Course Description

This course is mostly concerned with the level of syntactic representation called "Logical Form", i.e., the conceptual-intentional interface level of linguistic representation. It first introduces the Minimalist Program; then, it tackles several LF topics, starting with their "classic" account and moving onto more recent (alternative, sometimes minimalistic) approaches. The LF topics covered are the following:

• The Syntax of Scope
• Binding Theory
• Reconstruction of different types of movement
• Crossover
• Wh- at LF

Course Requirements

Your grade will be based on:

• Two homework assignments:
  • First one: assigned on Sept 22 and due on Sept 29.
  • Second one: assigned on Nov 15 (approx.) and due on Nov 22.
• One class presentation of a paper on the syllabus, and a review of another paper on the syllabus. Either the presentation or the review have to be done by Oct 25 (you can choose what you do first); the other has to be done by Dec 8.
• Two squibs:
  • First one: due on Oct 25.
  • Second one: due on Dec 13.
• Class participation.

Syllabus

Minimalism

Sept 8	Start Minimalism.
Sept 13	Minimalism I: chapter 3. Reading: Chomsky, N. The Minimalist Program. MIT Press. Chapter 3 (first appeared in K, Hale and S.J. Keyser (eds.). 1993. The View from Building 20, pp. 1-52. MIT Press.) Backgr.: Lasnik, H. 1993. Lectures on Minimalist Syntax. University of Connecticut Working Papers in Linguistics.
Sept 15	Minimalism II: chapter 4. Reading: Chomsky, N. Op. Cit. Chapter 4. Backgr.: Collins, Ch. & Thrainsson, H. 1996. VP-Internal Subject and Object Shift in Icelandic, LI 27.3.
Sept 20	Minimalism III: "chapter 5". Reading: Chomsky, N. 1998. Minimalist Inquiries: the framework. MITWPL 15.
Sept 22	Minimalism IV: some applications. Reading: Pensalfini, R. and H. Ura (eds.). 1995. Papers on Minimalist Syntax. MITWPL 27. Papers TBA.
Sept 27	Minimalism V: some applications. Reading: Pensalfini, R. and H. Ura (eds.). 1995. Papers on Minimalist Syntax. MITWPL 27. Papers TBA.

The Syntax of Scope

Sept 29	Ambiguous LF from GB to Minimalism I. Reading: May, R. 1985. Logical Form, MIT Press. Sections TBA Backgr.: Sag, I. Deletion and Logical Form. MIT Dissertation. Chapter TBA.
Oct 4	Ambiguous LF from GB to Minimalism I. Reading: Aoun, J. and Y. A. Li. 1993. Syntax of Scope, MIT Press. Ch. 2 & 3. Backgr.: Hornstein, N. 1995. Logical Form: From GB to Minimalism, Basil Blackwell. Chapter TBA. Kitahara, H. 1992, 1996. "Raising Quantifiers without Quantifier Raising", in Abraham, W. et al. (eds.) 1996. Minimal Ideas. John Benjamins.Pp. 189-198.
Oct 6	Unambiguous LF I: Quantifier Raising or movement to Spec-AgrP? Reading: Kennedy. 1997. ACD and the Syntax of Quantification, LI 28. Backgr.: Hornstein, N. 1994. "An argument for Minimalism: The Case of Antecedent-Contained Deletion", Linguistic Inquiry 25.3, pp.455-480.
Oct 11	Unambiguous LF II: Quantifier Raising and Quantifier Lowering. Reading: Johnson, K. and S. Tomioka. 1997. "Lowering and Mid-Size Clauses", Proceedings of the Tuebingen Workshop on Reconstruction.
Oct 13	Scope computed along the derivation. Scope beyond Syntax. Readings: Higginbotham, J. 1996. "Semantic Computation", paper delivered at GISSL '96. Excerpt pp. 1-14. Reinhart, T. 1995. "Interface Strategies", ms Utrecht University. Excerpt pp. 3-13. Backgr.: Fox-Sauerland. 1995. "Illusive Scope of Universal Quantifiers". NELS 26. Heycock, C. and T. Kroch. 1999. Pseudocleft Connectivity: Implications for the LF interface level", LI 30.3. Section 5. Kratzer, A. 1998. "Scope or Pseudoscope? Are there wide scope indefinites?", ms. Umass. Reinhart, T. 1997. "Quantifier Scope: How Labor is Divided between QR and Choice Functions", L&P, August 1997.

