Cover not available
Part of
Minimalism and Beyond: Radicalizing the interfaces
Edited by Peter Kosta, Steven L. Franks, Teodora Radeva-Bork and Lilia Schürcks
[Language Faculty and Beyond 11] 2014
► pp. 236–266

Flavors of movement

Revisiting the A/A′ distinction

| Universität Potsdam, Germany
| Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Argentina

In this paper we revisit a distinction that has been core to GB and Minimalist approaches to the property of displacement in natural languages: the opposition between A(rgumental) and A′ (non-argumental) positions, as sources and targets of the general operation Move-α. Minimalism brought an additional requirement for the establishment of chains generated via movement, the Chain Uniformity Principle, requiring that all members of a chain be in uniform positions with respect to a certain property. We will argue that such chains, even if possible in principle, are not desirable for both theoretical and empirical reasons, with Radical Minimalism as our theoretical framework. The rejection of the Chain Uniformity Principle will ultimately lead us to revisit the A/A′ distinction as a real and relevant theoretical concept.

Published online: 24 September 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.11.09kos
References
Abels, Klaus
2003 “Successive Cyclicity, Anti-locality and Adposition Stranding.” Ph.D. Thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs.Google Scholar
2012 Phases: An Essay on Cyclicity. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Abels, Klaus and Bentzen, Kristine
2009 “A note on the punctuated nature of movement paths.” Catalan Journal of Linguistics 8: 19–40.Google Scholar
Baddeley, Alan
2003 “Working memory and language: An overview.” Journal of Communication Disorders 36: 189–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bayer, Josef and Kornflit, Jaklin
1994 “Against scrambling as an instance of move-alpha.” In Studies on Scrambling. Movement and Non-Movement Approaches to Free Word Order Phenomena, Norbert Corver and Henk van Reimdisjk (eds). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Boeckx, Cedric
2003 “Free word order in minimalist syntax.” Folia Linguistica 37(1–2): 77–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 “Treelets, not trees”. Talk presented at BCGL 3 – Trees and Beyond, May 21–23.
2010 Defeating Lexicocentrism. lingBuzz/001130
Bresnan, Joan
1971 “Sentence stress and syntactic transformations”. Language 47(2): 257–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cable, Seth
2010 The Grammar of Q: Q-Particles, Wh-Movement and Pied-Piping. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
1986 Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1995 The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1999 “Derivation by phase.” MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 18.Google Scholar
2000 “Minimalist inquiries: The framework.” In Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik, Roger Martin, David Michaels and Juan Uriagereka (eds), 89–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2005 On Phases. Ms., MIT.Google Scholar
2007 “Approaching UG from below.” In Interfaces + Recursion = Language? Chomsky’s Minimalism and the View from Syntax-Semantics, Uli Sauerland and Hans-Martin Gaetrner (eds), 1–30. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2013 “Problems of projection”. Lingua. Special Issue in Syntax and Cognition: Core Ideas and Results in Syntax. 33–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam and Lasnik, Howard
1977 “On filters and control”. Linguistic Inquiry 8: 425–504.Google Scholar
1993 “The theory of principles and parameters.” In Syntax: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, Volume 1, Joachim Jacobs, Arnim vos Stechow, Wolfgang Sternfeld, Theo Vennemann (eds), 506–569. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Corver, Norbert and van Riemsdijk, Henk
(eds) 1994 Studies on Scrambling: Movement and Non-Movement Approaches to Free Word Order Phenomena. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, William and Cruse, Alan
2004 Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culicover, Peter
1991 “Topicalization, inversion and complementizers in English.” In Going Romance and Beyond, OTS Working Papers, Denis Delfitto, Martin Everaert, Arnold Evers and Frits Stuurman (eds), 1–45. Research Institute for Language and Speech, University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
Culicover, Peter and Jackendoff, Ray
2005 Simpler Syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davies, Christopher
2013 “The role of focus particles in Wh-Interrogatives: Evidence from a southern Ryukyuan language.” Presented in West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics 31 , Arizona State University, February 8, 2013.
Di Sciullo, Anna-Maria and Isac, Daniela
2008. “The asymmetry of merge.” Biolinguistics 2(4): 260–290.Google Scholar
Dehaene, Stanislas
(ed.) 2011 Space, Time and Number in the Brain: Searching for the Foundations of Mathematical Thought. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, Samuel and Seely, T. Daniel
2002 “Rule applications as cycles in a level free syntax.” In Derivation and Explanation in the Minimalist Program, Sanuel D. Epstein and T. Daniel Seely (eds), 65–89. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fanselow, Gisbert
2003 “Free constituent order: A minimalist interface account.” Folia Linguistica. 37(1–2): 191–232. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004 “Cyclic phonology-syntax-interaction: Movement to first position in German” In Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure Vol. 1 (Working Papers of the SFB 632), 1–42. Potsdam: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.Google Scholar
Gallego, Angel
2010 Phase Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Green, Georgia
2011 “Elementary principles of HPSG.” In Non-Transformational Syntax. Formal and Explicit Models of Grammar, Borsley, Robert and Kresti Börjars (eds), 9–53. London:Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grohmann, Kleanthes K
2003 Prolific Domains. On the Anti-Locality of Movement Dependencies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hale, Kenneth and Kayser, Samuel Jay
2002 Prolegomena to a Theory of Argument Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hauser, Macr D., Chomsky, Noam and Fitch, W. Tecumseh
2002 “The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how does it evolve?” Science 298: 1569–1579. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heck, Fabian and Müller, Gereon
2007 Extremely local optimization.” In Proceedings of the 26th WECOL , Erin Brainbridge and Brian Agbayani (eds), 170–183. California State University, Fresno.Google Scholar
Horn, Lawrence
1988 “Pragmatic theory.” In Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey. Volume I, Linguistic Theory: Foundations, Frederick Newmayer (ed.), 113–145. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray
1983 Semantics and Cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2002 Foundations of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Junghanns, Uwe and Zybatow, Gerhild
2009 “Grammatik und Informationsstruktur.” In The Slavic Languages. An International Handbook on their Structure, History and Investigation, Kempgen, Sebastian, Peter Kosta, Tilman Berger and Karl Gutschmidt (eds), 684–706. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter (HSK 32.1).Google Scholar
Kayne, Richard
1994 The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kitahara, Hisatsugu
1997 Elementary Operations and Optimal Derivations. Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 31. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kosta, Peter
2006 “On free word order phenomena in Czech as compared to German: Is clause internal scrambling A-movement, A-bar-movement or is it base generated?” Zeitschrift für Slawistik 51(3): 306–321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kosta, Peter and Schürcks, Lilia
2007 “The focus feature revisited.” In Linguistic Investigations into Formal Description of Slavic Languages. Contributions of the Sixth European Conference held at Potsdam University, November 30-December 3 2005, Peter Kosta, Lilia Schürcks (eds), 245–267. Peter Lang Verlag. (Potsdam Linguistic Investigations; 1)Google Scholar
2009 “Word order in slavic.” In The Slavic Languages. An International Handbook on their Structure, History and Investigation, Sebastian Kempgen, Peter Kosta, Tilman Berger and Karl Gutschmidt (eds), 654–683.Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter (HSK 32.1).Google Scholar
Kosta, Peter and Krivochen, Diego
2012 “Some thoughts on language diversity, UG and the importance of language typology: Scrambling and non-monotonic merge of adjuncts and specifiers in Czech and German.” Zeitschrift für Slawistik. 57(4): 377–407 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krivochen, Diego
2011 “An introduction to radical minimalism I: On merge and agree.” IBERIA 3(2): 20–62.Google Scholar
2012a. Towards a Geometrical Syntax: A Formalization of Radical Minimalism. Ms., Universität Potsdam. Under Review. [URL]Google Scholar
2012b The Syntax and Semantics of the Nominal Construction. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Publishers. (Potsdam Linguistic Investigations; 8).Google Scholar
2013a A Frustrated Mind. Ms., Under Review. [URL].Google Scholar
2013b Tokens vs. Copies: Displacement Revisited. Ms., Under Review. [URL].Google Scholar
Krivochen, Diego and Kosta, Peter
2013 Eliminating Empty Categories: A Radically Minimalist View on their Ontology and Justification. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Publishers. (Potsdam Linguistic Investigations; 11).Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald
2009 Investigations in Cognitive Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larson, Bradley and Hornstein, Norbert
2012 Copies and Occurrences. Ms., lingbuzz/001484Google Scholar
Larson, Richard
1988 “On the double object construction.” Linguistic Inquiry 19 (3). 335–391.Google Scholar
Lasnik, Howard
1999 Minimalist Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lasnik, Howard, Uriagereka, Juan and Boeckx, Cedric
2005 A Course in Minimalist Syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Mateu Fontanals, Jaume
2002 “Argument Structure. Relational Construal at the Syntax-Semantics Interface.” Ph.D. dissertation, Bellaterra: UAB. [URL].Google Scholar
2005 “Impossible primitives.” In The Compositionality of Meaning and Content: Foundational Issues, Markus Werning, Edouard Machery, Gerhard Schurz (eds), 213–229. Frankfurt: Ontos.Google Scholar
Martin, Roger and Uriagereka, Juan
this volume. “On the nature of chains in minimalism.”
Miyagawa, Shigeru
2010 Why Agree? Why Move? Unifying Agreement-Based and Discourse-Configurational Languages. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Molnárfi, Lazlo
2003 “On optional movement and feature checking in West Germanic.” Folia Linguistica 37(1–2): 129–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Müller, Gereon
2011 Constraints on Displacement: A Phase-Based Approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, LFAB Series volume 7. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nunes, Jairo
2004 Linearization of Chains and Sidewards Movement. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ouali, Hamid
2008 “On C-to-T Phi-feature transfer: The nature of agreement and anti-agreement in Berber.” In Agreement Restrictions, Roberta D’Alessandro, Gunar Hrafnjargarson and Susann Fischer (eds), 151–180. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David and Torrego, Esther
2007 “The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features.” In Phrasal and Clausal Architecture: Syntactic Derivation and Interpretation, Simin Karimi, Vida Samiian, Wendy K. Wilkins (eds), 262–294. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pollock, Jean-Yves
1989 “Verb movement, UG and the structure of IP.” Linguistic Inquiry 20: 365–424.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan and Smolensky, Paul
2004 Optimality Theory. Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Putnam, Michael
(ed.) 2010 Exploring Crash-Proof Grammars. LFAB Series volume 3. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 The Thing that Should not Be: Rethinking the A-A’ distinction. Universitet i Tromso CASTL Linguistics Colloquium, October 7, 2010.Google Scholar
Putnam, Michael and Stroik, Thomas
2011 “Syntax at ground zero.” Linguistic Analysis 37(3–4): 389–404.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi
1997 “The fine structure of the left periphery.” In Elements of Grammar, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 281–337. Kluwer, Dordrecht. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004 “Locality and left periphery.” In Structures and Beyond – The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Volume 3, Adriana Belletti (ed.), 223–251. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2006 “On the form of chains: Criterial positions and ECP effects.” In Wh-Movement: Moving on, Lisa Cheng, Norbert Corver (eds). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rezac, Milan
2004 “Elements of Cyclic Syntax: Agree and Merge.” PhD thesis, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Sag, Ivan and Wasow, Tom
2011 “Performance-compatible competence grammar.” In Non Transformational Syntax, Robert Borsley and Kresti Börjars (eds), 359–377. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shieber, Stuart
1986 An Introduction to Unification-Based Approaches to Grammar. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Starke, Michal
2001 “Move dissolves into Merge.” PhD thesis, University of Geneva.Google Scholar
Stroik, Thomas
2009 Locality in Minimalist Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stroik, Thomas and Putnam, Michael
2013 The Structural Design of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Kristen, Devereux, Barry and Tyler, Lorraine
2011 “Conceptual structure: Towards an integrated neurocognitive account.” Language and Cognitive Processes 26(9): 1368–1401. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Uriagereka, Juan
1998 Rhyme and Reason. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2002 “Multiple Spell-Out.” In Derivations: Exploring the Dynamics of Syntax, Juan Uriagereka (ed.), 45–65. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
2008 Syntactic Anchors: On Semantic Restructuring. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 Spell-Out and the Minimalist Program. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre and Sperber, Dan
2003 “Relevance theory.” In Handbook of Pragmatics, Lawrence Horn and Gregory Ward (eds), 607–628. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Kosta, Peter & Petr Karlík
2020. Die Nominalisierung von Nebensätzen im Tschechischen. Zeitschrift für Slawistik 65:4 ► pp. 479 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.