The Explanatory Range of Movement

1. The Explanatory Range of Movement Presentation at Workshop on Comparative and Theoretical Syntax When and Why do Constituents Move? University of Aarhus, December 14-16, 2004 Torben Thrane [Århus School of Business]

2. The Janus-Effect of Move When you see a cheetah move you can ask for an explanation of this fact in one of two ways: • What properties of the cheetah will account for its having moved? (‘Systemic’ explanation – muscles, sinews, etc.) • What properties of the cheetah will its having moved account for? (‘Functional’ explanation – hunger, fear,etc.) Each explanation is causal in its own right, but they are not causally connected [H. Putnam, Reductionism and the Nature of Psychology (1973)]

3. Movement in language The most casual inspection of output conditions reveals that items commonly appear “displaced” from the position in which the interpretation they receive is otherwise represented at the LF interface.91 [Chomsky 1995:316] Rather there are just extremely general principles like “move anything anywhere” [Chomsky 2000: 1] You only have to look to see that something has moved There is no meaningful controversy over the basic facts. The axiom of Chomsky’s version of GG: Movement is not a thesis that needs support; it is one of the facts of language that can be invoked to support other theses.

4. Functional vs. systemic explanation of movement in language • What properties of language will some linguistic item having moved account for ? (‘Functional’) (1a)John called up his sister vs. (b) John called his sister up • What properties of language will account for some linguistic item having moved? (‘Systemic’)

5. Movement in language The most casual inspection of output conditions reveals that items commonly appear “displaced” from the position in which the inter- pretation they receive is otherwise represented at the LF interface.91 [Chomsky 1995:316] 91Technically, this is not quite correct; see note 1. 1 The PF level itself is too primitive and unstructured to serve this purpose, but elements formed in the course of the mapping of syn- tactic objects to a PF representation might qualify. Notice that I am sweeping under the rug questions of considerable significance, notably, questions about what in the earlier Extended Standard Theory (EST) framework were called “surface effects” on interpretation. These are manifold, involving topic-focus and theme- rheme structures, figure-ground properties, effects of adjacency and linearity, and many others. Prima facie, they seem to involve some additional level or levels internal to the phonological component, postmorphology but prephonetic, accessed at the interface along with PF (Phonetic Form) and LF (Logical Form). [Chomsky 1995:220 – my italics]

6. ] [IP [NP i ] [VP [NP i ] [V ] ] Functional vs. systemic explanation of movement in language • What properties of language will some linguistic item having moved account for ? (‘Functional’) (1) John called up his sister vs. John called his sister up • What properties of language will account for some linguistic item having moved? (‘Systemic’) (2) John t cried

7. AdvP Nede/*ned i kælderen Down in cellar-the S NPs VP D N´ er is et a N´ IP A N I VP V´ NP godt good sted place at to PRO V DP stille put sin cykel one’s bike Advice about parking your bike (3) Nede/*ned i kælderen er et godt sted at stille sin cykel Down in cellar-the is a good place to put one’s bike This sits fairly well with the idea of Danish as a V2 language

8. AdvP nede/ned i kælderen down in cellar-the S NPs VP D N´ er is Et A N´ IP A N I VP V´ NP godt good sted place at to PRO V DP stille put sin cykel one’s bike Mirror-image advice about parking your bike (4) Et godt sted at stille sin cykel er nede/ned i kælderen A good place to put one’s bike is down in cellar-the ... and so does this

9. AdvP Nede/*ned i kælderen Down in cellar-the S CP NPs SpecLOC IP VP D N´ et godt sted a good place I VP er is et a N´ IP at to Spec V´ A N I VP PRO V´ NPLOC V´ NP godt good sted place at to V DP tLOC PRO V DP stille put sin cykel one’s bike stille put sin cykel one’s bike Revised structure for (3) (5) (6) *Nede i kælderen er en god idé at stille sin cykel (7) Det er en god idé at stille sin cykel ned(e) i kælderen “Under any approach that takes Attract/Move to be driven by morphological features ...there should be no interaction between theta-theory and the theory of movement.” [Chomsky 1995: 312]

10. AdvP nede/ned i kælderen down in cellar-the S CP SpecLOC IP VP et godt sted a good place I VP er is at to Spec V´ PRO V´ NPLOC V DP tLOC stille put sin cykel one’s bike Revised structure of (4) + further matters (8) (9) Han parkerede sin cykel nede/*ned i kælderen (10) Han stillede sin cykel nede/ned i kælderen

11. CP SpecLOC IP Et godt sted A good place I VP at to Spec V´ PRO V´ NPLOC V DP tLOC stille put sin cykel one’s bike (4) Et godt sted at stille sin cykel er nede/ned i kælderen A good place to put one’s bike is down in cellar-the (11) VP V´ V AdvP er is nede/ned i kælderen down in cellar-the

