macroparameters.ppt

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "macroparameters.ppt"

坦朔喻
5 years ago
Views:

1 Macroparametric Theory & the syntax-lexicon interface - C.-T. James Huang Harvard University : Analytic Synthetic () Inuktitut Mohawk 1

2 Language diversity in linguistic theory Facts of life: Languages differ in diverse ways Languages change Language acquisition seems effortless Goal of a theory of linguistic variation (as part of a theory of UG): Explain the patterns of diversity in a way that is compatible of optimal theories of linguistic change and language acquisition (Macro-) Variations (1): Lexical complexity (1) John phoned home. (English) (2) (3) John-was Bill-ni denwa sita. (Japanese) (4).... () (5) tavvakiqutiqarpiit (Inuktitut) (4) Washakoty tawitsherahetkvhta se (Mohawk). 2

3 (Macro-) Variations (2): Telecity vs. atelicity Accomplishment Activity + State (Telic) (Atelic + atelic) kill, 弑,, Enter, exit, etc. come in, go out, etc.,, John wrote the letter, #but did not finish it. ( write,. ( ) John killed him yesterday, #but he did not die.,. John wrote the letter in 30 minutes. * 内. *. Ok: 内.. ok Telecity vs. atelicity (),, : small/good/bad, belittle/like/dislike give, receive; jia : lend, borrow : die, die-for (e..g., si guo die for the country ), die-at (e.g., si Changan zang Changan ) : rice, give rice (feed one with rice) : cloth, clothe; shi: food, eat, feed ( ) : king, make-king, consider-king () you : friend, befriend; zi : son, take-as-son; etc. ( ) Telic vs. atelic = vs. = vs. (, ) 3

4 (Macro-) Variations (3): :,,,,,,, etc.: one book, two persons,,, Two cups of water,, (mass noun),,. book +, table +.,. : :() : =,, ; (light verb = verbal classifier),,(1958?). classify 4

5 (Macro-) Variations (4): Japanese: Last year John often Bill visited. Chinese: Last year John often visited Bill. English: Last year John often visited Bill. French: Last year John visited often Bill. German: Last year visited John often Bill. Irish: Visited John last year often Bill. Modern Chinese: Reverse V2, so to speak. English & Old Chinese: V Complement Adjunct, 囯,, etc. Modern Chinese: Adjunct Verb Complement, (Macro-) Variations (5): Nobody 1a. John saw nobody. (: nobody) 1b. John didn t see anybody. (: not. anybody) Each other 2a. They criticized each other. ( 2b. They each criticized the other. Bi-nominal each 3a. They each bought three books. 3b. They bought three books each.. 5

6 (Macro-) Variations (6): What did you buy? (wh-movement) Ni mai-le shenme? You bought what (wh-in-situ) John-wa nani-o katta no? John bought what? (wh-in-situ) Tsai (1994) [OP Q [you did buy what ]]? what OP Q (synthetic) what (in situ)(analytic) wh-movementwh-in-situ What-the-hell (Huang and Ochi 2004) What the hell did you buy?what did you buy the hell? (synthetic)(analytic). : 1. (atelic) (mass) 5. classifiers nobody, each other, binominal each 8. wh-movement 9. what the hell, who the hell, Fact: these differences seem to cluster together in one language-type to the exclusion of another 6

7 Explaining the variations Traditionally: word-order parameter, wh-movement parameter, semanticmapping parameter, telicity parameter, nobody-parameter?, light-verb parameter, etc. Can t be right: how to explain the clustering? The macro-parametric proposal: The analytic-synthetic parameter -,. Analytic Synthetic ()..... Inuktitut Mohawk = Prediction (e.g.): Classifier No wh-movement (A)Telicity and mass/count : = = () = = atelic language classifier language ( 7

8 Wh-movement English Who, what, where, when, etc. Whoever, whatever, wherever, etc. Somewhat, somehow, somewhere, etc. Chinese Interrogative (under Q-morpheme) Existential (in non-veridical contexts) Universal (in the context of dou) Chinese wh-words are analytic, English whwords are synthetic : (Lin 2001), VP DP V V VP DO DP V V VP USE V 8

