Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Spelling out the Double-o Constraint

  • Published:
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article aims to elucidate the true nature of the so-called Double-o Constraint (DoC) in Japanese. The nature of the DoC has long been discussed in the literature since Harada’s work back in the 1970’s, but it has eluded a principled explanation. The DoC has been known to apply to certain domains and a careful study presented in this article shows that these domains correspond to phases. Thus, the DoC reduces to a PF constraint against realizing multiple occurrences of the accusative Case value within a single Spell-Out domain. Specifically, I argue that the DoC applies cyclically phase-by-phase and thus that the DoC provides solid evidence for the cyclic phase-based computation in the current minimalist theorizing (Chomsky 2001, 2004, 2008). If correct, Case in Japanese has two facets: a Case is valued in narrow syntax but its value is only realized at Spell-Out, at which point PF interface conditions apply. It is further suggested that the DoC reduces to a syntactic OCP (Obligatory Contour Principle). The DoC, therefore, is considered to be a case in which an apparently language-particular and hence peripheral phenomenon provides empirical support for the architecture of the Universal Grammar.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackema, Peter. 2001. Colliding complementizers in Dutch: another syntactic OCP. Linguistic Inquiry 32: 717–727.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, Mark. 1988. Incorporation: a theory of grammatical function changing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boškovíc, Željko. 2002. On multiple Wh-fronting. Linguistic Inquiry 33(3): 351–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browning, Marguerite, and Ezat Karimi. 1994. Scrambling to object position in Persian. In Studies on scrambling: movement & non-movement approaches to free word order phenomena, eds. Norbert Corver and Hank van Reimsdijk, 61–100. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Step by step: essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, eds. Roger Martin, David Michaels, and Juan Uriagereka, 89–155. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: a life in language, ed. Michael Kenstowicz, 1–52. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 2004. Beyond explanatory adequacy. In Vol. 3 of Structures and beyond: the cartography of syntactic structures, ed. Adriana Belletti, 104–131. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 2008. On phases. In Foundational issues in linguistic theory, eds. Robert Freidin, Carlos P. Otero, and Maria Luisa Zubizarreta, 133–166. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, Chris. 1997. Local economy. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Comrie, Bernard. 1976. The grammar of causative constructions. In Syntax and semantics 6: the grammar of causative constructions, ed. Masayoshi Shibatani, 262–312. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, William D. 1986. Choctaw verb agreement and universal grammar. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • den Dikken, Marcel. 1995. Particles: on the syntax of verb-particle, triadic, and causative constructions. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukui, Naoki. 2000. Wh-gimonbun no bunseki. In Syntax and meaning: S. I. Harada collected works in linguistics, ed. Naoki Fukui, 817–830. Tokyo: Taishukan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimshaw, Jane, and Armin Mester. 1988. Light verbs and theta-marking. Linguistic Inquiry 19(2): 205–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale, Ken, and Chisato Kitagawa. 1976–1977. A counter to counter equi. Papers in Japanese Linguistics 5: 41–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harada, S.I. 1973. Counter Equi NP deletion. In Vol. 7 of Annual Bulletin, 113–147. Tokyo: University of Tokyo, Research Institute of Logopedics and Phoniatrics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harada, S.I. 1975. The functional uniqueness principle. In Vol. 2 of Attempts in Linguistics and Literature, 17–24. Tokyo: ICU.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasegawa, Nobuko. 1985. On the so-called “zero pronouns” in Japanese. The Linguistic Review 4(4): 289–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiraiwa, Ken. 2002. Facets of case: on the nature of the Double-o Constraint. In The proceedings of the 3rd Tokyo psycholinguistics conference, ed. Yukio Otsu, TCP, 2002, 139–163. Tokyo: Hituzi Shobo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiraiwa, Ken. 2005. Dimensions of symmetry in syntax: agreement and clausal architecture. Unpublished PhD dissertation, MIT.

  • Hiraiwa, Ken, and Ishihara, Shinichiro. 2002. Missing links: cleft, sluicing and ‘no da’ construction in Japanese. In The proceedings of the HUMIT 2001: MIT working papers in linguistics #43, eds. Tania Ionin, Heejeong Ko, and Andrew Nevins, 35–54. Cambridge: MITWPL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiraiwa, Ken, and Shinichiro Ishihara. 2010. Syntactic metamorphosis: cleft, sluicing, and in-situ focus in Japanese. Syntax (to appear).

  • Kageyama, Taro. 1993. Bunpoo to gokeisei. Tokyo: Hituzi Shobo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kato, Sachiko. 2007. Scrambling and the EPP in Japanese: from the viewpoint of the Kumamoto dialect of Japanese. In The proceedings of FAJL 4, 113–124. Cambridge: MITWPL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Jong-Bok, and Peter Sells. 2006. Case assignment in the clause and adjuncts. In The proceedings of the 11th Harvard international symposium on Korean linguistics, 506–519. Cambridge: Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koizumi, Masatoshi. 1995. Phrase structure in minimalist syntax. Unpublished PhD dissertation, MIT.

