Episode 4b. UTAHEpisode 4b. UTAH

4.3-4.44.3-4.4

CAS LX 522CAS LX 522Syntax ISyntax I

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

We give trees to We give trees to ditransitivesditransitives

You may recall our You may recall our discussion of discussion of -theory, -theory, where we triumphantly where we triumphantly classified verbs as classified verbs as coming in three types:coming in three types: IntransitiveIntransitive (1 (1 -role)-role) TransitiveTransitive (2 (2 -roles)-roles) DitransitiveDitransitive (3 (3 -roles)-roles)

Theta roles go to Theta roles go to obligatory arguments, obligatory arguments, not to adjuncts.not to adjuncts.

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

We give trees to We give trees to ditransitivesditransitives

You may also recall You may also recall that we believe that that we believe that trees are binary trees are binary branching, where:branching, where: Syntactic objects are Syntactic objects are formed by Merge.formed by Merge.

There’s just one There’s just one complement and one complement and one specifier.specifier.

We give trees to We give trees to ditransitivesditransitives

FantasticFantastic, except that , except that these things just these things just don’t fit together.don’t fit together.

We know what to do We know what to do with transitive verbs.with transitive verbs.

But what do we do with But what do we do with ditransitive verbs? ditransitive verbs? We’re out of spaceWe’re out of space!!

OBJ

V

V

VP

SUB

Problems continue…Problems continue…

I showed Mary to herself.I showed Mary to herself. *I showed herself to Mary.*I showed herself to Mary. I introduced nobody to anybody.I introduced nobody to anybody. *I introduced anybody to nobody.*I introduced anybody to nobody.

This tells us something about This tells us something about the relationship between the the relationship between the direct and direct and toto-object in the -object in the structure. (What?)structure. (What?)

Problems continue…Problems continue…

The OBJ c-commands the The OBJ c-commands the PP. PP. But how could we But how could we draw a tree like that?draw a tree like that?

Even if we allowed Even if we allowed adjuncts to get adjuncts to get --roles, the most natural roles, the most natural structure would be to structure would be to make the PP an adjunct, make the PP an adjunct, like this, but that like this, but that doesn’t meet the c-doesn’t meet the c-command requirements.command requirements.

OBJ

VSUB

V

V

PP

* VP

Some clues from idiomsSome clues from idioms Often idiomatic meanings are Often idiomatic meanings are associated with the verb+object associated with the verb+object complex—the meaning derives both from complex—the meaning derives both from the verb and the object together.the verb and the object together.

Suppose that this is due being Merged Suppose that this is due being Merged into the structure together initially.into the structure together initially. BillBill threw a baseballthrew a baseball.. BillBill threw his supportthrew his support behind the behind the candidatecandidate..

BillBill threw the boxing matchthrew the boxing match..

Idioms in ditransitivesIdioms in ditransitives In ditransitives, it seems like this In ditransitives, it seems like this happens with the happens with the PPPP.. Beethoven Beethoven gavegave the Fifth Symphony the Fifth Symphony to the to the worldworld..

Beethoven Beethoven gavegave the Fifth Symphony the Fifth Symphony to his to his patronpatron..

Lasorda Lasorda sentsent his starting pitcher his starting pitcher to the to the showersshowers..

Lasorda Lasorda sentsent his starting pitcher his starting pitcher to to AmsterdamAmsterdam..

Mary Mary tooktook Felix Felix to taskto task.. Mary Mary tooktook Felix Felix to the cleanersto the cleaners.. Mary Mary tooktook Felix Felix to his doctor’s appointmentto his doctor’s appointment..

So V and PP are So V and PP are sisters…sisters…

Larson (1988) took this as evidence that Larson (1988) took this as evidence that the V is a sister to the PP “originally.”the V is a sister to the PP “originally.”

Yet, we see that Yet, we see that on the surface on the surface the OBJ the OBJ comes between the verb and the PP.comes between the verb and the PP. Mary sent a letter to Bill.Mary sent a letter to Bill.

