Luigi Rizzi TG 1 Locality 1. Background: Impenetrability locality and intervention locality. Syntactic representations are unbounded as a consequence of the recursive nature of natural language syntax, but core structural dependencies are local: they must be satisfies in small portions of the syntactic tree. For instance, agreement dependencies: (1) The fact that Bill s friends have been invited to the seminars shows that Mary was right when she said that they would. Where locality is computed in hierarchical, not in linear terms: so fact is close to shows hierarchically, even if many words intervene linearly. Seminars is linearly close to shows, but the verb agrees with the linearly distant (but hierarchically close) fact. One crucially local dependency is Movement: an element can be pronounced in a position distinct from the position in which it is interpreted. (2)a Ho comprato questo libro b Che libro hai comprato? c Che libro pensi che dovremmo comprare? d Che libro pensi che il professore abbia detto che dovremmo comprare? But there are constraints on the possible movement. This is the topic of the theory of locality. For instance, certain configurations are impenetrable to movement. Ross (1967) Island Constraints are the core case of impenetrability constraints: Complex NP Constraint: (4)a Ho incontrato la studentessa che ha comprato questo libro b * Che libro hai incontrato la studentessa che ha comprato? (4 )a J ai rencontré [ l étudiante [ qui a acheté ce livre ]] b * Quel livre as-tu rencontré [ l étudiante [ qui a acheté ]]? (4 )a I met [ the student [ who bought this book ]] b * Which book did you meet [ the student [ who bought ]] Sentential Subject Constraint : (5)a Credo che comprare questo libro sarebbe un grave errore b * Che libro credi che comprare sarebbe un grave errore? (5 )a Je crois [ qu [ acheter ce livre ] serait une erreur ] b * Quel livre crois-tu [ qu [ acheter ] serait une erreur ]? 1
(5 )a I think that [to buy this book ] would be a mistake b * Which book do you think that [ to buy ] would be a mistake Coordinate Structure Constraint : (6)a Credo che Gianni abbia comprato un disco e che Piero abbia comparto un libro b * Che libro credi che Gianni abbia comprato un disco e che Piero abbia comprato? (6 )a Je crois [[ que Jean a acheté un disque ] et [ que Pierre a acheté un livre ]] b * Quel livre crois-tu [[que Jean a acheté un disque] et [ que Pierre a acheté ]] (6 )a I believe [[ that John bought a record ] and [ that Bill borrowed a book ]] b * Which book do you believe [[ that John bought a record ] and [ that Bill borrowed ]] Adjunct Island (Huang 1982) : (7)a Sono andato a Parigi perché volevo comprare questo libro b * Che libro sei andato a Parigi perché volevi comprare? (7 )a Je suis allé à Paris [parce que je voulais acheter ce livre] b * Quel livre es-tu allé à Paris [parce que tu voulais acheter ] (7 )a I went to Paris [because I wanted to buy this book ] b * Which book did you go to Paris [ because you wanted to buy ]? All these cases manifest what has been called «Impenetrability locality»: certain syntactic configurations are impervious to movement. The concept of locality we will focus on is Intervention locality : movement is impossible when a certain type of element intervenes between the source and the target of movement. This kind of locality can be illustrated by the wh-island constraint: a wh-element can be extracted from a declarative, but not from an indirect question because in this case another wh element intervenes between the source and the target of movement: (8)a Hanno detto che ci siamo comportati così They said that we behaved in this way b Come hanno detto che ci siamo comportati? How did they say that we behaved? (9)a Si domandano perché ci siamo comportati così They wonder why we behaved in this way b * Come si domandano perché ci siamo comportati? * How do they wonder why we behaved? In order to study this kind of locality, we must consider three types of movement: 1. Head movement, movement of a single head (a word or just a morpheme) to another head position. 2. A-movement, movement of a DP so an argument position, typically the subject position in passive or raising. 3. A -movement, movement of a DP, or another phrase to a non-argument position, typically to the left periphery of the clause. 2
2. Three empirical generalizations. 2.1. Head movement: Head Movement Constraint (1)a They have left b Have they left? (2)a They could have left b Could they have left? c * Have they could left? (3)a Essendo Gianni tornato a Milano, siamo ripartiti b Tornato Gianni a Milano, siamo ripartiti c * Tornato Gianni essendo a Milano, siamo ripartiti (4)a They X bought the book b * They bought not [ the book ] c * Bought they X [ the book ]? (5) a Ils achetaient [ le livre] b Ils n achetaient pas [ le livre] c Achetaient-ils [ le livre]? (6) XVI century English allowed both V to T and V to T to C (Roberts 1993): a If I gave not this to you b How cam'st thou hither? (How did you come here?) (7) Generalisation: in head movement a head cannot jump across an intervening head (Head Movement Constraint: Travis 1986). NB: a potential problem: some languages permit long Head movement, allowing structures such as (8) bought he has the book e.g. in fairy tale Italian (Tornato che fu al castello, come back that he had to the castle = once he had come back to the castle, ), and, productively, in Breton (Roberts 2001), etc. 2.2. A-movement: No Super Raising (12)a It seems [that it is likely [ that John will win ]] b It seems [that John is likely [ to win]] c John seems [ to be likely [ to win]] 3
d * John seems [that it is likely [ to win]] (13)a sembra [che risulti [ che i tuoi amici siano residenti in Francia]] b sembra [che i tuoi amici risultino [ essere residenti in Francia]] c I tuoi amici sembrano [ risultare [ essere residenti in Francia]] d * I tuoi amici sembrano che [ risulti [ essere residenti in Francia]] (14)a Il semble [ qu il s avère [ que tes amis sont résidents en France ]] b Il semble [ que tes amis s avèrent [ être résidents en France ]] c Tes amis semblent [ s avérer [ être résidents en France ]] d * Tes amis semblent [ qu il s avère [ être résidents en France ]] (15) No Super Raising : a DP targeting a subject position cannot jump across an intervening subject position. (16)a John gave a book to Mary b A book was given to Mary (by John) (17)a John gave Mary a book b Mary was given a book c * A book was given Mary It can be shown that in the double object construction the first object asymmetrically c-commands the second: (18)a Bill showed [every boy] [his father] b * Bill showed [his boy ] [every father] (Barss & Lasnik 1988) So, the structure must be a kind of small clause, with give and similar verbs decomposed roughly as cause to have : (19) John gave [ Mary [ V [a book]]] Then, the second object can t jump across the first object, which is in fact the subject of the small clause: (20) * [A book] was given [ Mary [ V ]] (21)a It was believed [ that John was given a book ] b John was believed [ to be given a book ] c * John was believed [ that it was given a book ] NB: in certain British dialects (17)c is accepted. But in these dialects the following is also possible: He gave it me (as well as the standard form He gave me it). These varieties evidently admit the order Accusative aprepositional Dative, from which the accusative argument can be passivized. Another possible manifestation of locality on A-movement: a locality constraint on past participle agreement: 4
(22)a Jean a repeint la chaise b Voilà la chaise que Jean a repeint-e (23) Voilà la chaise que Jean a [ AgrPast Part repeint-e ] (Kayne 1989) (24) Voilà la chaise que Jean a dit(*-e) [ que Pierre a [ repeint-e ] 2.3. A movement: the Wh Island Constraint. (22)a I think that he left at 5 b I wonder who left at 5 (23)a When do you think that he left? b * When do you wonder who left? (24)a Penso che sia partito alle 5 b Mi domando chi sia partito alle 5 (25)a Quando pensi che sia partito? b * Quando ti domandi chi sia partito? (26)a Je pense qu il s est bien comporté b Je ne sais pas qui s est bien comporté (27)a Comment penses-tu qu il s est comporté? b * Comment ne sais-tu pas qui s est comporté? (28)a Come pensi che si sia comportato? b * Come non sai chi si sia comportato? (29) Wh-Island constraint: a wh-element cannot be extracted from an indirect question 5