grammatical foundations

Other fronting movements

One observation that links all these structures (including those with an initial adverb) is that they are all pronounced with a pause after the initial phrase. This is unlike the wh-element in spec CP, which has no pause after it. This might indicate, that they are not in the same positions. Another observation that indicates a difference between topicalisation and wh-movement is that there is never inversion with topicalisation:

(102)a where will the robbers strike next

b *the bank, will the robbers strike next

Moreover, if the fronted topics occupied the same position as fronted wh-phrases, then we would expect them to be in complementary distribution, which they are not:

(103)a on this train, where would you hide the money? b this man, where have I seen before?

These data show us that the topic is not moved to the specifier of the CP, but to a position to its left. The obvious suggestion is that the topic is adjoined to the CP. This is supported by the fact that we can have multiple topics and adjunction is a recursive structure:

(104)[CP yesterday, [CP on the train, [CP Biggs, [CP I saw]]]]

A complication is added by considering other examples. In embedded contexts, the topic does not precede the CP, but follows both the specifier and the head complementiser:

(105)a I asked where, in this town, we could hide

b I think that, in this town, there’s no hiding place

Thus it seems that there are two topic positions in the clause, one adjoined to the CP and one adjoined to the IP. The choice of the two is not free however as it is only in main clauses that the topic can adjoin to the CP and only in embedded clauses that the topic can adjoin to IP:

(106)a *where could [in this town], you hide?

b *I asked [in this town] where you could hide?

Thus, the relevant structures for topicalisation in main and embedded clauses is as follows:

271

Chapter 7 - Complementiser Phrases

Conditional clauses also have a similar distribution and hence we might claim that they are CP and IP adjuncts:

(109)a if you had known, what would you have done

b I think that, if I had known, I never would have allowed it

However, conditionals, unlike topics, are not restricted to the preceding position:

(110)a what would you have done, if you had known

b I think that I never would have allowed it, if I had known

Moreover, conditional clauses are not associated with any particular position inside the main clause, unlike topics. Therefore we can conclude that conditionals are generated in these positions whereas topics are moved to these positions from various places within the IP.

5.2Focus fronting

Compare the following two sentences:

(111)a an Arsenal supporter, I wouldn’t trust b an Arsenal supporter I wouldn’t trust

(111a) is a case of topicalisation, whereas (111b) is something different. Note that the comma after the topic indicates an intonational difference between the two sentences: the topic forms an intonational unit by itself, with its own stress, and the following sentence also has its own stress. The other construction, however, has the fronted element within the same intonation unit as the rest of the clause and this element carries the major stress of the sentence. Interpretationally, there is also a large difference between these two sentences. In the first, the conversational situation must be that an Arsenal supporter has already been mentioned, probably as one of a number of people being discussed. The sentence then offers some new information about this person: that the speaker wouldn’t trust him. Thus we may classify the topic as ‘old’ information and what follows, usually termed the comment, as ‘new’:

The other structure is almost the exact opposite of this. The situation here is that it is already known that I wouldn’t trust someone and the new information is that an Arsenal supporter is that person. A typical use of this construction would be to correct someone asserting that I wouldn’t trust a Liverpool supporter. The reply might be “no,

272

Other fronting movements

an Arsenal supporter I wouldn’t trust”. Thus, in terms of the information it contains, the stressed element can be seen as the new stuff and what follows, the old:

We call the stressed element that carries new information the focus.

As to the position of the focus, this is a little more difficult to determine. For one thing, foci and questions do not sit happily together:

(114)a *men who would trust b *who would men trust

If we want to have a focus and a wh-question in the same clause, we have to indicate the focus by stress alone rather than by movement:

(115)who would trust men

(115)might be used in response to someone asking ‘who would trust women?’, with the meaning that it’s men who are untrustworthy, not women. However, this complementary distribution between foci and wh-elements should not lead us to assume that the focus sits in the specifier of the CP. We can see this from the fact that in embedded clauses the focus, like the topic, follows the complementiser:

(116)I said that men I wouldn’t trust

From this perspective, it seems as though the focus sits in a similar position to the topic, adjoined to the IP in embedded contexts. This assumption is also problematic, as if both the topic and the focus were adjoined to IP, one might expect them to be able to appear in any order. But this is not so:

(117)a I said that, in this room, potatoes I wouldn’t store b *I said that potatoes, in this room, I wouldn’t store

At the moment it is not obvious how we can accommodate these data and in particular the position of the focus remains a mystery. We will put the issue to one side until after we have looked at one more case of movement to the front of the clause.

5.3Negative fronting

A third movement which places an element at the front of the clause involves negative phrases:

(118)never in my life have I been so embarrassed

This kind of movement is even more like wh-movement than the other two we have looked at as it is accompanied by an inverted auxiliary, which topicalisation and focus fronting are not. We might be tempted, therefore to propose that negative fronting moves the negative element in to the specifier of CP. Unfortunately, the following datum questions this assumption:

(119)I said that never in my life have I been so embarrassed

273

Chapter 7 - Complementiser Phrases

The fronted negative obviously follows the complementiser and so cannot be in specifier of CP. However, note that the fronted negation is still accompanied by auxiliary inversion and therefore there must be a head position to accommodate the auxiliary. This would suggest the following structure:

(120)CP C©

C XP

NegP X©

X IP

Under these assumptions the negative phrase is fronted to the specifier of some phrase that comes between the complementiser and the IP. The head of this phrase is then where the inverted auxiliary sits.