  • Kuno, Susumu. 1973. The structure of the Japanese language. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuno, Susumu. 1976. Subject raising. In Vol. 5 of Syntax and semantics: Japanese generative grammar, ed. Masayoshi Shibatani, 17–49. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurafuji, Takeo. 1997. Case-checking of accusative Wh-adjuncts. In MIT working papers in linguistics #31, 253–272. Cambridge: MITWPL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuroda, S.-Y. 1965. Generative grammatical studies in the Japanese language. PhD dissertation, MIT.

  • Kuroda, S.-Y. 1978. Case-marking, canonical sentence patterns, and Counter-Equi in Japanese. In Problems in Japanese syntax and semantics, eds. John Hinds and Irwin Howard, 30–51. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuroda, S.-Y. 1988. Whether we agree or not: a comparative syntax of English and Japanese. Linguisticae Investigationes 12: 1–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuroda, S.-Y. 1992. Japanese syntax and semantics: collected papers. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuroda, S.-Y. 1999. Syubunaizai kankeisetu. In Gengo no naizai to gaizai, eds. S.-Y. Kuroda and Masaru Nakamura, 27–103. Tokyo: Kurosio.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuroda, S.-Y. 1999. Tokoro sesu. In Gengo no naizai to gaizai, eds. S.-Y. Kuroda and Masaru Nakamura, 105–162. Tokyo: Kurosio.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuroda, S.-Y. 2000. Gyakkoodouitumeisikusakuztyo oyobi kankeisetuka. In Syntax and meaning: S.I. Harada collected works in linguistics, ed. N. Fukui, 795–803. Tokyo: Taishukan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leben, William. 1973. Suprasegmental phonology. Unpublished PhD dissertation, MIT.

  • Lefebvre, Claire, and Pieter Muysken. 1988. Mixed categories: nominalization in Quechua. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maling, Joan, and Soowon Kim. 1992. Case assignment in the inalienable possession construction in Korean. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 1: 37–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marantz, Alec. 1981. Grammatical relations, lexical rules, and Japanese syntax. In Coyote papers 2, 123–144. Tucson: University of Arizona Linguistics Circle.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, John. 1986. OCP effects: gemination and antigemination. Linguistic Inquiry 17: 207–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menn, Lise, and Brian MacWhinney. 1984. The repeated morph constraint: toward an explanation. Language 60: 519–541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mihara, Ken-ichi. 1994. Nihongo no Toogo Koozoo. Tokyo: Shohakusha.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miyagawa, Shigeru. 1989. Syntax and semantics 22: structure and case marking in Japanese. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miyagawa, Shigeru. 1997. Against optional scrambling. Linguistic Inquiry 28(1): 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miyagawa, Shigeru. 1999. Causatives. In The handbook of Japanese linguistics, ed. Natsuko Tsujimura, 236–268. Malden: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miyake, Tomohiro. 1996. Nihongo no idoodoosi no taikakuhyoozi nituite (On accusative case-marking in motion verbs in Japanese). Gengokenkyu 110: 143–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohanan, Tara. 1994. Case OCP: a constraint on word order in Hindi. In Theoretical perspectives on word order in South Asian languages, eds. Miriam Butt, Tracy Holloway King, and Gillian Ramchand, 185–216. Stanford: CSLI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murasugi, Keiko. 2000. Japanese complex noun phrases and the antisymmetry theory. In Step by step: essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, eds. Roger Martin, David Michaels, and Juan Uriagereka, 211–234. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neeleman, Ad, and Hans Van de Koot. 2006. Syntactic haplology. In Vol. 4 of The Blackwell companion to syntax, eds. Martin Everaert, Henk van Riemsdijk, Rob Goedemans, and Bart Hollebrandse, 685–710. New York: Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nishigauchi, Taisuke. 1998. Multiple sluicing in Japanese and the functional nature of wh-phrases. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 7(2): 121–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nishiyama, Kunio, John Whitman, and Eun-Young Yi. 1995. Syntactic movement of overt Wh-phrases in Japanese and Korean. In Japanese/Korean Linguistics 5, 337–351. Stanford: CSLI.

  • Nissenbaum, Jon. 2001. The investigations of covert phrasal movement. Unpublished PhD dissertation, MIT.

  • Odden, David. 1986. On the role of the Obligatory Contour Principle in phonological theory. Language 62: 353–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poser, William J. 1981. The “Double-o Constraint”: evidence for a direct object relation in Japanese. Manuscript, MIT.

  • Poser, William J. 2002. The Double-O Constraints in Japanese. Manuscript, University of Pennsylvania.

  • Richards, Norvin. 2006. A distinctness condition on linearization. Manuscript, MIT.

  • Saito, Mamoru. 1982. Case marking in Japanese: A preliminary study. Manuscript, MIT.

