C'Stephen van Vlack
Sookmyung Women`s University
Graduate School of English
Introduction to Linguistics
Fall 2003
Answers for Cook and Newson, `Chapter 4`.
Hopefully these answers will give you not only a clearer understanding of the concepts but also more fruit for thought.
1. What is the purpose of x-bar theory?
1. The purpose of tree diagrams was originally to simply create a visual representation of the structural aspects of utterances. No one suspected at all that they might actually be used to do more than merely describe the structure of utterances in a very simple way.
All this changed with the advent of x-bar theory. X-bar theory was first formalized by Jackendoff in 1977 with the publication of X-bar Syntax: A Study of Phrase Structure. From this point on x-bar became a theory in itself. This was forced by the basic underlying principle of x-bar theory, which was that all phrases are essentially the same. This simple idea forced the issue and the trees became more abstract.
Once more, x-bar has played an important role in constraining and helping to simplify Chomsky`s overall theory of language. The simple principles which make up x-bar theory and the structures that are so obvious in the trees that are made using this theory have had a profound effect on syntactic theory over the years. Most of the rules that have emerged make use of this framework. Just look at binding relations and government, not to mention movement. The descriptions of these processes would be impossible without the accompanying concepts of x-bar theory. It is, then, possible to posit that there might be tree-like representations in the brain as well.
2. What are the basic structural relationships between items in a tree?
2. The basic structural relationships between items in a tree are best described in family terms. Two nodes that have the same node directly above them are called sisters. The node which is directly above them is said the dominate them. This dominating node is called the mother and the ones below are called daughters. Look at the example below.
C"
C'
C I"
N"
I'
N'
N
PASTj N"
N'
N Spec
eatj N'
ti the
N
armadillo
V and NP are sisters in that they are on the same level and both are immediately dominated by V`. It`s really simple.
3. What are the four lexical phrases in x-bar syntax and how does the concept of endocentricity help to define their structure?
3. The four lexical phrases in x-bar syntax are Noun Phrase, Verb Phrase, Prepositional Phrase, and Adjective/Adverb Phrase. The structure of the phrase is preserved by the endocentricity constraint, which states that all lexical phrases must have the same structure. They must all contain a head as well of the other levels necessary in the description. This means that all lexical categories must follow the same basic principles. This not only retains the structural uniformity of the tree, but works to curtail possibilities in the tree. For example, because of endocentricity a VP must go to V`, V, and finally the lexical representation, which carries the same features that are present at the VP level. The lexical category cannot change, nor can the specific nature of the VP. All the levels must be realized for each entry.
Inherent in the x-bar theory is also the idea of levels, as shown the tree above. The idea for levels was developed based on sentences like the one shown below.
1. The elephant whipped the farmer with its tail.
In this sentence the VP is composed of a verb and an NP and PP. After a cursory glance it is possible to see that the status of the NP and the PP is different. First of all the PP is optional, while the NP is obligatory.
2. The elephant whipped the farmer.
3. *The elephant whipped.
4. *The elephant whipped with its tail.
Part of the problem with baby trees is that they cannot show the difference between phrases like the farmer and with its tail. For this reason, we need to posit the idea of levels in the tree. On closer inspection we can see some further differences between the two. We can stack one but not the other.
5. *The elephant whipped the farmer his wife wit its tail.
6. The elephant whipped the farmer with its tail, on Wednesday, in the mud, while performing a jig.
We can also change the order of one, but not the other. That is, we can move one around, but the other is stuck with the verb.
7. The elephant, with its tail, whipped the farmer.
8. *The elephant, the farmer, whipped with its tail.
The phrase, the farmer, is a complement and must be located near the verb it modifies on the tree. The phrase, with its tail, is an adjunct and is not as closely related to the verb. We can show these distinctions in the tree by putting them in at different levels.
Complements are the daughters of X` and the sisters of X. This places them close to the entity they modify.
Adjuncts are the daughters of X` and the sisters of X`. This puts them at a higher level on the tree and further from the lexical entity. It is also allows the to occur recursively and to move. To add more adjuncts all we have to do is add more levels via X` to the tree structure.
4. How do the functional sets of specifier and head account for the levels in the structures of trees?
4. The functional sets of specifier and head are used to account for the levels in the structures of trees? Specifier, like complements and adjuncts is a specific position in the tree. The specifier is the sister of X` and daughter of X. In addition to specifier we have the notions of complement, which is the sister of X and daughter of X`. Finally, we have the head, which is at the lexical level. Taking all this into account, then we have proof of the levels in the tree. Based on the evidence of these different functional sets, we can clearly see why so many levels are necessary.
5. What is INFL or IP? What is its role and how does it differ from lexical phrases? Give an example with a tree.
5. INFL Phrase or IP is a functional category. It has been claimed to hold agreement and tense information. It is different from lexical phrases in that is may or may not be filled with a word. In the sentence, `I like trees`, the IP will be empty of any overt words and rather is filled with an abstract grammatical component. In the sentence, `Porky porcupine would kill you`, the IP is filled with a lexical item. In the tree IP appears above the level of VP. VP becomes the complement of IP. The big issue here is how the contents of IP and VP are merged, if necessary. So, for example in the sentence, `George loves dogs`, does the verb move up to IP to combine with the tense and agreement features to make the word `likes` or do the features bounce from IP down to the verb. This is a question which has not been answered yet, but it is my sneaking suspicion that it is the INFL information which is incorporated into the verb by having the verb move up rather than having the INFL information move down to the verb. This is arrived at based on the fact that verbs are raised to IP position to form questions in English.
6. What is Comp or CP and how does it fit in with our tree structures? Give an example with a tree.
6. Comp or CP is a functional category which stands for Complementizer Phrase. This category was arrived at based on the data from such sentences as, `That he was hungry was a miracle.` and he wondered whether he could eat pork anymore. This category appears above the IP and IP is a complement of CP. Once we start to look at movement rules we will have a better idea of the full range of roles that CP plays in language.
7. What is trace (t) and why do we need it in the theory?
7. Trace (t) is the residue that is left behind when an element moves from one position to another. We need trace in our theory of syntax because it seems true that when things move they leave something behind. For example, in the sentence, `what did Betty eat?`, we assume tat the NP `what` originated in the VP Complement position. After `what` is moved a trace occupies that position and it is not possible to insert anything into the position occupied by the trace.
*`What did Betty eat the armadillo?`
This sentence is unacceptable because the trace is blocking anything from being able to take its position.