«1. Introduction. In Korean and Japanese Morphology from a lexical perspective, Sells (1995) argues against the view that complex words in Japanese or ...»
A simplified derivation for (13) illustrates this analysis (section 4.2.) discusses other cases where selection is satisfied before movement). We start the derivation at the point where the arguments DP and V/v have been merged (14a), but not the dative P hanthey’, past tense ‘-ss’ the topic/focus marker ‘nun’ and the declarative marker ‘ta’ The derivation abstracts away from the external argument, the theme. At each step, the tail of the attracted element is indicated by a strike-trough. As the derivations show, head movement plays no role in these derivations
g. merge ta move TP, TP pied-pipes TopP (nunP): (possibly more steps) → [[PP swuni hanthey [kkaci] [ nun [TP [FP[VPcwu [F[iss [ta [[PP swuni hanthey [kkaci] [ un [TP [VPcwu[iss
The movements in (14b), (14d) (14e), (14f), and (14g) are forced by the Principle of Locality of Selection, with selection satisfied after movement. The step in (14c) resembles Kayne’s (1998,
2000) VP-movement to WP creates the remnant PP necessary for (14e),6. This movement seems to be empirically well-motivated (see Kayne 1998, 2000), and Cinque (1999, 2002), the question of the motivation for this movement remains to be answered. 7
4.2. Complementizer selection.
Sells presents complementizer selection as an example where local selection in word structure is interrupted. Korean has different types of non-tensed verb endings, and their distribution is determined by selecting verbs. Sells, following Cho and Sells 1995, glosses these as Comp1, Comp2, Comp3, etc. I will gloss them by their spell-out forms, and return to their distribution in
4.5. I follow Sells and analyze ahn as a negative auxiliary (Sells:305) selecting for a clausal constituent headed by -ci (see also footnote10).
The violation of locality is not an argument against the syntactic account under consideration.
Indeed, the Principle of Locality of Selection forces an account where selection is satisfied locally before movement to higher merged heads takes place, i.e. local selection of the C by the verb try must precede merger of man and movement to the specifier of man, which in turn precedes (optional) merger of nun and movement to Spec, nun. This leads to the following entirely reasonable hierarchy of merger. Read is focused and must moves to Spec man (only).
In order to make the derivations precise, and examine further predications, we must bring in complex verb formation: try obligatorily forms a complex verbs with VP-e (Sells 1998). This can be shown by short negation an, which precedes the entire verbal complex in neutral clauses, and scopes over try (hence Neg(an) try e ilk)8.
Verbal complexes can become quite big, and resemble Hungarian or West Germanic verbal complexes, with each verb carrying its own inflectional morphology (Koopman and Szabolcsi 2000):
Koopman and Szabolcsi (2000) propose that there is a (universal) set of predicates which must form a complex predicate. They propose that complex verb formation is universally achieved in a particular configuration: i.e. complex verb formators must enter into a local Spec head relation with a small clause predicate (a small clause constituent is slightly larger than VP, called VP+ in Koopman and Szabolcsi (2000)). The locus of complex verb formation (VP+) is lower than negation (an). This yields the following structures for (19), and (18), with VP+ further embedded in inflectional layers
The phrasal affix –e Spec selects for VP+, hence forcing VP(+) movement to -e. try locally selects for –e when eP merges as its complement. Try attracts VP+, VP+ will pied-pipe –e to the position where a complex verb with ‘try’ is formed (-e cannot be stranded as it requires overt material in its Spec). This yields the following surface
constituent and the selecting verb (16). This follows from the independently established hierarchy man (Focus) VP+ try -eread, complex verb formation, and obligatory phrasal movement of the focused constituent to man. As the reader can check all selectional relations are locally satisfied either before or after movement.
Thus, locality of selection forces a different surface constituent structure for ilke po-ass-ta and ilke-man po-ass ta, with ilk-e higher in the derivation when it is followed by man.
4.3. Interactions between Focus (man), short negation (an) and verbal complexes.
Let us next consider the predictions if we combine the hierarchies in (17) and (24b):
First the relative order of merger between man and an needs to be determined. This can be achieved by examining the relative scopal possibilities of man and an. As the following example shows, man ‘only’ scopes over short negation an (Neg) in simple clausal structures, establishing the hierarchy of merger unambiguously as Focus(man)Negation (an)10.
The focused predicate ilk-e must raise to Spec, man, and manan. It should therefore precede an, and scope over negation: ( man anilk-e (+focus) po.)This prediction is
‘Reading is the only thing I didn’t try/I tried everything but reading’ onlynot These data immediately fall out from the underlying hierarchy of merger, head complement structure, and phrasal movements. Complex verb formation is obligatory, and only attracts a focused constituent. Certain inflectional morphemes are allowed within verbal compounding, because locality of selection holds before the complex verb is formed. Other inflectional morphemes are never allowed within the verbal complex (-man, -nun) because these can only be merged at a later point in the derivation accordance with universal principles that guide the structural make-up of the clause.
Movement is forced, because of locality of selection. Finally, scope is determined by the hierarchy of merger, which determines the location of the scope bearing heads.
4.4. Selection after movement.
Sells’ second type of argument is based on cases where the leftmost element shows head-like behavior, and is the element which an outside selector needs access to. Sells illustrates this with Japanese gerunds, and with Japanese speech level particles.