Where is the OBJ? It must c-command the Where is the OBJ? It must c-command the PP, remember. Why is the V to the left of PP, remember. Why is the V to the left of the OBJ when we hear it?the OBJ when we hear it?

PP

V

V

Where’s the V? Where’s the Where’s the V? Where’s the OBJ?OBJ?

We can paraphrase We can paraphrase John gave a book to MaryJohn gave a book to Mary as as John caused a book to go to MaryJohn caused a book to go to Mary..

Chichewa:Chichewa: Mtsikana ana-chit-Mtsikana ana-chit-itsits-a kuti mtsuku -a kuti mtsuku u-u-gwgw-e-egirl agr-do-girl agr-do-causecause-asp that waterpot -asp that waterpot agr-agr-fallfall-asp-asp‘The girl made the waterpot fall.’‘The girl made the waterpot fall.’

Mtsikana anau-Mtsikana anau-gwgw--itsits-a kuti-mtsuku-a kuti-mtsukugirl agr-girl agr-fallfall--causecause-asp that waterpot-asp that waterpot‘The girl made the waterpot fall.’‘The girl made the waterpot fall.’

Suppose that in both cases Merge puts things Suppose that in both cases Merge puts things together in the same way initially:together in the same way initially: [[that waterpot] fall][[that waterpot] fall]

CausativesCausatives Mtsikana ana-chit-Mtsikana ana-chit-itsits-a kuti mtsuku u--a kuti mtsuku u-gwgw-e-e

girl agr-do-girl agr-do-causecause-asp that waterpot agr--asp that waterpot agr-fallfall-asp-asp‘The girl made the waterpot fall.’‘The girl made the waterpot fall.’

Mtsikana anau-Mtsikana anau-gwgw--itsits-a kuti-mtsuku-a kuti-mtsukugirl agr-girl agr-fallfall--causecause-asp that waterpot-asp that waterpot‘The girl made the waterpot fall.’‘The girl made the waterpot fall.’

[[that waterpot] fall][[that waterpot] fall] Then it’s merged with Then it’s merged with causecause (basically (basically

transitive: needs a causer and a causee):transitive: needs a causer and a causee): [cause [[that waterpot] fall]][cause [[that waterpot] fall]]

And then it’s Merged with the AgentAnd then it’s Merged with the Agent [girl [cause [[that waterpot] fall]]][girl [cause [[that waterpot] fall]]]

At which point, one At which point, one cancan movemove fallfall over to over to causecause.. [girl [cause+fall [[that waterpot] <fall> ]]][girl [cause+fall [[that waterpot] <fall> ]]]

Ditransitives againDitransitives again The proposal will be that English The proposal will be that English

ditransitives are really a lot like Chichewa ditransitives are really a lot like Chichewa causatives.causatives.

One One movesmoves fallfall over to over to causecause to get: to get: [girl [cause+fall [[that waterpot] <fall> ]]][girl [cause+fall [[that waterpot] <fall> ]]]

Starting withStarting with [[the book] [go [to Mary]][[the book] [go [to Mary]]

Merging Merging causecause and an Agent and an Agent [John [cause [[the book] [go [to Mary]]]]][John [cause [[the book] [go [to Mary]]]]]

One then moves One then moves gogo over to over to causecause to get: to get: [John [cause+go [[the book] [<go> [to Mary]]]]][John [cause+go [[the book] [<go> [to Mary]]]]] John “gave” the book to Mary.John “gave” the book to Mary.

A very, very little bit A very, very little bit of Frenchof French

If you’ve tried to learn any French at If you’ve tried to learn any French at all, you’ve come across this phenomenon:all, you’ve come across this phenomenon: dede ‘of’ ‘of’ lele ‘the (masculine)’ ‘the (masculine)’ àà ‘at’ ‘at’ lala ‘the (feminine)’ ‘the (feminine)’

à la à la biblioteque biblioteque ‘to the library (fem)’‘to the library (fem)’ **à leà le cinéma cinéma ‘to the movies (masc)’‘to the movies (masc)’ auau cinema cinema ‘to the movies (masc)’‘to the movies (masc)’ de la de la mayonnaisemayonnaise ‘of mayonnaise (fem)’‘of mayonnaise (fem)’ *de le *de le laitlait ‘of milk (masc)’‘of milk (masc)’ du du laitlait ‘of milk’ (masc)‘of milk’ (masc)

A very, very little bit A very, very little bit of Frenchof French

This is usually taught as:This is usually taught as: au = à + leau = à + le du = de + ledu = de + le

If your underlying If your underlying intentintent is is àà ‘at’ + ‘at’ + lele ‘the’, you pronounce it like ‘the’, you pronounce it like auau..

