|11 - 12:15||Myunggwan Park (Dongguk University) and Arum Kang (Korea University)||"Bare nouns and pro's as anaphoric definites in Korean and Chinese"|
|12:15 - 1:45||lunch|
|1:45 - 3:00||Victor Pan (Chinese University of Hong Kong)|
"Minimalist Derivation of A'-dependency in Mandarin Chinese"By examining A-bar dependency such as relative clauses and Left-Dislocation (LD)-structures in Mandarin Chinese, I will argue that Agree applies phase by phase in a cyclic fashion and that during the course of the whole derivation, multiple Transfer and multiple Spell-Out apply. Agree is subject to locality constraints just as Move is and it gives rise to island effects. However, Matching only requires that the Attributes of the Probe and of the Goal are identical (rather than their Values). Two matched uninterpretable features do not Agree immediately. A phase containing uninterpretable features cannot be Transferred to interfaces. The matched pair of uninterpretable features will be “forced” to be Agreed until the final Transfer at the final phase cycle, as a last resort. And then the entire sentence containing all of the phases will be sent to the interfaces by Transfer. Therefore, a Matching chain is not subject to the locality constraints. On the other hand, A'-bound elements such as gap, resumptive pronoun and pro do not behave alike in that they give rise to different syntactic and semantic effects, such as island effects, crossover effects and reconstruction effects. Gap always gives rise to island effects, irrespective of whether it appears in a relative clause or in an LD-structure; an overt resumptive pronoun (i.e. in its intrusive use) can only save the sentence from the potential violation of locality constraints in an LD-structure but not in a relative clause; pro in Chinese can function as resumptive pronoun which can redeem the relevant sentence from the violation of locality constraints, which is why island effects are not observed irrespective of whether pro appears inside a relative clause or inside an LD-structure. A systematic comparison shows that Gap and pro are different in their nature.
|3:00 - 4:15||Mamoru Saito (Nanzan University)|
"Weak Heads in Labeling: Case Studies with Modification Structures"One of the main goals of Minimalist Syntax is to eliminate the stipulated syntactic principles. The labeling theory of Chomsky 2013 was a big step forward in this respect as it explains the distribution of noun phrases as well as the nature of movement in place of several syntactic principles, including the Case Filter and the Last Resort Principle. It also opened up a new way to approach syntactic variation among languages. I proposed in Saito 2017 that Case markers and predicate inflection serve as anti-labeling devices in Japanese and showed that the labeling theory then successfully explains several well-known typological properties of the language, including free word-order, multiple subjects, argument ellipsis and productive use of complex verbs. In this presentation, I first make an attempt to explain why Case markers and predicate inflection serve as anti-labeling devices. The proposal is that they are weak heads in the sense of Chomsky 2015 and hence are unable to provide labels. Then, I extend the analysis to two more typologically significant properties of Japanese. One is the very productive sentential modification of nouns and the other is the wide distribution of floating quantifiers.
|4:15 - 4:45||coffee|
|4:45 - 6:00||Michael Barrie (Sogang University)||"Where and why are labels necessary?"|
|6:00 - 6:30||open discussion|