9 : Coercion: English and Chinese (Lin & Liu 2005) begin John began a book. * fast John is a fast typist. * Fast drivers will be ticketed by the police. * Read I read Chomsky this morning. *Chomsky. : Pro Drop Did John see Bill? Ans: yes, *(he) saw *(him). (English) Did John see Bill? Ans: yes, (he) saw *(him). (Italian, etc.)? : ( Gapping, nominal small clauses, verb omission, etc. ( 1998, 2004, 2005, etc.) 9

10 Argument-structure analyticity,,,,(argument structure) (theta grid). Lexicalization parameter (Lin 2001): Chinese verb enters into syntactic computation as a pure verb with no argument structure requirement. Therefore it can occur with any argument of any light verb that it combines with in syntax. An English verb enters into syntax already with a full argument structure (it already has the features represented by {1, 2, 3}, {Agent, theme, location}, etc., as a result of L-syntax computation. These features need to be checked off at appropriate places in S-syntax, and they limit the locations where a verb can move to. FP DP F F TrP DP Tr Tr VP DP V put (1, 2, 3) V VP CAUSE DP V V VP BECOME V put 10

11 DOR: (=Direct Object Requirement (DOR); (Simpson 1983, Levin & Rappaport 1995) (1) a. John hammered the metal flat. b. *John hammered the metal tired (2) a. *John laughed silly. b. *Mary ran tired. c. *Bill cried sad. (3) a. John laughed himself silly. b. Mary ran herself tired. c. Bill cried himself sad. (4) a. The metali was hammered ti flat. b. The garage doori rumbles ti open c. The riveri froze ti solid. : (DOR). Zhangsan kicked the ball broken. Mengjiangnü cried the Great Wall to ruins. Lisi bumped Zhangsan injured. (DOR): () () : () ***OK **,, ok ) 11

12 : a. b. (under the resultative reading) c. d. Lisi chased (someone) and got tired. e. ():,? :,,: The window broke. They broke the window. The boat sank. They sank the boat. They are angry at the news. > The news angered them. John cried *They cried John (for They caused John to cry. ) John chased Bill tired *Bill chased John tired (for Bill caused John to become tired from chasing him.) : : 12

13 : ():,? 爲爲爲 dat het vliegtuuig (zich) te pletter vloog That the airplane (itself) to pieces flew that the airplane flew (itself) to pieces. dat het vliegtuig (*zich) te pletter is gevlogen. (be as auxiliary) that the airplace (*itself) to pieces is flown that the airplane has (lit. is) flown (*itself) to pieces. [fly = unaccusitve] dat het vliegtuig *(zich) te pletter heft gevlogen. (have as auxiliary) that the airplan *(itself) to pieces has flown that the airplane has flown *(itself) to pieces. [fly = unergative] dat het vliegtuuig (zich) te pletter vloog That the airplane (itself) to pieces flew that the airplane flew (itself) to pieces. dat het vliegtuig (*zich) te pletter is gevlogen. (be as auxiliary) that the airplace (*itself) to pieces is flown that the airplane has (lit. is) flown (*itself) to pieces. [fly = unaccusitve] dat het vliegtuig *(zich) te pletter heft gevlogen. (have as auxiliary) that the airplan *(itself) to pieces has flown that the airplane has flown *(itself) to pieces. [fly = unergative] 13

14 Conclusion A theory of language variation as part of linguistic theory: languages differ in the nature of their funcitonal categories Macroparameters microparameters A compatible theory of language acquisition explains the ease of acquisition A theory of language change: From OC to MnC Internal reasons Weakening or grammaticalization Phonological, syntactic, and/or semantic consequences Compensatory processes External factors 14

2 4a 2-3 N 2-4 2-4 1978 2 5a 5b 5c a. b. 1982 4a a. b. c. 5-6 NP NP1 NP2 NP1 NP2 NP 1 2-4 NP 2. 2-4 NP NP1 NP2

1 1. 3a-d a. a. b. c. (1984); (2002) 2002 Huang1994, 1997 Yanshi Niina Zhang 2 4a 2-3 N 2-4 2-4 1978 2 5a 5b 5c a. b. 1982 4a a. b. c. 5-6 NP NP1 NP2 NP1 NP2 NP 1 2-4 NP 2. 2-4 NP NP1 NP2 3 1978 1982 8c