So is So is auau a preposition or an article? a preposition or an article? There’s no reason to believe that There’s no reason to believe that auaucincinémaéma has a different syntactic structure has a different syntactic structurefrom from à la bibliotèqueà la bibliotèque..

This is just about how it is pronounced.This is just about how it is pronounced. AuAu = = àà + + lele. . GiveGive = = causecause + + gogo..

N

NP

D

PP

P

Where’s the V? Where’s the Where’s the V? Where’s the OBJ?OBJ?

Larson’s proposal was basically Larson’s proposal was basically this. Logically, if we’re going to this. Logically, if we’re going to have binary branching and three have binary branching and three positions for argument XPs (SUB, positions for argument XPs (SUB, OBJ, PP), we need to have another XP OBJ, PP), we need to have another XP above the VP.above the VP.

Since the subject is in the Since the subject is in the specifier of the higher XP, that specifier of the higher XP, that must be a VP too.must be a VP too.

Ditransitive verbs really Ditransitive verbs really come in come in two partstwo parts. They are in a “VP shell” . They are in a “VP shell” structure.structure.

Furthermore, the higher part seems Furthermore, the higher part seems to correlate with a meaning of to correlate with a meaning of causation.causation.

PP

V

V

VP

OBJ

v

v

vP

SUB

Where’s the V? Where’s the Where’s the V? Where’s the OBJ?OBJ?

The higher verb is a “light verb” The higher verb is a “light verb” (we’ll write it as (we’ll write it as vvP to signify P to signify that)—its contribution is to that)—its contribution is to assign the assign the -role to the subject. -role to the subject. The lower verb assigns the The lower verb assigns the -roles -roles to the OBJ and the PP.to the OBJ and the PP.

That is, V has [That is, V has [uuP, P, uuN] features,N] features,and and vv has a [ has a [uuN] feature.N] feature.

Hierarchy of Projections (so far):Hierarchy of Projections (so far): vv > V > V

““V comes with V comes with vv”” PP

V

<V>

VP

OBJ

v

v+V

vP

SUB

Where we areWhere we are We’ve just come up with an We’ve just come up with an analysis of sentences with analysis of sentences with ditransitive verbs, such ditransitive verbs, such as as Pat gave books to ChrisPat gave books to Chris that accords with the that accords with the constraints of the constraints of the syntactic system we have syntactic system we have developed so far.developed so far. Merge is binaryMerge is binary -roles are assigned to -roles are assigned to specifiers and complements.specifiers and complements.

The solution is to assume The solution is to assume a two-tiered structure, a two-tiered structure, with a little with a little vv in in addition to the VP.addition to the VP.

PP

V

V

VP

NP

v

v

vP

NPPat

books

to ChrisNPP

gave

Where we areWhere we are The three The three -roles for -roles for givegive are assigned like this:are assigned like this: The PP gets a Goal The PP gets a Goal -role.-role. The lower NP gets a Theme The lower NP gets a Theme --role.role.

The highest NP (in the The highest NP (in the specifier of specifier of vvP) gets an Agent P) gets an Agent -role.-role.

But how did we know that?But how did we know that?

More importantly, how do More importantly, how do kids come to know that?kids come to know that?

Do they memorize this list Do they memorize this list for each verb they learn?for each verb they learn?

PP

V

V

VP

NP

v

v

vP

NPPat

books

to ChrisNPP

gave

Uniformity of Theta Uniformity of Theta AssignmentAssignment

If kids are really If kids are really memorizing which memorizing which -role -role goes where for each verb, goes where for each verb, there should be some verbs there should be some verbs that do it in other ways.that do it in other ways. For example, there might be For example, there might be a ditransitive verb with a ditransitive verb with Theme in the specifier of Theme in the specifier of vvP, Goal in the specifier of P, Goal in the specifier of VP, and Agent in the VP, and Agent in the complement of VP.complement of VP.

E.g., E.g., to tupto tup::Books tup on the shelf ChrisBooks tup on the shelf Chris‘Chris put books on the ‘Chris put books on the shelf.’shelf.’ Agent

V

V

VP

Goal

v

v

vP

Theme?

tup

Uniformity of Theta Uniformity of Theta AssignmentAssignment

But that just never happens.But that just never happens.

It seems that all verbs have It seems that all verbs have -role assignment that looks -role assignment that looks pretty much the same.pretty much the same. If there’s an Agent, it’s the If there’s an Agent, it’s the first (uppermost) NP.first (uppermost) NP.

If there’s a Theme it’s down If there’s a Theme it’s down close to the verb.close to the verb.

Given that things Given that things seem seem to be to be relatively uniform, it has been relatively uniform, it has been proposed that this is a proposed that this is a fundamental property of the fundamental property of the syntactic system. Each syntactic system. Each -role -role has a consistent place in the has a consistent place in the structure.structure.

Agent

V

V

VP

Goal

v

v

vP

Theme

tup

UTAHUTAH The Uniformity of Theta-Assignment The Uniformity of Theta-Assignment Hypothesis (UTAH):Hypothesis (UTAH): Identical thematic Identical thematic relationships between predicates and relationships between predicates and their arguments are represented their arguments are represented syntactically by identical structural syntactically by identical structural relationships when items are Merged.relationships when items are Merged. That is, all Agents are structurally in the That is, all Agents are structurally in the same place (when first Merged). All Patients same place (when first Merged). All Patients are structurally in the same place, etc.are structurally in the same place, etc.

We can take this to be a property of the We can take this to be a property of the interpretation. interpretation. When a structure is When a structure is interpreted, the interpreted, the -role an argument gets -role an argument gets depends on where it was first Merged.depends on where it was first Merged.

-roles and structure-roles and structure Great. So, the Agent (Great. So, the Agent (PatPat) in ) in Pat gave books to ChrisPat gave books to Chris is in is in the specifier of the specifier of vvP. Because P. Because that’s where Agents go.that’s where Agents go.

But.. What about structures But.. What about structures like the ones we had before like the ones we had before for things like for things like Pat called Pat called ChrisChris??

Pat

called Chris

NP

VP

NPV

V PP

V

V

VP

NP

v

v

vP

NPPat

books

to ChrisNPP

gave

?

-roles and structure-roles and structure Well, if we’re serious about Well, if we’re serious about working within the working within the constraints of UTAH, we need constraints of UTAH, we need a a vv there too— to host the there too— to host the Agent.Agent.

Hierarchy of Projection: Hierarchy of Projection: vv > > VV

calledChrisNPV

VP PP

V

V

VP

NP

v

v

vP

NPPat

books

to ChrisNPP

gave

v

v

vP

NPPat

-roles and structure-roles and structure Specifier of Specifier of vvP = AgentP = Agent

But where’s the Theme? But where’s the Theme? Isn’t that in different Isn’t that in different places in places in Pat called Pat called ChrisChris and and Pat gave Pat gave booksbooks to to ChrisChris??

calledChrisNPV

VP PP

V

V

VP

NP

v

v

vP

NPPat

books

to ChrisNPP

gave

v

v

vP

NPPat

-roles and structure-roles and structure NP, daughter of NP, daughter of vvP = AgentP = Agent NP, daughter of VP = ThemeNP, daughter of VP = Theme PP, daughter of VPP, daughter of V = Goal = Goal

That seems to work, and it That seems to work, and it seems a reasonable seems a reasonable interpretation of UTAH.interpretation of UTAH.

calledChrisNPV

VP PP

V

V

VP

NP

v

v

vP

NPPat

books

to ChrisNPP

gave

v

v

vP

NPPat

Unaccusatives vs. Unaccusatives vs. unergativesunergatives

Recall that there are two types of Recall that there are two types of single-argument (intransitive) verbs single-argument (intransitive) verbs in terms of the in terms of the -role they assign -role they assign to their single argument. to their single argument.

UnaccusativesUnaccusatives: Have one, : Have one, ThemeTheme --role.role. Fall, sink, break, closeFall, sink, break, close

UnergativesUnergatives: Have one, : Have one, AgentAgent -role.-role. Walk, dance, laughWalk, dance, laugh

Unaccusatives vs. Unaccusatives vs. unergativesunergatives

UnaccusativesUnaccusatives: Have one, : Have one, ThemeTheme -role.-role. Fall, sink, break, closeFall, sink, break, close

UnergativesUnergatives: Have one, : Have one, AgentAgent -role.-role. Walk, dance, laughWalk, dance, laugh

If we adopt the UTAH, then we are forced If we adopt the UTAH, then we are forced to a certain view of the original Merges.to a certain view of the original Merges. If you’re going to be a Theme, you need to be If you’re going to be a Theme, you need to be NP daughter of VP.NP daughter of VP.

If you’re going to be an Agent, you need to If you’re going to be an Agent, you need to be NP daughter of be NP daughter of vPvP..

(Is it bad to be forced into an (Is it bad to be forced into an analysis?)analysis?)

UnaccusativesUnaccusatives Let’s go back and consider VP shells a bit in Let’s go back and consider VP shells a bit in

connection with unaccusatives.connection with unaccusatives.

The ice melted.The ice melted. The boat sank. The boat sank. The door closed.The door closed.

The iceThe ice, , the boatthe boat, , the doorthe door are all are all Themes—Themes— the the argument starts as NP daughter of VP.argument starts as NP daughter of VP.

Unaccusatives have a relatively “inert” Unaccusatives have a relatively “inert” vv, no , no “causal” meaning.“causal” meaning.

There are two kinds of There are two kinds of vv, the causal one that , the causal one that needs an NP (Agent), and a non-causal one.needs an NP (Agent), and a non-causal one.

What if we pick the causal What if we pick the causal v v (and provide an (and provide an Agent NP)?Agent NP)?

NP

VP

Vthe icemelt

vP

v

VP shellsVP shells Bill melted the iceBill melted the ice..

Straightforward enough. The Straightforward enough. The causal causal vv adds an Agent. adds an Agent.

Bill was the agent/instigator Bill was the agent/instigator of a melting that affected of a melting that affected the ice.the ice.

Why isn’t the unaccusative Why isn’t the unaccusative version version Melted the iceMelted the ice, , though?though? (English being head-initial, (English being head-initial, after all)after all)

v

v

vP

NP

VP

Vthe icemelt

NPBill

PreviewPreview Why isn’t the unaccusative Why isn’t the unaccusative version version Melted the iceMelted the ice, though?, though? (English being head-initial, after (English being head-initial, after all)all)

We will turn to this question We will turn to this question more thoroughly next. But to a more thoroughly next. But to a first approximation, we say first approximation, we say that:that:

Sentences need subjects.Sentences need subjects. Subjects come first.Subjects come first.

Since there is only one NP here, it Since there is only one NP here, it has to be the subject, and it has to has to be the subject, and it has to come first.come first.

We suppose that a We suppose that a movementmovement operation operation (something like what happens to (something like what happens to give give when it moves up to when it moves up to vv) carries the ) carries the subject over to the left of the subject over to the left of the vvP.P.

vP

v

NP

VP

Vthe icemelt

PreviewPreview Sentences need subjects.Sentences need subjects. Subjects come first.Subjects come first.

Since there is only one NP Since there is only one NP here, it has to be the here, it has to be the subject, and it has to come subject, and it has to come first.first.

We suppose that a We suppose that a movementmovement operation operation (something like what (something like what happens to happens to give give when it moves when it moves up to up to vv) carries the subject ) carries the subject over to the left of the over to the left of the vvP.P.

