Advertisement

Natural Language & Linguistic Theory

, Volume 10, Issue 3, pp 375–414 | Cite as

Spec of IP and spec of VP: Two subjects in Austronesian languages

  • Eithne Guilfoyle
  • Henrietta Hung
  • Lisa Travis
Article

Abstract

In this paper we claim that certain facts from four Austronesian languages provide striking support for the claim that there is a VP-internal subject position in addition to the traditional subject position of SPEC of IP. We show (i) that subject-sensitive properties may be split between SPEC of VP and SPEC of IP, theta-sensitive properties (such as binding and control) associated with the former and structure-sensitive properties (such as extraction and quantifier float) with the latter; (ii) that word order facts about these four Austronesian languages as well as variations among the languages follow from the assumption that the two subject positions may be licensed simultaneously at S-structure. Lastly, we show that the proposed analysis of Austronesian phrase structure allows the placement of Austronesian languages within a typology of passive.

Keywords

Word Order Subject Position Austronesian Language Theta Role English Passive 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baker, Mark: 1988, Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  2. Bell, Sarah: 1976, Cebuano Subjects in Two Frameworks, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  3. Burzio, Luigi: 1986, Italian Syntax: a Government-Binding Approach, Reidel, Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Byma, Gary: 1987, Government and Binding in Tagalog: an Ergative Analysis, unpublished M.A. Thesis, University of Calgary.Google Scholar
  5. Carrier-Duncan, Jill: 1985, ‘Linking of Thematic Roles in Derivational Word Formation’, Linguistic Inquiry 16, 1–35.Google Scholar
  6. Chomsky, Noam: 1981, Lectures in Government and Binding, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  7. Chomsky, Noam: 1986a, Barriers, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  8. Chomsky, Noam: 1986b, Knowledge of Language, Praeger, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Chung, Sandra: 1976, ‘On the Subject of Two Passives in Indonesian’, in C. N. Li (ed.), Subject and Topic, Academic Press, New York, pp. 57–99.Google Scholar
  10. Chung, Sandra and Jim McCloskey: 1987, ‘Government Barriers and Small Clauses in Modern Irish’, Linguistic Inquiry 18, 173–238.Google Scholar
  11. Collins, Grace C.: 1970, Two Views of Kalagan Grammar, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University.Google Scholar
  12. Dell, François: 1981, ‘On Certain Sentential Complements in Tagalog’, Philippine Journal of Linguistics 12, 11–28.Google Scholar
  13. Fukui, Naoki and Margaret Speas: 1986, ‘Specifiers and Projections’, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 8, 128–172.Google Scholar
  14. Gerdts, Donna: 1988, ‘Antipassives and Causatives in Ilokano: Evidence for an Ergative Analysis’, in R. McGinn (ed.), Studies in Austronesian Linguistics, Ohio University Press, Athens, OH, pp. 295–321.Google Scholar
  15. Grimshaw, Jane and Armin Mester: 1988, ‘Light Verbs and Theta-Marking’, Linguistic Inquiry 19, 205–232.Google Scholar
  16. Guilfoyle, Eithne: 1988, ‘Parameters and Functional Projection’, Proceedings of NELS XVIII.Google Scholar
  17. Guilfoyle, Eithne: 1990, Functional Categories and Phrase Structure Parameters, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, McGill University.Google Scholar
  18. Guilfoyle, Eithne: 1991, ‘Phrase-Structure and Passive’, in D. Bouchard and K. Leffel (eds.), Views on Phrase-Structure, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 137–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hung, Henrietta: 1987, Functional and Lexical Categories in Bahasa Malaysia, unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
  20. Hung, Henrietta: 1988, ‘Derived Verbs and Nominals in Malagasy’, unpublished ms., McGill University.Google Scholar
