View Item 

Show simple item record

Feature‐Splitting Internal Merge: Improper Movement, Intervention, and the A/A′ Distinction
dc.contributor.authorObata, Mikien_US
dc.contributor.authorEpstein, Samuel Daviden_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-11-10T15:31:33Z
dc.date.available2012-07-12T17:42:23Zen_US
dc.date.issued2011-06en_US
dc.identifier.citationObata, Miki; Epstein, Samuel David (2011). "Feature‐Splitting Internal Merge: Improper Movement, Intervention, and the A/A′ Distinction." Syntax 14(2). <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/86827>en_US
dc.identifier.issn1368-0005en_US
dc.identifier.issn1467-9612en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/86827
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Ltden_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.titleFeature‐Splitting Internal Merge: Improper Movement, Intervention, and the A/A′ Distinctionen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelLinguisticsen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHumanitiesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumSamuel David Epstein
University of Michigan
Department of Linguistics
440 Lorch Hall, 611 Tappan Street
Ann Arbor, MI 48109‐1220
USA 
 sepstein@umich.eduen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherMiki Obata
Mie University
Faculty of Humanities, Law, and Economics
1577 Kurimamachiya‐cho
Tsu City, Mie 514‐8507
Japan 
 obata@human.mie‐u.ac.jpen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/86827/1/j.1467-9612.2010.00149.x.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1467-9612.2010.00149.xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceSyntaxen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAbels, K. 2007. Towards a restrictive theory of (remnant) movement. Ms., University of Tromsø and University College London.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAdger, D. & G. Ramchand. 2005. Merge and Move: Wh ‐dependencies revisited. Linguistic Inquiry 36: 161 – 193.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBaker, M. 1988. Incorporation: A theory of grammatical function changing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBaker, M. & C. Collins. 2006. Linkers and the internal structure of vP. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 24: 307 – 354.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBejar, S. & D. Massam. 1999. Multiple Case checking. Syntax 2: 65 – 79.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBošković, Ž. 1997. The syntax of nonfinite complementation: An economy approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBošković, Ž. 2007. On the locality and motivation of Move and Agree: An even more minimal theory. Linguistic Inquiry 38: 589 – 644.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarstens, V. 2005. Agree and EPP in Bantu. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 23: 219 – 279.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarstens, V. 2008. Raising in Bantu. Ms., University of Missouri, Columbia.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChomsky, N. 1964. Current issues in linguistic theory. The Hague: Mouton.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChomsky, N. 1973. Conditions on transformations. In A festschrift for Morris Halle, ed. S. Anderson & P. Kiparsky, 232 – 286. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChomsky, N. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChomsky, N. 1982. Some concepts and consequences of the theory of government and binding. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChomsky, N. 1995a. Bare phrase structure. In Government and binding theory and the Minimalist Program, ed. G. Webelhuth, 383 – 439. Cambridge: Blackwell.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChomsky, N. 1995b. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChomsky, N. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, ed. R. Martin, D. Michaels & J. Uriagereka, 89 – 155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChomsky, N. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. M. Kenstowicz, 1 – 52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChomsky, N. 2005. Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry 35: 1 – 22.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChomsky, N. 2007. Approaching UG from below. In Interfaces + recursion = language? ed. U. Sauerland & H.‐M. Gärtner, 1 – 29. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChomsky, N. 2008. On phases. In Foundational issues in linguistic theory: Essays in honor of Jean‐Roger Vergnaud, ed. R. Freidin, C. P. Otero & M. L. Zubizarreta, 133 – 166. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChomsky, N. & H. Lasnik. 1995. The theory of principles and parameters. In The Minimalist Program, N. Chomsky, 13 – 127. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceden Dikken, M. 2001. “Pluringulars,” pronouns, and quirky agreement. The Linguistic Review 18: 19 – 41.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEpstein, S. D., E. Groat, R. Kawashima & H. Kitahara. 1998. A derivational approach to syntactic relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEpstein, S. D., H. Kitahara & T. D. Seely. 