NBlöcher: Edited the format and removed the block {{format}}

2014-08-31T10:46:23Z

Edited the format and removed the block {{format}}

Wohlgemuth: utrecht

2009-06-10T14:37:55Z

utrecht

New page

'''VP-adjunction''' is an [[adjunction]] of a [[constituent]] to [[VP]]. In the Barriers-framework (Cf. Chomsky 1986b), VP-adjunction is a crucial step in the (A'-)movement of direct objects.

=== Example ===

if the direct object of a simple sentence would be ''wh''-moved to spec of CP in one step, the result would be (i).

(i) [CP who [C did] [IP John [VP see t ]]]

This structure is ruled out, because there are two [[barrier]]s between ''who'' and its trace: VP is a non [[L-marked]] maximal projection (and therefore a [[Blocking Category]] and an inherent barrier), and IP, being the first maximal projection to dominate VP, is a barrier by inheritance. In order to explain the well-formedness of ''who did John see''?, it is assumed by Chomsky that the object first adjoins to VP and only then moves to spec of CP, resulting in (ii).

(ii) [CP who [C did] [IP John [VP t1 [VP see t2 ]]]]

Because barrierhood is defined in terms of [[exclusion]], this step voids the barrierhood of VP and thus that of IP, which is inherited from VP. The possibility of adjunction to VP is required independently to account for certain cases of [[QR]].

=== Links ===

[http://www2.let.uu.nl/UiL-OTS/Lexicon/zoek.pl?lemma=VP-adjunction&lemmacode=125 Utrecht Lexicon of Linguistics]

=== References ===

* Chomsky, N. 1986b. ''Barriers,'' MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
* May, Robert 1985. ''Logical form,'' MIT Press
* Williams, E. 1977. ''Discourse and Logical Form,'' Linguistic Inquiry 8-1, 101-139

{{dc}}
[[Category:Syntax]]

{{stub}}{{cats}}{{format}}

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 '''VP-adjunction''' is an [[adjunction]] of a [[constituent]] to [[VP]]. In the Barriers-framework (Cf. Chomsky 1986b), VP-adjunction is a crucial step in the (A'-)movement of direct objects.
-=== Example ===
+== Example ==
+If the direct object of a simple sentence would be ''wh''-moved to spec of CP in one step, the result would be (i).
   (i)   [<sub>CP</sub> who [<sub>C</sub> did] [<sub>IP</sub> John [<sub>VP</sub> see t ]]]
@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 Because barrierhood is defined in terms of [[exclusion]], this step voids the barrierhood of VP and thus that of IP, which is inherited from VP. The possibility of adjunction to VP is required independently to account for certain cases of [[QR]].
-=== Links ===
+== Links ==
+*[http://www2.let.uu.nl/UiL-OTS/Lexicon/zoek.pl?lemma=VP-adjunction&lemmacode=125 Utrecht Lexicon of Linguistics]
 * Chomsky, N. 1986b. ''Barriers,'' MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
 * May, Robert 1985. ''Logical form,'' MIT Press
@@ Line 26: / Line 24: @@
 [[Category:Syntax]]
-{{stub}}{{cats}}{{format}}
+{{stub}}{{cats}}

VP-adjunction - Revision history

NBlöcher: Edited the format and removed the block {{format}}

Wohlgemuth: utrecht