12. (12) CP C´ CP C IP SpecLOC IP er is NP VP Et godt sted A good place I VP ts NP V´ at to Spec V´ ts V AdvP PRO V´ NPLOC tv nede/ned i kælderen down in cellar-the V DP tLOC stille put sin cykel one’s bike (4) Et godt sted at stille sin cykel er nede/ned i kælderen A good place to put one’s bike is down in cellar-the

13. AdvP Nede/*ned i kælderen Down in cellar-thea CP SpecLOC IP et godt sted a good place I VP at to Spec V´ ta PRO V´ NPLOC V DP tLOC stille put sin cykel one’s bike (3) Nede/*ned i kælderen er et godt sted at stille sin cykel Down in cellar-the is a good place to put one’s bike (13) CP C´ C IP er is VP NP V´ ts V AdvP tv

14. (14b) Der There er is et godt a good sted place nede down i kælderen in cellar-the (Dat.) at stille sin cykel to put one’s bike (15a) Der There er is et godt sted a good place at stille to put sin cykel one’s bike ned down i kælderen in cellar-the (Acc.) (15b) *Der There er is et godt sted a good place ned i kælderen down in cellar-the (Acc.) at stille to put sin cykel one’s bike Subject (16a) Nede Down i kælderen in cellar-the (Dative) er is der there et godt a good sted place at stille sin cykel to put one’s bike (16b) *Ned Down i kælderen in cellar-the (Acc.) er is der there et godt sted a good place at stille sin cykel to put one’s bike Ned vs. nede (14a) Der There er is et godt a good sted place at stille sin cykel to put one’s bike nede down i kælderen in cellar-the (Dat.) (3) Nede i kælderen er et godt sted at stille sin cykel

15. Intermezzo Fact: Spoken language is linear, by genetic necessity produced and perceived through one channel Fact: Grammatical structure is hierarchical, with a clearly discernible level of phrase structure between the levels of lexical structure and sentence structure Need: An empirically falsifiable theory of the mapping between linear structure and hierachical structure Claim: Theories of movement may be systemic or functional in explanatory range; only the latter are empirically falsifiable. Conclusion: If the Need is to be satisfied by a theory of movement, its explanatory range must be functional.

16. The Representational Thesis The Extended • All linguistic facts are mental facts • All mental facts are representational facts • All representational facts are facts about informational • functions [Dretske 1995:xiii] [Thrane 2004a,b]

17. 1o- Represetational systems (Perceptual and Conceptual) Digitalization Conceptual input 1o-Representations Complete Digitalization Linguistic data 2o-Representations 2o- Representational System (The Language Faculty) The language faculty as a 2o Representational System Sensory input A Model of Language Perception

18. Movement Movement The Generative View of Representational Domains Sentence CP Information Structure IP Modalization Structure VP Argument Structure

19. The Representational View of Representational Domains SI INPUT MS 1o-Rep Principles of Linear Organization AS

20. +Argumental John his shoes -Argumental on in the bathroom Constituents John put his shoes on in the bathroom Constitutive on Obligatory John +Necessary Optional -Necessary

21. Typology of sentence constituents Constituents are Necessary iff they help define situation type Constituents are Argumental iff they are referential V selects Complements and Parasites to form V´ V´combine with Arguments and Satellites to for VP

22. ∏ VP • S ∑ V´ A in the bathroom • C John V P his shoes put on Argument structure ∑ = situation type ∏ = proposition

23. Constituent types C A P S Localist basis? Selectional Components C = Complement; A = Argument; P = Parasite; S = Satellite The axioms of John Anderson’s Localist Case Theory

24. 17. Sin cykel ˌstiller John ˈned i kælderen hver aften 18. John ˌstiller sin cykel ˈned i kælderen hver aften VP 19. Hver aften ˌstiller John sin cykel ˈned i kælderen 20.* ˈNed i kælderen ˌstiller John sin cykel hver aften • S V´ A hver aften every night • C John V P sin cykel one’s bike stille put ned i kælderen down in cellar-the

25. VP ● S • S hver aften every night V´ A nede i kælderen down in cellar-the • C John V P sin cykel one’s bike stille put Ø 21. Sin cykel ˈstiller John ˈnede i kælderen hver aften 22. John ˈstiller sin cykel ˈnede i kælderen hver aften 23. Hver aften ˈstiller John sin cykel ˈnede i kælderen 24. ˈNede i kælderen ˈstiller John sin cykel hver aften 25. John ˈstiller sin cykel et nyt sted hver aften

26. VP • S V´ A nede i kælderen down in cellar-the • C Ø V PVP Ø ● SNP V´ A et godt sted a good place være be • C Ø V P sin cykel one’s bike Ø ˈstille put

27. To conclude - Systemic movement is not empirically falsifiable Functional movement is empirically falsifiable, if an initial order is assumed If an initial order is not assumed, movement reduces to linear organization of hierarchically related constituents according to language-specific principles of information structure