Syllabus for Syntax II (LING 610), Spring 2000

Overview

The focus of this class is on comparative syntax, primarily from the perspective of the Principles and Parameters approach to syntax, which has developed over the last 20 years. Research in this tradition has attempted to characterize the grammars of all natural languages in terms of a set of universal principles which all languages share, and a set of parameters along which languages may vary.

The course will emphasize the empirical motivation behind major theoretical proposals in the Principles and Parameters approach, and show how views on the nature of universal grammar and cross-linguistic variation have developed over the past 20-30 years as a consequence of a massive increase in cross-linguistic syntax research. While this course differs from LING 609 Syntax I in its greater comparative focus and its increased attention to recent theoretical models, it continues to stress the tools of syntactic argumentation and hypothesis testing. The course is also intended to provide graduate students in linguistics with preparation for the syntax qualifying exam.

In order to maximally benefit from this course, you should ensure that you are an active participant in class: active participation involves reading assigned articles or chapters before class and identifying questions or concerns that you have about them, attending class, and participating in class discussions. In addition to regular written assignments, all students are required to write two short papers which go beyond the material covered in class. The topics for these should be discussed with the instructor: one possibility would be for one of the papers to be a review of two or three related articles, and for the other paper to discuss the analysis of some novel syntactic data.

Schedule

Times & Places

Topics

This is a tentative schedule for the class - it is likely to change as the semester progresses. Some of the readings will be discussed in detail, others will be discussed in much less detail. More specific details as the semester proceeds.

February

 7
8
Class 1
Principles & Parameters I
Reading: Kenstowicz 1989, Roberts pp. 149-157, 204-210

9
10
Class 2
Principles & Parameters II
Reading: Baker 1996 Ch.1, Richards 1998

11

 14
15
Class 3
Word Order I
Reading: Roberts Ch.1, especially pp.29-44

16
17
Class 4
Word Order II
Reading: Pollock 1989 (selections), Iatridou 1990

18

21
22
Class 5
Word Order III
Reading: Baker 1988 Ch.2

23
24
Class 6
Word Order IV
Reading:

25

28
29
Class 7
Binding I
Reading: Roberts Ch.3

March

 

1
2
Class 8
Binding II
Reading: Haegeman Ch.4

3

6
7
Class 9
Binding III
Reading: Cole, Hermon & Lee 2000

8
9
Class 10
Binding IV
Reading: Reinhart & Reuland 1993, Lidz, 2000

10

13
14
Class 11
Binding V
Reading: Demirdache 1998, Fox 1999 (excerpts)

15
16
Class 12
Case & Grammatical Functions I
Reading: Roberts Ch.2

17

20
21
Class 13
Case & Grammatical Functions II
Reading: Haegeman Ch.6

22
23
Class 14
Case & Grammatical Functions III
Reading: Baker et al. 1989
First Squib Due!

24

27
28

 29

 30

 31

 April

 3

4
Class 15
Case & Grammatical Functions IV
Reading: Lasnik & Saito 1991

5

6
Class 16
Unbounded Dependencies I
Reading: Haegeman Ch.7

7

10
11
Class 17
Unbounded Dependencies II
Reading: Haegeman Ch.8

12
13
Class 18
Unbounded Dependencies III

14

17
18
Class 19
Unbounded Dependencies IV
Reading: Roberts Ch.4

19
20
Class 20
Unbounded Dependencies V
Reading: Haegeman Ch.10

21

24
25
Class 21
Unbounded Dependencies VI
Reading: Haegeman Ch.12

26
27
Class 22
Unbounded Dependencies VII

 28

May

1
2
Class 23
Unbounded Dependencies VIII
Reading: Cole & Hermon 1997

3
4
Class 24
Word Order V (Free Word Order)
Reading: Saito & Hoji 1983, Baker 1991

5

8
9
Class 25
Word Order VI (Free Word Order)
Reading: Saito 1992

10
11
Class 26
Derivations and Constituency I
Reading: Phillips 1998

12

 15
16
Class 27
Derivations and Constituency II
Reading: Richards 1999
Second Squib Due!

 17

 

 

Readings

Books

We will be drawing on material from two textbooks in this course, both of which are available at the campus bookstore. Liliane Haegeman's Introduction to Government and Binding Theory provides a clear and detailed presentation of many of the important theoretical proposals in the GB tradition in the 1980s and early 1990s. It focuses on introducing technical concepts, and focuses primarily on English. Ian Roberts' recent book Comparative Syntax focuses more on the characterization of cross-linguistic differences in the principles and parameters approach, but with less detail on technical issues. Thus, the two books complement one another nicely.

  1. Roberts, Ian. 1997. Comparative Syntax. London: Arnold.
  2. Haegeman, Liliane. 1994. Introduction to Government & Binding Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.

Articles, Chapters, etc.

In addition to reading material from the two textbooks, you will also read a number of articles or chapters from the primary syntax literature. Some of these have been chosen because they are classic papers in the field, others because they provide a particularly interesting idea or dataset that bears on issues that we will be discussing in clsss. The list given below is provisional. One copy of the articles will be made available in the Syntax II mailbox in the linguistics department mailroom. You should make a copy for yourself and return it promptly to the mailbox.