4.4.1. Japanese gerunds
Japanese gerunds can be adjectival or verbal:
Only the verbal gerunds (27a, b) can be selected by a V like oku (oita past tense) ‘to put/to prepare for some future eventuality’ (Sells 1995: 21a)
‘Ziro made the provision of not eating all the food’ The category of the gerund must be determined by the V/A that it contains, which is merged lower than the negative copula. This configuration parallels the well-known case of pied-piping where a feature embedded in a specifier is able to satisfy an outside selector, i.e. this is a case where selection is not satisfied at the point of merger, but after movement, through spec head agreement in category. Agreement in category has a phonological reflex: the spell-out of Neg and the copula covaries with the A/V features in its Spec, as does the form of the Formal level affix.
This leads minimally to the following structures and derivations, with agreement indicated:
(29) a. Verbal gerund
Cyclic application of Spec head agreement for the categorical feature and projection carry the categorical feature up to the maximal projection, thus allowing the verb to satisfy its selection of the gerund locally. Agreement in category creates the impression that the leftmost category determines the category of the constituent, just as wh-specifiers create the impression that the containing phrase is +wh.
4.4.2. Speech level.
Sells argues that selection has to look deep into a constituent for the form and ordering of the inflectional morpheme that indicates speech level in Japanese. Interestingly, this selection is also sensitive to category (V versus A).
The formal speech level desu occurs with A, but not with V:
The formal speech level mas occurs with verbs, but not with As. but not with As.
Furthermore, mas precedes,while desu, follows, T. The surface form masi in the examples below is due to epenthesis)
The dependency of the form of speech level on category (desu with AP, mas with VP), is analyzable in two ways under the syntactic view: selection is satisfied under first merge, or selection is satisfied after movement through Spec head agreement (32b): 12 (32) a. selection is satisfied under first merge (Tdesu AP TmasVP ),
It seems to me there is a strong bias for (34). Formal speech level is in complementary distribution with Force/mood markers, and is restricted to root contexts. This suggests Formal is located at the root level, higher than T. If this is correct, it must be explained why VP must extract from TP in (34a), but AP cannot do so. In Koopman and Szabolcsi 2000, and Koopman 2002, Spec extraction is forced by means of complexity filters, which are part of the entry of individual lexical item, and which are sensitive to overt phonological material. These filters “summarize” the syntactic forms that lead to wellformed phonological forms, and are sensitive to syntactic structure, in the sense that they pay attention to the depth of embedding of overt material at spell-out. Thus, mas, as an idiosyncratic lexical property, does not allow overt material
in V/v to be more deeply embedded than the following template:
Pied-piping VP-ta, to Spec, mas, which we expect to be available in principle on the basis of the derivation of adjectival predicates, would yield a violation of (35), since VP/vP would be embedded under TP.
The obligatory stranding of T in (34a) can therefore be attributed to a phonological property of mas. In other words, Spec-extraction is a way to keep the representations that spell-out/the phonology accesses shallow.
The form of Formal speech level covaries with the category in Spec: this is an overt reflection of Spec head agreement (in category), as argued in 3.3.13 If this analysis is correct, we have identified a case of Spec extraction within the Japanese “word”, where the merged order surfaces because of Spec extraction, in conjunction with head complement order.
4.5. Arguments against universal hierarchies?
Sells argues against the syntactic view in part because it presupposes universal hierarchies, or principles that determine the underlying order of merger, a view he assumes to be problematic.
The verbal (and nominal) morphology of Korean is usually presented as a template, in which there are a number of morphological slots available after the verb or the noun. Different nonfinite verb endings (his C1, C2, C3, C4)) appear to occupy these slots, even though they have
nothing in common with the other elements that can occupy these slots:
(37) Vroot –Honorific- tense-Mood-Discourse
Thus, C1 appears in the same slot as Honorific, and can only follow a verbal root, C2 appears in the same slot as Tense, and can only be preceded by a Honorific suffix, C3 by Honorific and Tense, and C4 by Honorific, Tense and Mood, etc. This, Sells argues, is exactly what one expects under a theoretical approach that includes morphological templates, but not under a view that includes syntactic hierarchies, since this would not allow a unique location of C. Under a templatic view, all slots should be able to be filled: elements that fill a particular slot do not have to form a natural class: there is no reason to find a unique position for C in Korean, nor is there any a-priori reason to assume C and honorific cannot occupy the same slot.
The syntactic view simply does not lead one to expect a unique syntactic position for a non-finite verb ending or a subordinator (i.e. C). Noone expects English, to, -ing, for, if, that, etc to occupy exactly the same syntactic position (i.e. to be merged at the same height), or English –ing to correspond to a unique position in the hierarchy: as is well-known –ing can be merged at different heights in the hierarchy, leading to different types of –ing clauses, with different distributional properties. Even if the different Cs were all merged in the same position, the patterns in (37) would still be precisely what one expects to find under a syntactic view: individual heads can select for different pieces of the hierarchy, thus C1 selects for VoiceP/VP as a EPP property, C2 for a constituent that includes Agrhon, C3 for TP etc. Since these Cs are final, selection must minimally be satisfied after movement to their Spec. This is the only way in which the syntactic view can derive the appearance that elements that do not form natural classes seem to occupy the same slot. Sells further takes the ordering facts discussed in the previous section as an argument against universal hierarchies.
“ However, to work correctly, this part of the syntactic view presupposes that there is a consistent hierarchy of functional categories, such that, for example, the existence of CP always entails MoodP, MoodP entails TP, and so on. However, it is clear that there is no such hierarchy either universally, or even within a given language: if we just look at the expression of Speech Level and Tense, we find that they are reversed in Japanese and Korean……” Sells, 1995, p.297.
“ For the syntactic view, the facts are even more puzzling, since even within the same language there may be no consistent hierarchy” Sells 1995 p 299.