  • Saito, Mamoru. 1985. Some asymmetries in Japanese and their theoretical implications. Unpublished PhD dissertation, MIT.

  • Saito, Mamoru. 1989. Scrambling as semantically vacuous A′-movement. In Alternative conceptions of phrase structure, eds. Mark Baltin and Anthony Kroch, 182–200. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saito, Mamoru. 1992. Long distance scrambling in Japanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 1(1): 69–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saito, Mamoru, and Hiroto Hoshi. 2000. The Japanese light verb construction and the minimalist program. In Step by step: in honor of Howard Lasnik, eds. Roger Martin, David Michaels, and Juan Uriagereka, 261–296. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sasaki, Kan. 2004. Mitsukaido hoogen ni okeru kaku to bunpoo kankei [The case and grammatical relation in the Mitsukaido dialect]. Tokyo: Kurosio.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sasaki, Takashi. 2007. Mokutekigo-o saisetusuru: Joodaigo-no koobun. Kokugokokubun 76(10): 40–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1973. Semantics of Japanese causativization. Foundations of Language 9: 327–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1978. Nihongo no bunseki. Tokyo: Taishukan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Takahashi, Daiko. 1994. Sluicing in Japanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 3(3): 265–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takano, Yuji. 2002. Surprising constituents. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 11(3): 243–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsubomoto, Atsuro. 1998. Bunrenketsu no katachi to imi to goyooron. In Modality to Hatsuwakooi, ed. Minoru Nakau, 100–193. Tokyo: Kenkyusha.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsujimura, Natsuko. 1996. Introduction to Japanese linguistics. New York: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ura, Hiroyuki. 1996. Multiple feature-checking: a theory of grammatical function splitting. Unpublished PhD dissertation, MIT.

  • Ura, Hiroyuki. 2000. Checking theory and grammatical functions in universal grammar. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uriagereka, Juan. 1999. Multiple spell-out. In Working minimalism, eds. Samuel D. Epstein and Norbert Hornstein, 251–282. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Riemsdijk, Henk. 1988. The representation of syntactic categories. In Proceedings of the conference on the Basque language, 2nd Basque World Congress, 104–116. Victoria-Gasteiz: Central Publication Service of the Basque Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Riemsdijk, Henk. 1998. Syntactic feature magnetism: the endocentricity and distribution of projections. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 2: 1–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watanabe, Akira. 1991. Wh-in-situ, subjacency, and chain formation. MIT occasional papers linguistics 2. Cambridge: MITWPL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watanabe, Akira. 1992. Subjacency and s-structure movement of Wh-in-situ. Journal of East Asian Linguistis 1(3): 255–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watanabe, Akira. 1996. Case absorption and Wh-agreement. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, Edwin. 1981. Argument structure and morphology. The Linguistic Review 1(1): 81–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yip, Moria. 1998. Identity avoidance in phonology and morphology. In Morphology and its relation to phonology and syntax, eds. Steven G. Lapointe, Diane K. Brentari, and Patrick M. Farrell, 216–246. Stanford: CSLI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoshimura, Noriko. 1994. “ga” no mondai. In Hen’yoo-suru gengobunka kenkyuu, 13–28. Shizuoka: Shizuoka Prefectural University.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of English, Meiji Gakuin University, 1-2-37 Shirokanedai, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 108-8636, Japan

    Ken Hiraiwa

Authors
  1. Ken Hiraiwa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ken Hiraiwa.

Additional information

I am very grateful to three anonymous reviewers for NLLT. This material has been presented at various places including Kwansei Gakuin University, The University of British Columbia, The University of Calgary, The University of The Ryukyus, and The University of Washington. I would also like to thank the Japanese native speakers in the audience for their judgments. I am grateful to Noam Chomsky, Marcel den Dikken, Yoshi Dobashi, Tomo Fujii, Naoki Fukui, Takeo Kurafuji, Shinsho Miyara, Kimiko Nakanishi, David Pesetsky, Hiroyuki Ura, and Akira Watanabe. Special thanks to Marcel den Dikken for editorial assistance and to Adam Steffanick for proof-reading the manuscript. All errors and are solely mine. This work is partially supported by the Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Fellows No. 1710271 from the Ministry of Education, Sports, and Culture. The abbreviations used in this article are as follows: Acc = Accusative, Ben = Benefactive, Caus = Causative, C = Complementizer, Cl = Classifier, Cop = Copula, Dat = Dative, Dem = Demonstrative, F = Focus marker, Gen = Genitive, Loc = Locative, Lv = Light verb, Nml = Nominalizer, Nom = Nominative, Pass = Passive, Pl = Plural, Pres = Present, Prog = Progressive, Pst = Past, Q = Q-complementizer, Sg = Singular, Top = Topic marker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hiraiwa, K. Spelling out the Double-o Constraint. Nat Lang Linguist Theory 28, 723–770 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-010-9098-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-010-9098-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation