[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Because NEG and T don t have astrong V-feature in present-day English, they can no longer trigger movement of a main verb.In §5.8 weoutlined a morphological account of Affix Hopping and Do-Support.We suggested that once thesyntactic component of the grammar has generated a given syntactic structure (e.g.a complete CP), therelevant structure is then sent to the PF component for morphological and phonological processing.If astructure being processed by the PF component contains an unattached Tns affix, this is lowered onto theclosest head below it by Affix Hopping if this is an overt verb; if not, the dummy item do is attached tothe affix by Do-Support.In §5.9, we presented evidence that head movement can also apply in nominalstructures.We argued that nouns in Italian raise to a head Num(ber) position intermediate between D andN in structures like la grande invasione italiana dell Albania the great invasion Italian of.the Albania.We noted that in some languages, nouns can raise still further to attach to D e.g.in Norwegian nominalssuch as bøkene hans books.the his.WORKBOOK SECTIONExercise 5.1Discuss the derivation of each of the following (declarative or interrogative) sentences, drawing a treediagram to represent the structure of each sentence and saying why the relevant structure is (or is not)grammatical (in the case of 4, saying why it is ungrammatical as a main clause):1 He helps her 2 *He d s help her 3 *Helps he her?4 *If he helps her? 5 Does he help her? 6 I wonder if he helps her7 *I wonder if does he help her 8 *I wonder if helps he her 9 *He helps not her10 *He not helps her 11 He does not help her 12 He doesn t help her13 Doesn t he help her? 14 He might not help her 15 He dare not help her(Note that d s in 1 represents unstressed does, /d z/.) Say what is archaic about the syntax of 16 below (thesecond line of the nursery rhyme Baa Baa Black Sheep) and why such structures are no longergrammatical in many varieties of English:16 Have you any wool?Then, discuss the derivation of each of the following questions produced by a number of different childrenaged 2-4 years, and identify the nature of the child s error in each case:17 Is the clock is working? 18 Does it opens?19 Don t you don t want one? 20 Does it doesn t move? 129Consider, also, the derivation of the following questions reported (by Akmajian and Heny 1975, p.17) tohave been produced by an unnamed three-year-old girl:21 Is I can do that? 22 Is you should eat the apple?23 Is the apple juice won t spill?In addition, comment on the syntax of the following negative sentence produced by a boy called Abe atage 2;5.26 (2 years, 5 months, 26 days):24 I not can find itAnd finally, say why you think negative imperatives like 25 below (which were grammatical inElizabethan English) are ungrammatical in present-day English, and why we find 26 instead:25 *Be not afraid! 26 Don t be afraid!Helpful hintsIn 13, account for the fact that the sentence is ambiguous between one interpretation paraphraseable as Isit the case that he doesn t help her and another paraphraseable as Isn t it the case that he helps her?.Inrelation to 14, 15 and 24, consider the scope relations between the auxiliary and not, and bear in mind thesuggestion made in the main text that finite auxiliaries normally originate in T, but originate in an AUXposition below NEG if they fall within the scope of not.In 17-20, consider the possibility that childrensometimes fail to delete the original occurrence of a moved T constituent.In 19 and 20, consider thepossibility that attachment of the clitic n t to a Tns affix in T may either be treated by the child as asyntactic operation, or as a phonological operation which applies after the relevant syntactic structure hasbeen formed.In relation to 25, consider the possibility that although a T in finite declarative andinterrogative clauses has a strong AUX feature, T in imperatives is weak and so can attract neither mainverbs nor auxiliaries
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