  21. Kayne, Richard: 1989, ‘Null Subjects and Clitic Climbing’, in O. Jaeggli and K. Safir (eds.), The Null Subject Parameter, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 239–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Keenan, Edward: 1976, ‘Remarkable Subjects in Malagasy’, in C. N. Li (ed.), Subject and Topic, Academic Press, New York, pp. 247–301.Google Scholar
  23. Keenan, Edward and Bernard Comrie: 1977, ‘Noun Phrase Accessibility and Universal Grammar’, Linguistic Inquiry 8, 63–99.Google Scholar
  24. Kitagawa, Yoshihisa: 1986, Subjects in Japanese and English, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, UMass, Amherst.Google Scholar
  25. Koopman, Hilda and Dominique Sportiche: 1988, ‘Subjects’, unpublished ms., UCLA.Google Scholar
  26. Kroeger, Paul: 1991, Phrase Structure and Grammatical Relations in Tagalog, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
  27. Kuroda, S.-Y.: 1988, ‘Whether We Agree or Not: a Comparative Syntax of English and Japanese’, in W. Poser (ed.), Papers from the Second International Workshop on Japanese Syntax, CSLI, Stanford, pp. 103–143.Google Scholar
  28. Lasnik, Howard: 1989, ‘Case and Expletives: Notes Toward a Parametric Account’, talk given at the Second Princeton Workshop on Comparative Grammar, Princeton University.Google Scholar
  29. Lewis, M. Blanche: 1969, Sentence Analysis in Modern Malay, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  30. McCloskey, James: 1984, ‘Raising, Subcategorization, and Selection in Modern Irish’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 1, 441–485.Google Scholar
  31. McConnell-Ginet, Sally: 1982, ‘Adverbs and Logical Form’, Language 58, 144–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. McGinn, Richard: 1988, ‘Government and Case in Tagalog’, in R. McGinn (ed.), Studies in Austronesian Linguistics, Ohio University Press, Athens, OH, pp. 275–293.Google Scholar
  33. Othman, Arbak: 1981, Tatabahasa Bahasa Malayasia, Sarjana Enterprise, Kuala Lumpur.Google Scholar
  34. Pollock, Jean-Yves: 1989, ‘Verb Movement, Universal Grammar and the Structure of IP,’ Linguistic Inquiry 20, 365–424.Google Scholar
  35. Postal, Paul: 1969, ‘On So-Called Pronouns in English’, in D. Reibel and S. Schane (eds.), Modern Studies in English, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 201–224.Google Scholar
  36. Rizzi, Luigi: 1990, Relativized Minimality, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  37. Schachter, Paul: 1976, ‘The Subject in Philippine Languages: Topic, Actor, Actor-Topic or None of the Above’, in C. Li (ed.), Subject and Topic, Academic Press, New York, pp. 491–518.Google Scholar
  38. Schachter, Paul and Fe Otanes: 1972, Tagalog Reference Grammar, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  39. Seiter, William: 1975, ‘Information Questions in Philippine Languages’, unpublished ms., University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
  40. Sie, Ing Djiang: 1989, The Syntactic Passive in Bahasa Indonesia, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  41. Sportiche, Dominique: 1988, ‘A Theory of Floating Quantifiers and its Corollaries for Constituent Structure’, Linguistic Inquiry 19, 425–450.Google Scholar
  42. Travis, Lisa: 1988, ‘The Syntax of Adverbs’, McGill Working Papers in Linguistics, Special Issue on Comparative Germanic Syntax, 280–310.Google Scholar
  43. Travis, Lisa and Edwin Williams: 1983, ‘Externalization of Arguments in Malayo-Polynesian Languages’, The Linguistic Review 2, 57–78.Google Scholar
  44. Williams, Edwin: 1981, ‘Argument Structure and Morphology’, The Linguistic Review 1, 81–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Williams, Edwin: 1987, ‘Implicit Arguments, the Binding Theory and Control’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 5, 151–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eithne Guilfoyle
    • 1
  • Henrietta Hung
    • 2
  • Lisa Travis
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada
  2. 2.Linguistics Program Department of PsychologyBrandeis UniversityWaltham
  3. 3.Department of LinguisticsMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations