Kayne, R. 1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. MIT Press.

1
Kayne, R. 1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. MIT
Press.
Kayne (1994)

• Chapter 8 Relatives and Possessives

Consider the set A of ordered pairs ltXj, Yjgt
such that for each j, Xj asymmetrically
c-commands Yj. Let us further take A to be the
maximal such set that is, A contains all pairs
of nonterminals such that the first
asymmetrically c-commnads the second. Then the
central proposal I would like to make is the
following (for a given phrase marker P, with T
the set of terminals and A as just given)
(Kayne 1994, 5-6) (3) LCA (Linear Correspondence
Axiom) d(A) is a linear ordering of T. (d
the nonterminal-to-terminal dominance relation)
2
Chapter 2 Deriving X-Bar Theory

• (1) K
• J L
• j M N
• m P
• p
• - the pairs that constitute the set A ltJ, Mgt,
  ltJ, Ngt, ltJ, Pgt, ltM, Pgt
• (i.e., the pairs of nonterminal nodes such
  that the first asymmetrically c-commands
• the second)
• d(A) ltj, mgt, ltj, pgt, ltm, pgt
• These three ordered pairs do constitute a linear
  ordering of the set j, m, p, given that
• transitivity holds
• Antisymmetry is respected
• The ordering is total

3
p. 93 N-first vs. N-final languages

• English
  vs.
  Amharic
• (3810) the NP picturethat Bill saw e
• the NP picturethat IP moving IP to
  Spec,DP yields (40)
• (40) IPj the NP picturethat ej
  (41) IPj the NP pictureC0 ej
• 
  with both
  D0 C0 empty
• 
  (42) IPj D0 NP
  pictureC0 ej

4
8.1 Postnominal Possessives in English

• In (1) the phrase of Johns is not plausibly a
  complement of picture.
• I have two pictures of Johns.
• Cf. two pictures of Mary of Johns
• (2) D0 John s two pictures
• e.g., in Hungarian, possessors are prenominal
  can be in nom Case
• preceded by the
  definite article ()the Johns two pictures
• cf. indefinite D0 that can precede the
  possessor phrase? the possessor must move
• into the specifier of the D0, picks
  up dative Case, and then out of the DP entirely
• D is a valid Case-licensing position (however,
  indef. D0 is not a Case licenser)
• 
  D0 John
  s two pictures
• (3) two picturesi D ofJohn s ei
• Quantifiers, every, many, some, any, a(n)
  generable within the NP/QP below s.
• Def. det. the uniquely a D0,
  not to be generable below s
• (4) ?I found the pictures of Johns/his.
• (5) ?I found the two pictures of Johns/his.

5
8.2 Relative Clauses in English

• Why (6) is fully grammatical?
• (6) I found the (two) pictures of Johns/his
  that you lent me
• 
  constituent
• head complement
• Cf. (5) ?I found the two pictures of
  Johns/his. pictures ?
  head
• ? constituent
• head complement
  
• (7) CP(two) pictures of Johnsi that me
  ei Raising analysis (Vergnaud,
  1974)
• 
  head
• 
  not a
  complement of N
• (8) John bought the picture of himself that Bill
  saw. nor right-adjoined to N
• (9) The picture of himself that Bill saw
  e (right adjunction is
  banned)
• 
  complement
  of D (the) DP D0 CP

6

• In Romanian, the head noun of the NP in Spec,CP
  will raise out of CP and left-adjoin to D0
• (11) Cartea pe care am citit-o
• book-the pe which I-have read it
• In French and Italian the structures in (13),
  (15), and (17) are ungrammatical because once
• cui, qui, and la femme de qui have filled
  Spec,CP, there is no room for persona, personne
  
• or homme. There is extra room in (14), (16),
  and (18) because the preposition in those
• examples provides it by making its specifier
  position available.
• (13) la persona cui Bill ha visto
  (Italian)
• the person who Bill has seen
• (14) la persona con cui Bill ha parlato
• the person with whom Bill has spoken
• (15) la personne qui Bill ha vue ( 13)
  (French)
• (16) la personne avec qui Bill ha parlé
  (14)
• (17) lhomme la femme de qui tu as
  insulteé
• the man the wife of who you have
  insulted
• (18) lhomme avec la femme de qui tu tes
  disputé
• the man with the wife of who you
  REFL-is argued

7
Relative pronouns originate as determiners that
are split off from their associated NP by
movement of the latter

• (19) the C0 he broke it with which hammer
• wh-movement of the PP to Spec,CP
• (20) the with which hammer C0 he broke it
  e
• The NP hammer then raises to Spec,PP
  (probably via Spec,which)
• (21) the CP PP hammeri with which ei C0
• (16)
• (22) la C0 Bill a parlé avec qui personne
• wh-movement of the PP to Spec,CP
• (23) la avec qui personne C0
• The NP hammer then raises to Spec,PP
  (probably via Spec,which)
• (24) la CP PP personnei avec qui ei C0
• When the constituent moved to Spec,CP is headed
  by a preposition, those NPs can raise

8
A well-formed headed restrictive relative
clause structure requires that personne reach in
the overt syntax a position governed by D0.

