Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-19T10:32:59.271Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

On Verb Fronting, Inflection Movement, and Aux Support

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Edwin Battistella
Affiliation:
University of Alabama/Birmingham
Anne Lobeck
Affiliation:
Western Washington University

Extract

Recent analyses of word order and clause structure suggest that natural language syntax employs competing processes of Verb Fronting (VF) and Inflection Movement (IM) for the realization of Tense and Agreement (TNS and AGR) features on verb stems. As the names suggest, Verb Fronting is a process that raises a verb from the head of VP to INFL and INFL Movement is a rule that lowers the contents of INFL to the head of VP. Both rules are assumed to involve Chomsky-adjunction of the moved node to the target node and both are assumed to leave a trace.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baker, C.L. 1991 The Syntax of English not: The Limits of Core Grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 22:3, 387429.Google Scholar
Battistella, Edwin L. 1987 A Note on LF Verb Raising and Negation. Linguistic Analysis 17:34, 233-237. [Dated 1987, appeared 1991.]Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam 1989 Some Notes on the Economy of Derivation and Representation. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 10:4374.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam 1957 Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Denison, David 1985 The Origins of Periphrastic do: Ellegård and Visser Reconsidered. Pp. 4560 in Papers from the 4th International Conference on Historical Linguistics. Eaton, Roger, Fischer, Olga, Koopman, Willem and van der Leek, Frederike, eds. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ellegård, Alvar 1953 The Auxiliary ‘do’: The Establishment and Regulation of its Use in English. Stockholm: Almquist and Wiksell.Google Scholar
Emonds, Joseph 1978 The Complex V-V’ in French. Linguistic Inquiry 9:151175.Google Scholar
Hausmann, Robert 1974 The Origin and Development of Modern English Periphrastic do . Pp. 159189 in Historical Linguistics. Anderson, John M. and Jones, Charles, eds. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Iatridou, Sabine 1990 About Agr(P). Linguistic Inquiry 21:551576.Google Scholar
Koopman, Hilda 1987 On the Absence of Case Chains in Bambara. Ms.Google Scholar
Kroch, Anthony 1989a Reflexes of Grammar in Patterns of Language Change. Language Variation and Change 1:199244.Google Scholar
Kroch, Anthony 1989b Function and Grammar in the History of English: Periphrastic do . Pp. 133172 in Language Change and Variation. Fasold, Ralph, ed. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kroch, Anthony, Pintzuk, Susan, and Myhill, John 1982 Understanding do . Pp. 282294 in Papers from the 18th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society. Tuite, K., et al., eds. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, David 1979 Principles of Diachronie Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Md. Salleh, Ramii 1987 Fronted Constituents in Malay. PhD. thesis, University of Washington.Google Scholar
Platzaclc, Christer, and Holmberg, Anders 1990 The Role of AGR and Finiteness in Some European VO Languages. Ms.Google Scholar
Pollock, J.-Y. 1989 Verb Movement, UG, and the Structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20:365424.Google Scholar
Roberts, Ian 1985 Agreement Parameters and the Development of English Modal Auxiliaries. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 3:2158.Google Scholar
Visser, F. Th. 1963- An Historical Syntax of the English Language (4 volumes). Leiden: Brill. [1963-1973.]Google Scholar