As for where it goes (how As for where it goes (how it is integrated into the it is integrated into the structure), we’ll concern structure), we’ll concern ourselves more with that ourselves more with that next week.next week.

vP

v+V

NP

VP

V<the ice><melt>

melt

NPthe ice

Bill lied.Bill lied. Just to address the last Just to address the last case, the unergatives, case, the unergatives, consider consider Bill liedBill lied..

That’s got an Agent, so That’s got an Agent, so it’s got a it’s got a vv..

So, it would look like So, it would look like this.this.

v

v

vP

VPlie

NPBill

Auxiliary selectionAuxiliary selection Molte ragazze telefonanoMolte ragazze telefonanomany girls phonemany girls phone‘Many girls are phoning.’‘Many girls are phoning.’

Molte ragazze arrivanoMolte ragazze arrivanomany girls arrivemany girls arrive‘Many girls are arriving.’‘Many girls are arriving.’

Molte ragazze hanno telefonatoMolte ragazze hanno telefonatomany girls have phone[past-part.3sg]many girls have phone[past-part.3sg]‘Many girls phoned.’‘Many girls phoned.’

Molte ragazze sono arrivate.Molte ragazze sono arrivate.Many girls are arrive[past-part.3pl]Many girls are arrive[past-part.3pl]‘Many girls arrived.’‘Many girls arrived.’

Auxiliary selectionAuxiliary selection Molte ragazze telefonanoMolte ragazze telefonanomany girls phonemany girls phone‘Many girls are phoning.’‘Many girls are phoning.’

Molte ragazze arrivanoMolte ragazze arrivanomany girls arrivemany girls arrive‘Many girls are arriving.’‘Many girls are arriving.’

Molte ragazze hanno <molte ragazze> Molte ragazze hanno <molte ragazze> telefonato telefonato many girls have phone[past-part.3sg]many girls have phone[past-part.3sg]‘Many girls phoned.’‘Many girls phoned.’

Molte ragazze sono arrivate <molte ragazze>.Molte ragazze sono arrivate <molte ragazze>.Many girls are arrive[past-part.3pl]Many girls are arrive[past-part.3pl]‘Many girls arrived.’‘Many girls arrived.’

Double objectsDouble objects

Just as you can give a book to Just as you can give a book to Chris, so can you give Chris a Chris, so can you give Chris a book.book.

But…But…

If we try to analyze If we try to analyze Pat gave Pat gave Chris a bookChris a book in the same way, in the same way, we run into trouble.we run into trouble.

Pat gave Chris a bookPat gave Chris a book NP, daughter of NP, daughter of vvP = AgentP = Agent NP, daughter of VP = ThemeNP, daughter of VP = Theme PP, daughter of VPP, daughter of V = Goal = Goal

See the problem?See the problem?

If we believe the UTAH,If we believe the UTAH,this can’t be right.this can’t be right.

V

V

VP

NP

v

v

vP

NPPat

Chris

a bookNP

go(“gave”)

?

Two kinds of givingTwo kinds of giving The two forms of The two forms of givegive are not quite are not quite equivalent, though:equivalent, though: Pat gave a book to Chris.Pat gave a book to Chris. Pat gave Chris a book.Pat gave Chris a book. *Pat gave a headache to Chris.*Pat gave a headache to Chris. Pat gave Chris a headache.Pat gave Chris a headache.

Try paraphrasing…Try paraphrasing… Pat sent a letter to Chicago.Pat sent a letter to Chicago. *Pat sent Chicago a letter.*Pat sent Chicago a letter. Pat taught French to the students.Pat taught French to the students. Pat taught the students French.Pat taught the students French.

To haveTo have NP, daughter of NP, daughter of vvP = AgentP = Agent NP, daughter of VP = ThemeNP, daughter of VP = Theme PP, daughter of VPP, daughter of V = Goal = Goal NP, daughter of VNP, daughter of V = = PossesseePossessee

This might solve the problem.This might solve the problem.

has a bookNPV

VPv

vP

NPPat

VV

V

VP

NP

v

v

vP

NPPat

Chris

a bookNP

have(“gave”)