In addition to these readings, I will distribute handouts in class on a fairly regular basis, containing examples and arguments from a wide variety of languages and sources.

  1. Baker, M. 1988. Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing. University of Chicago Press. [selections]
  2. Baker, M. 1991. On some subject/object non-asymmetries in Mohawk. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 9, 537-576.
  3. Baker, M. 1996. The Polysynthesis Parameter. Oxford University Press. [selections]
  4. Baker, M., K. Johnson & I. Roberts. 1989. Passive Arguments Raised. Linguistic Inquiry 20, 219-251.
  5. Cole, Peter & Gabriella Hermon. 1998. The Typology of Wh-movement: Wh-movement in Malay. Syntax 1, 221-258.
  6. Cole, Peter, Gabriella Hermon & Cher-Leng Lee. 2000. Long-distance Reflexives in Two Chinese Dialects. in press, Cole, Hermon & Huang (eds.) Long Distance Reflexives. San Diego: Academic Press.
  7. Demirdache, Hamida. 1998. Condition C. In Atomism and Binding.
  8. Fox, Danny. 1999. Reconstruction, binding theory, and the interpretation of chains. Linguistic Inquiry, 30, 157-196.
  9. Iatridou, Sabine. 1990. About Agr(P). Linguistic Inquiry, 21, 551-577.
  10. Kenstowicz, M. 1989. The Null Subject Parameter in Modern Arabic Dialects. In O. Jaeggli & K. Safir (eds.), The Null Subject Parameter. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp.263-275.
  11. Lasnik, H. & M. Saito. 1991. On the Subject of Infinitives. In L. Dobrin, L. Nichols & R. Rodriguez (eds.), CLS 27. Part 1: The General Session. University of Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.
  12. Lidz, Jeff. 2000. Condition R. in press, Linguistic Inquiry.
  13. Manzini, R. 1992. Locality. MIT Press. [selections]
  14. Marantz, A. 1994. A Reader's Guide to the Minimalist Program. In G. Webelhuth (ed), Government and Binding Theory and the Minimalist Program. Oxford: Blackwell, pp.351-382.
  15. Phillips, Colin. 1998. Linear Order and Constituency. to appear in Linguistic Inquiry.
  16. Pollock, J.-Y. 1989. Verb Movement, Universal Grammar, and the Structure of Inflection. Linguistic Inquiry 20, 365-424.
  17. Reinhart, Tanya & Eric Reuland. 1993. Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry 24, 657-720.
  18. Richards, Norvin. 1998. The Principle of Minimal Compliance. Linguistic Inquiry, 29, 599-629.
  19. Rizzi, Luigi. 1982. Issues in Italian Syntax. Dordrecht: Foris. [selections]
  20. Saito, Mamoru. 1992. Long-distance scrambling in Japanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 1, 69-118.
  21. Saito, Mamoru & Hajime Hoji. 1983. Weak crossover and move-alpha in Japanese. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 1, 245-259.

Requirements

There will be no exams for this course. The focus of the course is on reading, discussing, writing and doing over the course of the semester, and hence your entire grade will be based upon this.

If you want to get the maximum benefit from this class (i.e. learn lots and have a grade to show for it), you will do the following...

1. Come to class prepared, and participate (10% of grade). Being prepared means having read the assigned article(s), and having jotted down your initial thoughts or questions about the article(s). Particpating in class discussions is valuable because it makes you an active learner and *massively* increases the likelihood that you will understand and retain the material.

In class, don't hesitate to ask if there is something that you do not understand. Also, if you find the logic of an argument unconvincing, point this out to the class.

2. Think and write carefully in written assignments. (60% of grade) There will be regular written assignments, consisting either of problem sets or critical evaluations of some article.

It is fine to work with other students on the written assignments; this is even encouraged, since it will most likely improve your understanding of the material. However, if you do this you should submit an assignment that you have written yourself, you should mention who you worked with, and -- most importantly -- you should make sure that you are satisfied that you have understood what you have written.

3. Take care in writing the two short papers. (30% of grade) You are expected to write two short papers or 'squibs' for this class, which take you beyond the material directly discussed in class. While the scope of these pieces is flexible, I recommend that one of the pieces be a critical review of a couple of related papers in the syntax literature, and that the other piece be a discussion of some novel data that you have collected. The first squib is due on the last day before Spring Break, on March 24th; the second squib is due at the last meeting of this class on May 16th.

You are not helping yourself if you wait until the last possible moment to work on these squibs, and if you spend forever stressing out over what to write about. There are vast numbers of interesting papers to review and topics to explore, and your success will depend more on the care you give to working on the project than on the brilliance of the choice of topic! You should come to speak to me in advance to let me know what you are working on, and you should also feel free to come to talk to me if you're not sure what to write about.

Grade scale

 A

80-100%

 B-

60-65%

 A-

75-80%

 C+

55-60%

 B+

70-75%

 C

50-55%

 B

65-70%

 C-

54-50%

Note that even in the A range there is plenty of room for you to show extra initiative and insight.