2008. The value of phonological underspecification in the narrow syntax. Paper presented at the Exploring Crash‐Proof Grammars conference, Carson‐Newman College, Dandridge, TN (February–March).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEpstein, S. D., A. Pires & T. D. Seely. 2005. EPP in T: More controversial subjects. Syntax 8: 65 – 80.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEpstein, S. D. & T. D. Seely. 2002. Rule applications as cycles in a level‐free syntax. In Derivation and explanation in the Minimalist Program, ed. S. D. Epstein & T. D. Seely, 65 – 89. Cambridge: Blackwell.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEpstein, S. D. & T. D. Seely. 2006. Derivations in minimalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFukui, N. 1993. A note on improper movement. The Linguistic Review 10: 111 – 126.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGrewendorf, G. 2001. Multiple wh ‐fronting. Linguistic Inquiry 32: 87 – 122.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHeck, F. & G. Müller. 2003. Derivational optimization of wh ‐movement. Linguistic Analysis 33: 97 – 148.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKinyalolo, K. K. W. 1991. Syntactic dependencies and the SPEC–head agreement hypothesis in Kilega. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKiss, K. 1985. Parasitic gaps and Case. Paper presented at MIT, Cambridge, MA.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKitahara, H. 2006. Some notes on the Minimalist Program. In Minimalist essays, ed. C. Boeckx, 3 – 15. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKoopman, H. & D. Sportiche. 1983. Variables and the Bijection Principle. The Linguistic Review 2: 139 – 160.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLasnik, H. & N. Sobin. 2000. The who/whom puzzle: On the preservation of an archaic feature. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 18: 343 – 371.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLasnik, H. & T. Stowell. 1991. Weakest crossover. Linguistic Inquiry 22: 687 – 720.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMatushansky, O. 2006. Head movement in linguistic theory. Linguistic Inquiry 37: 6 – 109.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMay, R. 1979. Must COMP‐to‐COMP movement be stipulated? Linguistic Inquiry 10: 719 – 725.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNevins, A. 2005. Derivations without the Activity Condition. In Perspectives on phases (MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 49), ed. M. McGinnis & N. Richards, 283 – 306. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceObata, M. 2007. On the formal nature of attraction and the suppression of Superiority effects. In Proceedings of the 37th annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society 2, ed. E. Elfner & M. Walkow, 115 – 126. Amherst, MA: GLSA Publications.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceObata, M. 2009. Determining phonetic feature distribution: How to “pronounce” three types of A′‐movement. In Proceedings of the 2nd annual International Conference on East Asian Linguistics (Simon Fraser University Working Papers in Linguistics 2), ed. J. Brooke, G. Coppola, E. Görgülü, M. Mameni, E. Mileva, S. Morton & A. Rimrott. Vancouver: SFU Linguistics Graduate Student Association. http://www.sfu.ca/gradlings/wp_2.html.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceObata, M. & S. D. Epstein. 2008a. Deducing improper movement from phase‐based C‐to‐T phi transfer: Feature‐splitting internal merge. In Proceedings of West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics 27, ed. N. Abner & J. Bishop, 353 – 360. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceObata, M. & S. D. Epstein. 2008b. Building (proper) improper movement structures. Paper presented at the Ways of Structure Building conference, University of the Basque Country, Vitoria‐Gasteiz, Spain (November). http://ehutb.ehu.es/es/serial/85.html.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOuali, H. 2006. Unifying agreement relations: A minimalist analysis of Berber. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRezac, M. 2003. The fine structure of cyclic Agree. Syntax 6: 156 – 182.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRezac, M. 2006. On tough ‐movement. In Minimalist essays, ed. C. Boeckx, 288 – 325. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRichards, M. 2004. Object shift, scrambling, and symmetrical syntax. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cambridge.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRichards, M. 2007. On feature inheritance: An argument from the Phase Impenetrability Condition. Linguistic Inquiry 38: 563 – 572.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSvenonius, P. 2000. Quantifier movement in Icelandic. In The derivation of VO and OV, ed. P. Svenonius, 255 – 292. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceToyoshima, T. 2000. Head‐to‐Spec movement and dynamic economy. Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWilliams, E. 2002. Representation Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZwart, J.‐W. 2006. Complementizer agreement and dependency marking typology. Leiden Working Papers in Linguistics 3.2: 53 – 72.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
j.1467-9612.2010.00149.x.pdf
Size:
453.9KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.