What is the nature of XP and how does it interact with the other movements we have reviewed? If we are to maintain our view that functional categories select for a very limited selection of complements, then as XP is the complement of a complementiser this argues that it is something like an IP. However, presumably X is a functional element itself and it takes an IP complement, which makes it more like a complementiser. Given that complementisers are categorised as [+F, –N, –V] and inflections are [+F, –N, +V] categories, a category which shares properties of them both would be [+F, –N], with an undefined V feature. Let us refer to this category a little ‘i’, reflecting the use of ‘v’ to represent a verbal element with an undefined F feature. This element heads an iP and so the structure can be represented as:

(121)CP C©

C iP

NegP i©

i IP

Note that the fronted negative is like the focus in its interaction with the topic: the topic precedes the fronted negative:

(122)a I said that, in this town, never have I been so embarrassed b *I said that never have, in this town, I been so embarrassed

We can account for the distribution of the topic if we suggest that it adjoins to the highest phrase that it can. In main clauses the topic can adjoin to the CP and therefore as this is the highest phrase, this is where the topic will adjoin. In embedded contexts, something prevents the topic from adjoining so high up. Perhaps there has to be a

274

Other fronting movements

relationship between the selecting verb and the head of its complement clause, i.e. the complementiser, that the presence of the topic interferes with. In this case then the topic will have to adjoin lower down: to iP, if present, and if not, to IP.

The fronted negative is in complementary distribution with the focus:

(123)a *I said that under no circumstances would potatoes I store in this room b *I said that potatoes under no circumstances would I store in this room

Once again, if we want a focus in such a sentence it must be indicated by stress alone without the movement:

(124)I said that under no circumstances would I store potatoes in this room

This complementary distribution seems more significant than that which holds between the focus and the wh-element as both the focus and the fronted negative clearly occupy very similar positions. We might therefore claim that both make use of the same landing site: specifier of iP.

The difference however, between the fronted focus and the fronted negative is that the latter induces inversion to ‘i’, while the former does not. Referring back to the difference between wh-movement that triggers inversion and wh-movement that does not, we proposed that inversion is triggered when there is no head to agree with. In embedded interrogatives the complementiser position could be filled and hence there will be no inversion. If we project these ideas on to the current situation, we conclude that with focus the i head is filled by some abstract element but with negative fronting the head position is unfilled. We know that the negative head is a verbal element of the category ‘v’ and so it cannot be generated directly in i. The only way for the negative head to get to i is for it to move and yet we know that the negative is not able to move to I to support the inflection in English, as it is in Finnish. Thus, there is no way for the negative head to get to i and hence when a negative element moves to the specifier of iP it will induce inversion to provide a head for it.

With a fronted focus, on the other hand, there must be an abstract head capable of being generated in i with which the focus can agree. Let us call this head Foc. In other languages this element may appear as a morpheme on the focussed element, supporting the assumption here, as in the following Korean example:

(125)Mary-ka John-man-ul saranghanta Mary-nom John-Foc-acc love

‘John Mary loves.’

This head apparently cannot enter into an agreement relationship with the fronted negative and so, presumably, it must be inherently positive. Given that nothing prevents it from appearing when there is a focus, it will be present whenever there is a fronted focus and hence inversion will be unnecessary. The structures we end up with are:

275

Chapter 7 - Complementiser Phrases

C©

b CP

is marrying

With these structures in place we now have room for all fronted elements in English including wh-elements, topics, foci and fronted negatives and the inverted auxiliaries that accompany them. We have not accounted for why there is complementary distribution between elements that move to spec iP and wh-elements. This may be a semantic incompatibility rather than a matter of syntactic distribution, as suggested by the fact that this seems more of a universal restriction rather than something restricted to English. Alternatively, it may have something to do with the locality of movement in that if iP is present a wh-element is prevented from moving to spec CP. I will not attempt to sort these issues out here.

276

Conclusion

6 Conclusion

In this chapter we have introduced the final part of the clause structure of the English sentence. This part of the structure, built on top of the IP serves a number of purposes, but collectively seems to be to do with the syntactic arrangement of operators of one type or another. With wh-movement, both in interrogative clauses and relative clauses, the wh-element is an operator with either quantifier-like or anaphoric function. The interpretation of this element is dependent on movement which has a dual role, both to mark the clause as having a special interpretation (as an interrogative or relative) and to establish a relationship between that interpretation and a position in the clause itself. Hence, questions can be seen to be ‘about’ the subject or the clause, etc. and relatives can relate the modified noun to the object of the clause, etc. Focus and negative fronting may also have a similar function in that their interpretation is quantifier-like. Topicalisation, although not quantificational, may be seen as anaphoric in that the topic refers to some element established in the discourse.