• (25) la qui personne C0
• Cf. (24) la CP PP personnei avec qui ei
  C0
• In English, they use the specifier position of
  the wh-determiner itself as a landing site
• 
  (why they differ from F
  I? no solution yet)
• (28) the which picture C0
• ?(29) the CP DP picturei which ei C0
• (30) the CP DP mani who eis wife C0
• who the mans wife is moved to Spec,CP,
• man is moved to the inner Spec,DP (D
  who)
• Longer movement only in English
• (31) The book the author of which I know
  personally
• (32) ??the man the possibility of you marrying
  whom became a reality only yesterday
• (33)the man the possibility of who(m) marrying
  you became a reality only yesterday
• ? Subject island movement violation

9
8.3 N-Final Relative Clauses

• English rel-cl N-initial only as a result of
  leftward mvnt.
• cf. many other langes. have rel-cl structures in
  which the noun follows the rel-cl.
• p. 93
• Specifier positions are always on the left
• Since specifiers are an instance of adjunction
  and since adjunction is always left-adjunction
• Therefore, the final position of N in
  rel-structures in langes like Japanese differs
  from the
• N-initial one of langes like English.
• (37) a. N-final relatives lack relative pronouns.
• b. N-final relatives never display a
  complementizer that is identical to the normal
• complementizer of sentential
  complementation.
• N-initial N-final relatives are essentially
  identical then, N-final relatives must involve
  the
• same D0 CP structure that N-initial relatives
  have.

10
8.3 N-first vs. N-Final Relative Clauses

• p. 93 N-final languages
• lack any equivalent of
  English the the D0 will not be visible.
• Amharic language (Gragg, 1972)
• provides a significant clue to the syntax of D0
  in N-final relatives
• if starting from D0 CP, the entire CP moved
  to Spec,DP,
• then we would not expect N to follow D.
• Relative clause that precedes the definite
  article in Amharic is not CP
• The pre-D relative clause must be a projection
  smaller than CP let us call it IP
• English
  vs.
  Amharic
• (3810) the NP picturethat Bill saw e
• the NP picturethat IP moving IP to
  Spec,DP yields (40) IPj the NP picturethat
  ej
• 
  (41) IPj the NP
  pictureC0 ej
• 
  with
  both D0 C0 empty
• 
  (42) IPj D0 NP
  pictureC0 ej
• IP remains in situ, so that C0 can be overt and
• Can be identical to the normal sentential
  complementizer.

11
8.3 wh-relatives in English

• N-final relativization does not admit the
  presence of a relative pronoun.
• (4244) IPj D0 CPNP pictureC0 ej
  cf. Cole (1987)
• Starting from a D CP, the NP picture is moved
  to Spec,CP
• and then the IP complement of the empty C0 is
  moved to Spec,DP. That IP contains the trace of
• picture.
• (45) IP ejD0 CP NP picturejC0
  a copy of the moved constituent (Chomsky
  1993)
• (46) IP picturejD0 CP NP picturej C0
  
• (47) IP picturejD0 CP NP ej C0
• The English structure
• (48) D0 CP NP picturejC0 IP ej
• (49) D0 CP NP ej C0 IP picturej
• (50) A given chain link ck can license PF
  deletion of another link c1 of the same chain
• only if does not c-command ck.

12
8.4 Reduced Relatives and Adjectives

• (51) ?We were admiring the sweater of his.
• (52) We were admiring the sweater of his that was
  lying on the sofa.
• (53) (?)We were admiring the (one) sweater of his
  given to him by his wife. (reduced rel. IP, ?CP)
• (54)the sweater of Johns that/which given to
  him by
• Vergnaud (1974, p. 173ff.) the reduced
  relatives exhibit the behavior of ordinary
  relatives.
• When rel.es are stacked, the 2nd one can
  neither have a zero complementizer nor
  bereduced.
• (55) I just read the book that you told me about
  (that) your son gave me last year.
• (56) I just read the book that you told me about
  ?(that was) given to me by your son last year.
• (57) the CP NP booki C0 IP ei sent to me
• (58) the CP booki which ei j C0 IP ej
  sent to me
• (59) the book John fond of
• (60) the CP C0 IP booki I0 XP ei sent
  to me
• (61) the CP XPj C0 IP book I0 ej
• (62)the sent to me book
• (63) the recently sent book