3.3 Null Auxiliaries

Elliptical, gapping, null spellout, silent AUX

3.3-10

(15) He could have helped her, or [she have helped him]

(19) Have-cliticisation

Have can encliticise onto a word W ending

in a vowel or diphthong provided that

(i)W c-commands have and

(ii) W is immediately adjacent to have

3.4 Null T

(21) All finite clauses are TPs headed by an (overt or null) T constituent

(23) TP (25) TP

PRN T´ PRN T´

He T VP He T VP

? V N Do+Af3SgPr V N

enjoys syntax does enjoy syntax

enjoyed Af3SgPr enjoys syntax

Affix Hopping

(Af: Tense Affix)

Chomsky (1995): All heads in a syntactic structure are required to play a role in

determining the meaning of the overall structure.

Cf. perfect have (AUX) vs. causative/experienced have (V)

(31) a. They’ve seen a ghost (perfect have)

b.*They’ve their car serviced regularly (causative have)

c.*They’ve students walk out on them sometimes (experienced have)

Null T in infinitive clauses

(33) a. I have never known [Tom criticise anyone]

him

=> Tom has never been known [to criticise anyone]

b. A reporter saw [Senator Sleaze leave Benny’s Bunny Bar]

=> He was seen [to leave B’s B B]

(35) ECM verbs TP

a. I expect [him to win] N T´

b. I judged [him to be lying] Tom T VP

c. They reported [him to be missing] to V PRN

d. I believe [him to be innocent] criticise anyone

3.6 Null C in finite clauses

(44) We didn’t know [he had resigned] or [that he had been accused of corruption](49) A: What were you going to ask me? B: a. If you feel like a Coke b. Do you feel like a Coke? c.*If do you feel like a Coke?(50) [I am feeling thirsty], but [should I save my last Coke till later]?

(52) Case Condition A pronoun or noun expression is assigned case by the closest case- assigning head which c-commands it

A finite C constituent (whether overt or null) assigns nominative case to the subject of its clause under c-command

3.7 Null C in infinite clauses

(55) I want [Mary to come to Japan] and [for her to see my parents]

(57) obl. for-deletion when immediately follows want

a. *More than anything, she wanted for him to apologise

b. More than anything, she wanted him to apologise

c. She wanted more than anything for him to apologise

d. *She wanted more than anything him to apologise

(58) a. What she wanted was for him to apologise

b.*What she wanted was him to apologise

3.8 Defective clauses

ECM verbs

(67) *We didn’t intend [you to hurt him] or [for him to hurt you](70) a. He is believed to hurt you b. You weren’t intended to hurt him

(72) Impenetrability Condition A constituent in the domain of (i.e. c-commanded by) a complementiser

is impenetrable to (and so cannot be attracted by) a higher head c-commanding the complementiser

(73)*[CP [C Ø] [TP You [Tweren’t] intended [CP [Cfor] [TP you [Tto] hurt anyone]]]] x (PIC)

3.9 Null determiners and quantifiers

(81) a. DP b. DP c. DP

D N D N D N

we linguists you linguists Ø linguists

(82) a. Eggs and many dairy products cause cholesterol

b. I’d like toast and some coffee please QP

Q N

Ø eggs

toast

Longobardi (2005) ‘Toward a Unified Grammar of Reference’

• Italian bare arguments are in fact DPswith a null D

• DP

D NP

∂ potatoes

∂ : phonologically null

N-to-D raising: obligatory for PNs (proper nouns),

impossible for BNs (bare nouns)

Determinerless arguments

(1) PNs(proper names): (2) BNs(bare nouns):

to denote a definite, specific entity mass or plural head nouns

(Kripke 1980)

Ho incontrato Maria/te a. Bevo sempre vino

'I met Maria/you.' 'I always drink wine.‘

b. Ho mangiato patate

'I ate potatoes.'