In connection with the movements of these operator-like elements, we also have seen a series of head movements to various positions. These appear to provide the operators with something to agree with and so they play a supporting role in allowing the operators to fulfil their function.

With the end of this chapter we come to the end of the clause, so to speak. In the next chapter we will concentrate on the relationship between elements in different clauses and in particular across non-finite clauses which appear to more readily allow such relationships to be established.

Check Questions

1What are complementizers in English? How is it possible to argue that complementizers act like heads?

2Which type of clauses must be introduced by a complementizer and which need not, i.e. what is the distribution of overt versus covert complementizers?

3What are canonical structural realisation principles?

4What runs counter to the claim that complementizers determine the force of a clause?

5What does it suggest that complementizers and inverted auxiliaries are in complementary distribution?

6What motivates wh-movement?

7What are operators?

8How can A-movement and A-bar movement be distinguished?

9What are the two sets of assumptions proposed to underlie I-to-C movement?

10How can it be shown that ’whether’ is not a complementizer?

11What is the Doubly-Filled COMP Filter?

277

Chapter 7 - Complementiser Phrases

12List some general ordering restrictions affecting certain elements in a clause.

13What are the differences and similarities between restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses? How are these clauses analysed?

14Discuss the differences between relative and interrogative pronouns.

15How can it be shown that ’that’ is not a relative pronoun?

16Define and exemplify pied-piping and preposition stranding.

17What are the different types of relative clauses?

18Define the following terms: topic, focus, comment.

19What is the order of wh-elements and topicalised elements in matrix and embedded contexts?

20What are the three types of movement placing an element to the front of the clause?

21How can it be shown that the negative element in negative fronting does not occupy the [Spec, CP] position?

22What is the distribution of the following elements relative to each other: topic, fronted negative, focus?

Test your knowledge

Exercise 1

What is the case of the DPs in the following sentences? Determine the Case assigner, too.

(1)a It is time for me to close the door.

b Jane appears to have stolen the keys.

c The professor expects me to write an essay for her. d Jack has not been to America since January.

e For Kim to understand this exercise is extremely difficult. f I expect Peter to visit his family.

g The thief seems to be arrested.

Exercise 2

What kind of movements can be identified in the following sentences? Identify the traces in the S-structures and give the D-structure of the sentences as well.

(1)a The letter was sent to the government last night. b Interesting books, I often read.

c Can you lend me your umbrella? d In this garden, you can have a rest.

e Has John ever been caught in the act?

f A proposal has been handed in for the educational reform.

278

Test your knowledge

Exercise 3

What types of adverbs (i. e. sentential or VP adverb) can be found in the following sentences?

(1)a Cleverly, Agatha answered the question. b Ron hardly goes to the cinema.

c She suddenly burst into tears.

d Agatha cleverly answered the question.

e They certainly went to America for holiday.

f The student has rewritten her thesis thoroughly. g The king often visited the neighbouring countries.

Exercise 4

What type of movement is going on in the following sentences? Give their tree diagram as well.

(1)a Who lives in London? b Sam seems to sleep.

c Who appears to adore Anne?

Exercise 5

Thematic role assignment must be local. A -role assigning head must be in a local configuration to the DP it assigns -role to. Explain how the underlined nominal constituents can get -role.

(1)a Which book did John buy? b Short stories, I don’t like.

c Short stories I expect nobody likes. d Mary seems to hate big cats.

e I know the researcher who is believed to have invented cold fusion.

Exercise 6

Identify the different types of movement in the following sentences. What moves from which position to which position that is what is the extraction site and what is the landing site for the moved elements?

(1)a The diamonds were stolen yesterday. b Will you meet Mary in Paris?

c Linguistic textbooks, I never read. d I won’t trust you.

e Who does John like?

f Never have I been treated so rudely.

279

Chapter 7 - Complementiser Phrases

Exercise 7

Identify the head and the foot of each chain in the sentences below.

(1)a Jane has been taken to hospital.

bEverybody seems to speak two languages here.

cHave you ever been to Paris?

dWhat did you give to John?

eIn the park, John met Mary.

Exercise 8

Consider the contrast between sentences (a) and (b) in the following sentences. How do you account for the differences in grammaticality?

(1)a. *Up the letter John tore.

b.The letter, John tore up.

(2)a. *Whose did you meet mother?

b.Whose mother did you meet?

(3)a. *Friends were financially supported of the President.

b.Friends of the President were financially supported.

(4)a. *The fact surprised everybody that he had resigned.

b.The fact that he had resigned surprised everybody.

Exercise 9

Given passivisation, subject–auxiliary inversion, topicalisation, extraposition and preposing, which movement types can be spotted in the sentences below? Classify them according to whether they qualify as substitution or adjunction.

(1)a It surprised everyone that they left early.

bWhat is the meaning and purpose of life?

cIs there any more coffee?

dHim, I don’t like.

eIn the afternoon, they went fishing.

fCaptain Link was examined by the vet.

gA man appeared in the doorway with flowers in his hand.

hMary, Peter often meets.

iMary is said to be beautiful

jYesterday, they paid their electricity bill.

280