Natural Language & Linguistic Theory

, Volume 27, Issue 1, pp 45–75 | Cite as

On the prosody and syntax of DPs: evidence from Italian noun adjective sequences

Original Paper

Abstract

This study tests a syntactic property—namely the availability of N- vs. NP-raising in DPs—through prosodic means. The opposition between N- and NP-raising is central to the ongoing debate about the internal representation of DPs, yet it often eludes testing by syntactic means alone. As we show in this study, the two syntactic hypotheses are instead neatly distinguished by the distinct prosodic phrasing predicted by each operation. In this paper, we present the results of an empirical experiment designed to test the prosodic phrasing of N-A and A-N sequences in Italian and the corresponding syntactic implications. As prosodic cues, we use syllabic and word lengthening effects induced by phonological phrase boundaries. According to our results, A and N share the same phonological phrase in both orders. Regarding the syntactic implications of this finding, we show that under all current models of syntax-prosody mapping the underlying syntactic structure responsible for the attested prosodic phrasing must necessarily rely on N-raising. Finally, we propose an analysis of Italian DPs where the N-raising operation found necessary in light of the attested prosodic phrasing is reconciled with the evidence for DP-internal phrasal movement discussed in Cinque (20052006).

Keywords

Italian N-/NP-raising DP-structure Head v. phrasal movement Prosodic phrasing Prosodic boundaries 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abels, Klaus, and Ad Neeleman. 2006. Universal 20 without the LCA. Manuscript, University College London. Google Scholar
  2. Abney, Steven. 1987. The English Noun Phrase in its sentential aspect. Doctoral dissertation, MIT. Google Scholar
  3. Alexiadou, Artemis. 2001. Adjective syntax and noun raising: word order asymmetries in the DP as the result of adjective distribution. Studia Linguistica 55: 217–248. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alexiadou, Artemis, and Elena Anagnostopoulou. 1998. Parametrizing AGR: word order, V-movement and EPP checking. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16: 491–539. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Artiagoitia, Xabier. 2006. Basque adjectives and the functional structure of the noun phrase. Manuscript, University of the Basque Country. Google Scholar
  6. Bailyn, John F. 2004. The case of Q. In Proceedings of FASL 12: the Ottawa meeting, eds. Olga Arnaudova, Wayles Browne, María Luisa Rivero, and Danijela Stojanovic, 1–35. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications. Google Scholar
  7. Barbosa, Maria do Pilar Pereira. 1995. Null subjects. Doctoral dissertation, MIT. Google Scholar
  8. Beckman, Mary, and Jan Edwards. 1987. The phonological domains of final lengthening. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 81(S1): S67. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beckman, Mary, and Jan Edwards. 1990. Lengthenings and shortenings and the nature of prosodic constituency. In Between the grammar and physics of speech, papers in laboratory phonology I, eds. John Kingston and Mary Beckman, 152–178. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  10. Beckman, Mary, and Jan Edwards. 1991. Prosodic categories and duration control. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 89(4B): 1869. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bernstein, Judy. 1991. DPs in French and Walloon: evidence for parametric variation nominal head movement. Probus 3: 101–126. Google Scholar
  12. Bernstein, Judy. 1993. Topics in the syntax of nominal structure across Romance. Doctoral dissertation, CUNY. Google Scholar
  13. Bhattacharya, Tanmoy. 1998. Kinship inversion in Bangla. Papers in Linguistics from the University of Manchester (PLUM) 7: 143–156. Google Scholar
  14. Boersma, Paul. 2001. Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer. Glot International 5: 341–345. Google Scholar
  15. Boersma, Paul, and David Weenink. 2008. Praat: doing phonetics by computer (Version 5.0.06; Computer program). http://www.praat.org. Accessed 28 November 2008.
  16. Cardinaletti, Anna. 2004. Towards a cartography of subject positions. In The cartography of syntactic structures, ed. Luigi Rizzi, Vol. 2 of The structure of CP and IP, 115–165. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  17. Chomsky, Noam. 1995. Bare phrase structure. In Government and binding theory and the minimalist program, ed. Gert Webelhuth, 383–439. Oxford: Blackwell. Google Scholar
  18. Cinque, Guglielmo. 1994. On the evidence for partial N movement in the Romance DP. In Paths towards universal grammar, eds. Guglielmo Cinque, Jan Koster, Jean-Yves Pollock, Luigi Rizzi, and Raffaella Zanuttini, 85–110. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press. Google Scholar
  19. Cinque, Guglielmo. 2005. Deriving Greenberg’s Universal 20 and its exceptions. Linguistic Inquiry 36: 315–332. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cinque, Guglielmo. 2006. The dual source of adjectives and phrasal movement in the Romance DP. Manuscript, University of Venice. Google Scholar
  21. Crisma, Paola. 1991. Functional categories inside the noun phrase: A study on the distribution of nominal modifiers. BA Thesis, University of Venice. Google Scholar
  22. Crisma, Paola. 1993. On adjective placement in Romance and Germanic event nominals. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 18: 61–100. Google Scholar
