7 – 09.12.11

Exam: 3rd of February, 1 p.m, about an hour, take index book

60% - pass

describe the differences between: descriptive grammar and prescriptive

answers: 1 sentence

Syntax: illustrate gaping, draw tree structure of a sentence, analogical to what we've done on lectures

Morphology: list of words – identify morphological process of it's production, provide analogical example

Identify meaning of the suffix

A lot from phonetics – repeat it on your own 'describe certain consonants in English (oral nasal, place of articulation, plosive etc.)

Vowel chart – point where which vowel is produced

Picture of a face – identify places (alveolar ridge, parts of the tongue etc)

Semantics

A bit of multiple choice difficult, with more than 1 answer correct.

Test for constituency

co-ordination

a. [fond of cats] and [afraid of dogs]

b. [slowly] but [surely]

c. [to go] or [to stay]



A: What did he do?

B: Run up the hill and up the mountain
B: *Ring up the electricity company and up the gas company

up the hill – PP

up the electricity company -= not a constituent of the phrase ring up the electricity company

ring up forms a complex verb 'to telephone'

Constraint: only like constituents can be conjoined; not-constituent strings cannot be co-ordinated

Agreement, case assignment and selection

a. He has/*have resigned

b. We have / *has resigned

TP

T

PRN T V

We have resigned

He has resigned

Specifier-head agreement

A finite T-constituent agrees in person and number with its specifier / subject

a. He has resigned

b. *Him has resigned ← different case

She wants [him to be there]

[] ← it's non-finite clause

Nominative subject clauses are finite [by virtue of containing a finite T constituent], whereas accusative-subject clauses are not

Case assignment conditions in English

A noun or pronoun expression is assigned

a. nominative case if the specifier of finite T (i.e. the subject of finite clause)

b. genitive case if a possessor (i.e. an entity possessing something)

c. accusative case otherwise (by default, if ineligible for nominative or genitive case)

a. A: You've been lying to me. B: What! Me lie to you? Never! ← lie is non-finite, it's infinitive

b. I have never understood syntax, me.

c. A: Who has finished the assignment? B: me.

d. A: Who is it? B: It's me.

In (a) me is the subject of the non-finite lie clause (lie here is a non-finite infinitive form) and so receives accusative case by default

In (b), me is the topic pronoun me at the end of the sentence receives accusative case by default

In (c), me is used as a sentence fragment and hence carries default accusative case

in (d) me is used as the complement of the verb be and carries default accusative case.

Selection of pronouns

a. He is taking/*taken/*take French

b. He has taken/*taking/take French

c. He will take/*taking/*taken French

TP

T

VP

PRN T V N

he is taking French

He has taken French

He will take French

Auxiliaries have selectional properties which determine the kind of complement they select

Sentence formation not only involves merger operations, but also a series of other operations involving agreement, case-marking and selection.

Syntactic structures can also contain covert, null or empty constituents – silent constituents which have no overt phonetic form.

a. He was laughing and she was crying

b. He was laughing and she – crying. ← auxiliary verb (Tense marker) is omitted

The auxiliary was has been omitted in (b) to avoid repetition. (a kind of ellipsis known as gapping)

TP

PRN T

she

T V

o crying

The clause is a TP headed by a null auxiliary o

PRO: the empty subject of infinitive clauses

a. We would like [you to stay]

b. We would like [to stay]

Apparently subjectless inf. Clauses contain an understood null subject (empty subject). Since the null subject found in inf. Clauses has much the same grammatical properties as pronouns, it is designed as PRO

TP

T

VP

TP

T

PRN T V PRN T V

we would like you to stay

We would like PRO to stay

The null subject PRO in (b) is controlled by (refers back to) the subject of the would clause (we is controller or antecedent of PRO

Covert complements

a: do you thing he will resign?

B: he may

TP

PRN T

he

T V

may o

Empty complementisers

All clauses contain an over or null T constituent

Clauses can be introduced by clause-introducing particles (if/that/for)

(traditionally conjunctions, but now complemetisers)

Apparently complementiserless clauses can be argued to be Cps headed by a null complementiser.

a. We didn't know [if he had resigned]

b We didn't know [that he had resigned]

c. We didn't know [he had resigned]

TAKE THE REST FROM MAGDA