Objects and other subjects : grammatical functions, functional categories, and configurationality ; [papers presented at a workshop held July 1999 at the LSA Linguistic Institute, Urbana-Champagne, Ill

The papers in this volume examine the current role of grammatical functions in transformational syntax in two ways: (i) through largely theoretical considerations of their status, and (ii) through detailed analyses for a wide variety of languages. Taken together the chapters in this volume present a comprehensive view of how transformational syntax characterizes the elusive but often useful notions of subject and object, examining how subject and object properties are distributed among various functional projections, converging sometimes in particular languages. Title Page 3 Copyringt Page 4 DEDICATION 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS 6 LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS 7 FORWORD 8 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 11 REMARKS ON GRAMMATICAL FUNCTIONS IN TRANSFORMATIONAL SYNTAX 12 1. A POINT OF DEPARTURE 13 2. RECENT VIEWS ON GRAMMATICAL FUNCTIONS 17 2.1 On the subject of subjects 17 2.2 Objects and other objects 19 3. THE STATE OF FUNCTIONAL ART 21 3.1 Subject attributes through the clause 22 3.2 Object properties 25 3.3 Functional parameters and typological variation 26 4. CONCLUSION 28 ENDNOTES 29 PHRASE STRUCTURE AS A REPRESENTATION OF "PRIMITIVE" GRAMMATICAL RELATIONS 31 1. THE ORIGINS OF THE CHOMSKIAN VIEW 32 2. THE RELATIONAL GRAMMAR CRITIQUE 34 3. THE CHOMSKIAN REACTION 36 4. IS PHRASE STRUCTURE A GOOD REPRESENTATION FORGRAMMATICAL RELATIONS? 42 5. WHY IS PHRASE STRUCTURE A GOOD REPRESENTATION FORGRAMMATICAL RELATIONS? 53 6. CONCLUSION 59 NOTES 60 GRAMMA TICAL FUNCTIONS, THEMATIC ROLES, AND PHRASE STRUCTURE: THEIR UNDERLYING DISUNITY 62 1. INTRODUCTION 62 2. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DEEP ALIGNMENT HYPOTHESIS 62 2.1 Grammatical functions and thematic roles 62 2.2 The UTAH and its consequences 65 3. AGAINST THE DEEP ALIGNMENT HYPOTHESIS 70 3.1 The independent need/or D-structure 71 3.2 Problems with proto-thematic-roles 74 3.3 Relational prominence and embedding prominence 76 4. CONCLUSION 83 NOTES 83 IS CASE ANOTHER NAME FOR GRAMMATICAL FUNCTION? EVIDENCE FROM OBJECT ASYMMETRIES· 85 1. ABSTRACT CASE AND GRAMMATICAL FUNCTIONS 86 2. CHICHEWA 88 3. CATALAN 91 4. PROBLEMS 94 4.1 Thematic role differences 94 4.2 Differences regarding incorporated pronouns 96 4.3 Differences regarding lexical binding 98 4.4 Differences regarding inherent Case as the sole Case 100 5. CONSEQUENCES 104 NOTES 109 SUBJECTS, OBJECTS, AND THE EPP* 111 1. INTRODUCTION 111 2. BASIC EVIDENCE FOR OBJECT SHIFT IN ENGLISH 111 3. 'HIGH' BEHAVIOR AND MOVEMENT: OVERT OR COVERT? 113 4. THE NATURE OF OBJECT SHIFT IN ENGLISH 114 4.1 Overt Object Shift and the SpUt- VP Hypothesis 114 4.2 Apparent Obligatoriness of Object Shift 117 5. THE OPTIONALITY OF OBJECT SHIFT 117 5.1 Barrierhood of Subject vs. Object 117 5.2 Verb NP Particle/Verb Particle NP 119 5.3 A Scope Ambiguity 120 5.4 Quantifier Lowering? 122 6. ARGUMENTS FOR OBLIGATORY OBJECT SHIFT,AND POTENTIAL REPLIES 124 7. THE REMAINING QUESTION 127 ENDNOTES 127 DERIVED OBJECTS IN MALAGASY 130 1. DERIVED OBJECTS 131 1.1 Derived objects in Relational Grammar: Ascension to 2 131 1.2 Derived objects in GB and the Minimalist Program 133 1.2.1 Grammatical Function changing (Baker 1988) 133 1.2.2 Object movement to AgrO 134 2. DERIVED OBJECTS IN MALAGASY 136 2.1 Background facts 136 2.2 Raising to Object 137 2.3 Applicatives 138 2.4 Possessor Raising 140 2.4.1 Background 140 2.4.2 Agent Phrase Raising 144 2.5 Another look at raising to object 149 3. POTENTIAL PROBLEMS 152 3.1 Instruments and Material Themes 153 3.2 Specific objects 154 4. SPECULATIONS 158 NOTES 159 THE DISTRIBUTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTIES IN IRISH 163 1. CLAUSAL ORGANIZATIONAND THE UNDERSTANDING OF SUBJECTHOOD 163 2. ABSENCE OF EPP EFFECTS 166 2.1 Subject-less Clauses 169 2.2 Optionality of Raising 171 2.3 Existential Sentences 172 3. INTERIM SUMMARY 175 4. PARTIAL RAISING 175 4.1 Passive and Unaccusative Structures 175 4.2 Adverbial Distribution 177 4.3 Quantifier Stranding (Quantifier Float) 179 4.4 Semantic Properties of Subjects 180 5. SECOND INTERIM SUMMARY 182 6. THE LOCUS OF SEMANTIC ROLE ASSIGNMENT 183 6.1 Another Case Marking Strategy 186 6.2 Un-Raised Dative Subjects 193 7. CONCLUSION 196 NOTES 196 APPENDIX - SOURCES 198 THE EPP IN SP ANISH* 199 o. INTRODUCTION 199 1. APPARENT EVIDENCE AGAINST THE EPP IN SPANISH 201 2. EVIDENCE IN FAVOR OF THE EPP IN SPANISH 203 2.1 Preverbal subjects do not have information status of topic or focus 203 2.2 Only one preverbal non-topic is allowed 204 2.3 Preverbal subjects are not in topic position 205 2.4 Preverbal subjects are not in focuslwh- position 208 3. ANOTHER LOOK AT EVIDENCE AGAINST THE EPP 209 3.1 Word order, expletives, and the definiteness effect 210 3.2 Quantifier scope 214 3.3 Word order with fronted wh-Ijocused phrase 215 4. CONCLUSIONS 222 NOTES 224 ON PREDICATION AND THE STATUS OF SUBJECTS IN NIUEAN* 230 o. INTRODUCTION 230 1. SUBJECTHOOD 230 2. SUBJECTS AND PREDICATES IN NIUEAN 233 2.1 Two Views of Niuean Subjects 233 2.2 Niuean Predication 234 3. THE NIUEAN CLAUSE 236 4. ON THE EQUITY OF A,S,O 238 5. A,S VS. 0: ACCUSATIVE ORGANIZATION 242 5. 1 Thematic subjects 242 5.2 Niuean Binding 243 5.3 Control 246 5.4 Noun Incorporation 247 6. S,O VS. A GROUPING 247 7. CONCLUSION 249 ENDNOTES 249 FUNCTIONAL ARCHITECTURE AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTIES* 252 1. NP PROPERTIES OF ENGLISH NON-NP SUBJECTS 252 1.1 Raising 253 1.2 Subject agreement 254 1.3 Emphatic reflexives 254 1.4 Plural adverbs 255 1.5 Non-NP subjects are DPs 256 2. DP PROPERTIES OF NON-NPS INSERTED INTO CANONICAL DPCOMPLEMENT POSITIONS 258 2.1 Passive 259 2.2 Subjacency 260 2.3 Emphatic reflexives 261 2.4 Plural adverbs 262 3. NON-NP SUBJECTS IN FRENCH 263 3.1 Raising facts 263 3.2 Agreement 264 3.3 Emphatic reflexives 265 3.4 Subjacency and the relevance of subject islandhood 266 4. THE CASE AGAINST A SEMANTIC ACCOUNT OF SUBJECT PROPERTIES 269 4.1 Bulgarian 269 4.2 V-initial languages 273 5. A TYPOLOGY OF SUBJECT-PROPERTIES ANDA THEORY OF SUBJECT POSITIONS 276 5.1 A typology 276 5.2 A theory 277 REFERENCES 285 AUTHOR INDEX 300 SUBJECT INDEX 304 "Grammatical functions, readily identifiable informally in particular languages, have had an uncertain status in generative grammar. Despite Chomsky's assertion in Aspects that they are not theoretical primitives (a position vigorously challenged by a number of well-known theories), the role of functions such as subject and object has become increasingly prominent as Chomskyan linguistics has developed. As statements of principles and rules of grammar have grown to incorporate these notions, the position that grammatical functions are not primitives has come to merit scrutiny. The papers in this volume examine the current role of grammatical functions in transformational syntax in two ways: (i) through largely theoretical considerations of their status and (ii) through detailed analyses for a wide variety of languages. Taken together the chapters in this volume present a comprehensive view of how transformational syntax characterizes the elusive but often useful notions of subject and object, examining how subject and object properties are distributed among various functional projections, converging sometimes in particular languages."--Jacket Front Matter....Pages i-xv Remarks on Grammatical Functions in Transformational Syntax....Pages 1-19 Phrase Structure As a Representation of “Primitive” Grammatical Relations....Pages 21-51 Grammatical Functions, Thematic Roles, and Phrase Structure: Their Underlying Disunity....Pages 53-75 Is Case Another Name for Grammatical Function? Evidence From Object Asymmetries....Pages 77-102 Subjects, Objects, and the EPP....Pages 103-121 Derived Objects in Malagasy....Pages 123-155 The Distribution of Subject Properties in Irish....Pages 157-192 The EPP in Spanish....Pages 193-223 On Predication and the Status of Subjects in Niuean....Pages 225-246 Functional Architecture and the Distribution of Subject Properties....Pages 247-279 Back Matter....Pages 281-307