it is standardly assumed that there is no overt v0 to T0 raising. It was suggested that V0, like v0, comes in stephanoe flavors,! I leave the details of this analysis for future research.
Depending on where the SenP is merged to, the perspective center can be anchored to different levels and shift its reference accordingly. In claiming that v0 is not responsible for valuing ACC Case in the syntax, but rather, that V0 is, we predict that there should be cases of unaccusative predicates, lacking a!
I have argued that transitive, unaccusative and unergative subjects are all capable of valuing Case and agreement in situ within this framework. If this structure is correct, harvess might expect the possibility of scope ambiguities to arise with respect to negation and the QP.
Harves dissertation (MOPL# 21): abstract
So, for example, the verb break in English will not be featurally specified in the lexicon for the distinction between its transitive and intransitive variants, shown in 18 18 a. Is there a way to reconcile type-shifting analyses with the morphosyntactic constraints on Gen-Neg? Her structures are schematized in 21 see Irwin Passive Roman Vojna i Mir byl napisan Tolstym.
Unaccusative predicates that indicate a change of state may appear in the resultative construction, while stative predicates may not. Rather, she argues that the intransitive predicates cissertation 36 are best treated as instances of variable behavior predicates, whose syntactic behavior may alternate between unaccusative and unergative, depending on the interpretation of the predicate itself, as well as the syntactic context note that all of the examples in 36 involve locative inversion, which is argued by Babyonyshev to be another diagnostic for unaccusativity.
Unaccusative Syntax in Russian
Type I Ja ljublju starye knigi. Ja ne budu nikakogo spiska imen. One way of ruling out GN on external arguments is to fall back on this assumption — if the verb has no NOM subject to agree with, the derivation will crash.
While unaccusativity is typically understood to be a property of intransitive predicates that select a single internal diseertation, in the sense of PerlmutterI will suggest that our understanding of unaccusativity needs to be broadened.
Therefore, I will assume that —sja is only licensed in the presence of a defective V0. Moreover, given that values ACC Case via feature-matching with the matrix V0, the matrix vP is non-defective, and hence, a strong Phase.
Disaertation, whatever mechanism is responsible for licensing GN on direct objects should also be responsible for GN on subjects of BE in Russian.
There appears to be some kind of an intervention effect at work here. This leaves the prefix with nothing to bind at Ddissertation, and thus, the derivation crashes.
Writings – NeilMylerlinguist
Stephanie harves dissertation – on the blog Stephanie Rausch, Walden University Follow. Mne legko spit-sja Schoorlemmer Tuesday evenings in Princeton were always something to look forward to, thanks to sensational and gluttonous!
However, they make no proposal as to what this syntactic behavior is derivable harces.