Binding Theory

Oct 18	The Chomskian approach I: historic review. Reading: Lasnik, H. A selective history of modern Binding Theory. Backgr.: Chomsky, N. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding, Foris. Chomsky, N. 1986. Knowledge of Language, Praeger. Chapter 3, pp.164-186. Huang, J. 1982. Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar, MIT PhD Dissertation. Sections 5.0-5.5
Oct 20	The Chomskian approach II: extension to reciprocals. Reading: Heim, I., Lasnik, H. and R. May. 1991. "Reciprocity and Plurality", Linguistic Inquiry 22.1, pp. 63-101. Backgr.: Dimitriadis, A. 1998. SALT 9 paper. Heim-Lasnik-May. 1991. Reply to Williams’ reply. Williams, E. 1991. Reply to Heim-Lasnik-May.
Oct 25	Alternative approaches I: reflexives. Reading: Reinhart, T. and E. Reuland. 1993. "Reflexivity". Linguistic Inquiry 24.4, 657-720. Backgr.: Lidz. 1998. "Condition R". Available at http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~jldiz/condR.ps.gz .
Oct 27	Alternative approaches II: Rule I. Reading: Reinhart, T. 1997. "Strategies of Anaphora Resolution". To appear as UiL OTS Working Paper, TL97-007. Backgr.: Grodzinksky, Y. and T. Reinhart. 1993. "The Innateness of Binding and Coreference", Linguistic Inquiry 24.1, pp. 69-101. Heim, I. 1993. "Anaphora and Semantic Interpretation: Reinterpretation of Reinhart's Approach", SfS-Report 07-93, ms. Universitaet Tuebingen.
Nov 1	Where does Binding Theory apply? Reading: Lebeaux, D. 1994. "Where does Binding Theory Apply?", ms. University of Maryland.

Reconstruction

Nov 8	Reconstruction: BT applies only at LF. Reading: Fox, D. 1995. "Condition C Effects in ACD", MITWPL 27, pp.105-119. Backgr.: Chomsky, N. The Minimalist Program. MIT Press. Chapter 3.
Nov 10	Reconstruciton in Questions and in A-movement. Reading: Romero, M. 1997. "The correlation between Scope Reconstruction and Connectivity Effects". WCCFL 16. Backgr.: Fox, D. 1997. "Reconstruction, BT and the Interpretation of Chains". Proceedings of the 1997 Tuebingen Reconstruction Workshop.
Nov 15	Reconstruction in Relative Clauses. Reading: Sauerland, U. 1998. The Meaning of Chains. MIT Diss. Part of ch. 2. Backgr.: Bhatt, R. 1999. Penn Diss.

Crossover

Nov 17

Crossover: the phenomenon. Reading: Koopman, H. and D. Sportiche. 1982. "Variables and the Bijection Principle", The Linguistic Review 2.1, pp. 139-160. Backgr.: Higginbotham, J. 1980. "Pronouns and Bound Variables", Linguistic Inquiry 11.4, pp. 679-708. Lasnik, H. and M. Saito. 1984. "On the Nature of Proper Government", Linguistic Inquiry 15.2, pp. 235-290. May, R. 1985. Logical Form. Its structure and derivation. Ch. 5. Safir, K. 1984. "Multiple Variable Binding", LI 15, 603-638.

Nov 22

Crossover and Qu/Wh Interactions. Reading: Chierchia, G. 1993. "Questions with Quantifiers", NLS 1. Excerpt: pp. 181-189. Backgr.: Hornstein, N. 1995. Logical Form: From GB to Minimalism. Ch. ?

Wh- at LF

Nov 24	Subjacency I. Reading: Richards, N. 1998. What moves where when in which language? MIT Diss. Ch. 2. Backgr.: Chomsky, N. 1986. Barriers. Chapters 6 ("Subjacency") and 7 ("Island Violations"). Huang, J. 1982. Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. MIT Diss.
Nov 29	Subjacency II. Reading: McDaniel, D. 1989. "Partial and Multiple wh-movement", NLLT 7. Backgr.: Dayal, V. 1996. Locality in wh-quantification. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Chapter 2: "The scope of Hindi wh". Nishigauchi, T. 1990. Quantification in the theory of grammar. Dordrecth: Kluwer.
Dec 1	Minimal Compliance. Reading: Richards, N. 1998. What moves where when in which language? MIT Diss. Ch. 5.
Dec 6	Beck effects. Reading: Beck, S. 1996. Wh-constructions and transparent LF. Univ. Tuebingen Diss. Chapter 2: "Intervention Effects at LF I: German". Backgr.: Pesetsky 1997?
Dec 8	Superiority. Reading: Hornstein, N. 1995. Logical Form: From GB to Minimalism. Chapter 7. "Superiority Effects". Backgr.: Pesetsky, D. 1987. "Wh-in-situ: Movement and Unselective Binding".