Government and binding theory and the minimalist program Ed. by Gert Webelhuth

Language ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 73 (4) ◽  
pp. 856-858
Author(s):  
Lindsay J. Whaley
Language ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 73 (4) ◽  
pp. 856
Author(s):  
Lindsay J. Whaley ◽  
Gert Webelhuth

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-36
Author(s):  
Aiqing Wang

Following the Government and Binding theory mainly developed by Chomsky (1981, 1982, 1986), I explore wh-P and the Intervention Effect of negation in Late Archaic Chinese (LAC). I propose that the inverted order of wh-P in LAC is generated via PP inversion followed by the separate preposing of wh and P. The wh-complement raises to [Spec, PP] and further moves to the specifier position of a functional projection. If the wh-PP is base-generated preverbally, the preposition moves to the head position of the functional projection directly; if the wh-PP is base-generated postverbally, the preposition must first incorporate to a V0 and then move to the head position of the functional projection through excorporation. In terms of the Intervention Effect, wh-arguments and adverbials that usually move to the Low focus position below negation are subject to a blocking effect caused by negation, so these wh-phrases have to land in the High focus position above negation which is expected to accommodate ‘high’ adverbials exclusively. I argue that the Intervention Effect in LAC is a consequence of Q-binding as feature movement of [wh], interacting with fronting into the hierarchy of clause-internal positions driven by [Focus] feature.


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 365-377
Author(s):  
Faiza Zeb

Languages show variations in terms of their syntactic patterns. Their comparison reveals the effective strategies to explore and illustrate the difficulties that language learners may come across in the course of acquiring any new language. This study aims at the exploration of nominative and accusative properties in English and Urdu with the help of Chomsky’s Case theory as first introduced within the boundaries of the Government and Binding theory in 1981. It effectively presents the properties of any nouns in order to be declared as either nominative or accusative cases in any languages. Along with the case theory, the researcher has used qualitative and further the descriptive and content analysis approach as applied to the few English sentences taken from the New Headway Workbook by Liz and John Soars, meant for language learners at Elementary level. The study presents the thorough analysis of few English sentences and their Urdu translations to highlight similarities and differences as present in English and Urdu nominatives and accusatives in relation to other parts of speech as these properties haven’t been explored by the previous researches instead the focus has been on ergativity in Urdu.


2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 134-185
Author(s):  
Enrico Cipriani

Abstract I provide a critical survey of the role that semantics took in the several models of generative grammar, since the 1950s until the Minimalist Program. I distinguish four different periods. In the first section, I focus on the role of formal semantics in generative grammar until the 1970s. In Section 2 I present the period of linguistic wars, when the role of semantics in linguistic theory became a crucial topic of debate. In Section 3 I focus on the formulation of conditions on transformations and Binding Theory in the 1970s and 1980s, while in the last Section I discuss the role of semantics in the minimalist approach. In this section, I also propose a semantically-based model of generative grammar, which fully endorses minimalism and Chomsky’s later position concerning the primary role of the semantic interface in the Universal Grammar modelization (Strong Minimalist Thesis). In the Discussion, I point out some theoretical problems deriving from Chomsky’s internalist interpretation of model-theoretic semantics.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document