  23. Cruttenden, Alan. 1997. Intonation, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  24. Delsing, Lars-Olof. 1993. The internal structure of noun phrases in the Scandinavian languages. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Lund. Google Scholar
  25. D’Imperio, Mariapaola, Gorka Elordieta, Sónia Frota, Pilar Prieto, and Marina Vigário. 2005. Intonational phrasing in Romance: the role of syntactic and prosodic structure. In Prosodies—With special reference to Iberian languages, eds. Sónia Frota, Marina Vigário, and Maria J. Freitas, 59–97. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  26. Edwards, Jan, and Mary Beckman. 1988. Articulatory timing and the prosodic interpretation of syllable duration. Phonetica 45: 156–174. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Elordieta, Gorka, Sónia Frota, Pilar Prieto, and Marina Vigário. 2003. Effects of constituent weight and syntactic branching on intonational phrasing in Ibero-Romance. In Proceedings of the 15th international congress of phonetic sciences, ed. María-Josep Solé, Daniel Recasens, and Joaquín Romero, 487–490. Google Scholar
  28. Elordieta, Gorka, Sónia Frota, and Marina Vigário. 2005. Subjects, objects and intonational phrasing in Spanish and Portuguese. Studia Linguistica 59: 110–143. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Embick, David, and Rolf Noyer. 2001. Movement operations after syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 32: 555–595. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Frascarelli, Mara. 2000. The syntax-phonology interface in focus and topic constructions in Italian. In Studies in natural language and linguistic theory, Vol. 50. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar
  31. Frascarelli, Mara. 2007. Subjects, topics and the interpretation of referential pro. An interface approach to the linking of (null) pronouns. Natural Language and Linguistics Theory 25: 691–734. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Frota, Sónia, Mariapaola D’Imperio, Gorka Elordieta, Pilar Prieto, and Marina Vigário. 2007. The phonetics and phonology of intonational phrasing in Romance. In Segmental and prosodic issues in Romance phonology, eds. Pilar Prieto, Joan Mascaró, and Maria-Josep Solé, 131–153. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar
  33. Ghini, Mirco. 1993. Phi-formation in Italian: a new proposal. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 12: 41–78. Google Scholar
  34. Grice, Martine, Mariapaola D’Imperio, Michelina Savino, and Cinzia Avesani. 2005. Strategies for intonation labelling across varieties of Italian. In Prosodic typology: the phonology of intonation and phrasing, ed. Sun-Ah Jun, 362–389. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  35. Halle, Morris, and Jean-Roger Vergnaud. 1987. An essay on stress. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  36. Hammond, Michael. 1984. Constraining metrical theory: a modular theory of rhythm and destressing. Doctoral dissertation, University of California. Google Scholar
  37. Hayes, Bruce. 1988. Final lengthening and the prosodic hierarchy. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 84: S97. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hayes, Bruce. 1995. Metrical stress theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
  39. Hellmuth, Sam. 2004. Prosodic weight and phonological phrasing in Cairene Arabic. In Proceedings of annual meeting of Chicago Linguistic Society, Vol. 40, 97–111. Google Scholar
  40. Kayne, Richard S. 1999. Prepositional complementizers as attractors. Probus 11: 39–73. Google Scholar
  41. Kayne, Richard S. 2000. A note on prepositions, complementizers, and word order universals. In Parameters and universals, eds. Richard S. Kayne, 314–326. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  42. Kayne, Richard S. 2002. On some prepositions that look DP-internal: English of and French de. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 1: 71–115. Google Scholar
  43. Kayne, Richard S. 2005. Some notes on comparative syntax, with special reference to English and French. In The Oxford handbook of comparative syntax, eds. Guglielmo Cinque and S. Richard Kayne, 3–69. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  44. Kishimoto, Hideki. 2000. Indefinite pronouns and overt N-raising. Linguistic Inquiry 31: 557–566. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Knittel, Marie Laurence. 2005. Some remarks on adjective placement in the French NP. Probus 17: 185–226. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Laenzlinger, Christopher. 2000. French adjective ordering: perspective on DP-internal movement types. Generative Grammar in Geneva 1: 55–104. Google Scholar
  47. Larson, Richard K., and Franc Marušič. 2004. On indefinite pronoun structures with APs: Reply to Kishimoto. Linguistic Inquiry 35: 268–287. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Longobardi, Giuseppe. 1994. Reference and proper names: a theory of N-movement in syntax and logical form. Linguistic Inquiry 25: 609–665. Google Scholar
  49. Longobardi, Giuseppe 1996. The syntax of N-raising: A minimalist theory. In OTS working papers in theoretical linguistics. Utrecht: University of Utrecht, Utrecht Institute of Linguistics. Google Scholar
  50. Longobardi, Giuseppe. 2001. The structure of DPs: some principles, parameters and problems. In The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory, eds. Mark Baltin and Chris Collins, 562–601. Oxford: Blackwell. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Longobardi, Giuseppe. 2005. Toward a unified grammar of reference. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 24: 5–44. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. McCarthy, John, and Alan Prince. 1993. Generalized alignment. In Yearbook of morphology 1993, eds. Geert Booij and Jaap van Marle, 79–153. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar
  53. Nespor, Marina, and Irene Vogel. 1986. Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris. Google Scholar
  54. Pereltsvaig, Asya. 2006. Passing by cardinals: in support of head movement in nominals. In Formal approaches to Slavic linguistics 14: the Princeton meeting, eds. James Lavine, Steven Franks, Mila Tasseva-Kurktchieva, and Hana Filip, 277–292. Ann Arbor: Slavic Publications. Google Scholar
  55. Post, Brechtje. 2000. Tonal and phrasal structures in French intonation. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics. Google Scholar
  56. Prince, Alan, and Paul Smolensky. 1993. Optimality theory: constraint interaction in generative grammar. RuCCS Technical Report #2, ROA-537, 262 pp. Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science. Google Scholar
  57. Prince, Alan, and Paul Smolensky. 2004. Optimality theory: constraint interaction in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell. Google Scholar
  58. Pysz, Agnieszka. 2006. The structural location of adnominal adjectives: prospects for old English. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics 3: 59–85. Google Scholar
  59. Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Handbook in generative syntax, ed. Liliane Haegeman, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar
  60. Rizzi, Luigi. 2004. Locality and left periphery. In Structures and beyond: the cartography of syntactic structures, ed. Adriana Belletti, Vol. 3, 223–251. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  61. Rutkowski, Paweł, and Ljiljana Progovac. 2006. Classifying adjectives and noun movement in Lithuanian. In Minimalist views on language design: proceedings of the 8th Seoul international conference on generative grammar, ed. C. Yim, 265–277. Seoul: Hankook Korean Generative Grammar Circle. Google Scholar
  62. Samek-Lodovici, Vieri. 2005. Prosody-syntax interaction in the expression of focus. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 23: 687–755. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1984. Phonology and syntax: the relation between sound and structure. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  64. Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1986. On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology Yearbook 3: 371–405. Google Scholar
  65. Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1995. Sentence prosody: Intonation, stress, and phrasing. In The handbook of phonological theory, eds. John A. Goldsmith, 550–569. Oxford: Blackwell. Google Scholar
  66. Selkirk, Elisabeth. 2000. The interaction of constraints on prosodic phrasing. In Prosody: theory and experiment, ed. Merle Horne, 231–261. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. Google Scholar
  67. Selkirk, Elisabeth. 2004. Bengali intonation revisited. In Topic and focus: a crosslinguistic perspective, eds. Chungmin Lee, Matthew Gordon, and Daniel Büring, 217–246. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. Google Scholar
  68. Shlonsky, Ur. 2004. The form of Semitic noun phrases. Lingua 114: 1465–1526. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Sproat, Richard, and Chilin Shih. 1991. The cross-linguistic distribution of adjective ordering restrictions. In Interdisciplinary approaches to language: essays in honor of S.Y. Kuroda, eds. Carol Georgopoulos and Roberta Ishihara, 565–593. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. Google Scholar
  70. Svenonius, Peter. 1994. The structural location of the attributive adjective. In WCCFL 12: The proceedings of the 12th west coast conference on formal linguistics, eds. Eric Duncan, Donka Farkas, and Philip Spaelti, 438–454. Stanford: CSLI. Google Scholar
  71. Truckenbrodt, Hubert. 1995. Phonological phrases: their relation to syntax, focus, and prominence. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT. Google Scholar
  72. Truckenbrodt, Hubert. 1999. On the relation between syntactic phrases and phonological phrases. Linguistic Inquiry 30: 219–255. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Umeda, Noriko, and Ann Marie S. Quinn. 1981. Word duration as an acoustic measure of boundary perception. Journal of Phonetics 9: 19–28. Google Scholar
  74. Vaissière, Jacqueline. 1983. Language-independent prosodic features. In Prosody: models and measurements, eds. Anne Cutler and Robert Ladd, 53–66. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
  75. Valois, Daniel. 1991. The internal syntax of DP. Doctoral dissertation, University of California. Google Scholar
  76. Wightman, Colin W., Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel, Mari Ostendorf, and Patti J. Price. 1992. Segmental durations in the vicinity of prosodic phrase boundaries. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 91: 1707–1717. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Willis, David. 2006. Against N-raising and NP-raising analyses of Welsh noun phrases. Lingua 116: 1807–1839. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Zamparelli, Roberto. 1995. Layers in the Determiner Phrase. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Rochester. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institut für Englische PhilologieFreie Universität BerlinBerlinGermany
  2. 2.Department of ItalianUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations