Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T02:59:25.148Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Minimaliser les dépendances Aʹ : résomptifs vs lacunes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2017

Victor Junnan Pan
Victor Junnan Pan*
Affiliation:
LLF-UMR 7110, CNRS & Université Paris Diderot-Paris 7
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Résumé

Cet article étudie la dérivation de deux types de dépendances Aʹ – les relatives et les structures à dislocation à gauche – dans le cadre du programme minimaliste. Le mandarin montre qu'une relative contenant soit un pronom résomptif soit une lacune et une dislocation à lacune sont dérivées par l'opération Accorder et sont soumises aux contraintes de localité et qu'une dislocation résomptive est dérivée par Match sans conditions d’îlot. «Transferts multiples» et « épellations multiples » sont légitimés dans les dépendances établies par Accorder mais pas dans celles dérivées par Match. Le choix du mécanisme dérivationnel dépend de l'interprétabilité des traits formels attachés à la sonde ainsi qu’à la cible dans une dépendance Aʹ.

Abstract

This paper examines the derivation of two types of A′-dependencies – relatives and Left-Dislocation structures – in the framework of the Minimalist Program. Based on Mandarin data, I will argue that a relative clause containing either a gap or a resumptive pronoun (RP) and a left-dislocation (LD) structure with gap are derived by Agree and are subject to the locality condition, whereas a resumptive LD structure is derived by Match – an island-free operation not subject to the locality constraint. Multiple Transfer and multiple Spell-Out are possible in an Agree chain, but not in a Matching chain. The choice of derivational mechanism depends on the interpretability of the formal features attached to the Probe and to the Goal in the relevant A′-dependencies.

Keywords

syntaxe générativeprogramme minimalistedépendance Aʹpronom résomptifAccorderDéplacementgenerative syntaxminimalist programAʹ-dependencyresumptive pronounAgreemovement
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 62 , Issue 1 , March 2017 , pp. 118 - 145
Copyright
© Canadian Linguistic Association/Association canadienne de linguistique 2017 

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

Adger, David, et Ramchand., Gillian 2003. Predication and equation. Linguistic inquiry 34(3) : 325–359.Google Scholar
Adger, David, et Ramchand., Gillian 2005. Merge and move: Wh-dependencies revisited. Linguistic inquiry 36(2) : 161–193.Google Scholar
Aoun, Joseph, et Choueiri., Lina 2000. Epithets. Natural language and linguistic theory 18 : 1–39.Google Scholar
Aoun, Joseph, et Li., Yen-hui Audrey 2003. Essays on the representational and derivational nature of grammar. The diversity of Wh-constructions. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.Google Scholar
Boeckx, Cédric. 2003. Islands and chains: Resumption as stranding. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Borer, Hagit. 1984. Restrictive relatives in Modern Hebrew. Natural language and linguistic Theory 2(2) : 219–260.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries, the framework. Dans Step by step : Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, sous la direction Martin, de Roger, Michaels, David, et Uriagereka, Juan, 89–156. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. Dans Ken Hale. A life in language, sous la direction Kenstowicz, de Michael, 1–52. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2004. Beyond explanatory adequacy. Dans Structures and beyond, sous la direction Belletti, d'Adriana, 104–131. Oxford : Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2008. On phases. Dans Foundational issues in linguistic theory : Essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud, sous la direction Freidin, de Robert, Otero, Carlos P., et Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa, 133–166. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Demirdache, Hamida. 1991. Resumptive chains in restrictive relatives, appositives, and dislocation structures. Thèse de doctorat. MIT.Google Scholar
Engdahl, Elisabet. 1985. Parasitic gaps, resumptive pronouns and subject extractions. Linguistics, 23(1) : 3–44.Google Scholar
Guilliot, Nicolas. 2006. La reconstruction à l'interface entre syntaxe et sémantique. Thèse de doctorat. Université de Nantes.Google Scholar
Huang, James., Li, Audrey, Li, Yafei. (2009). The syntax of Chinese. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Koopman, Hilda. 1983. Control from COMP and comparative syntax. The linguistic review 2(4) : 365–391.Google Scholar
Li, Audrey Y.-H. 2006. Chinese ba. Dans The Blackwell companion to syntax, sous la direction Everaert, de Martin et van Riemsdijk, Henk, vol. 1, 374–468. Malden, MA : Blackwell.Google Scholar
McCloskey, James. 1990. Resumptive pronouns, Aʹ-binding and levels of representation in Irish. Dans The Syntax of the Modern Celtic Languages, sous la direction Hendrick, de Randall, 199–248. New York : Academic Press.Google Scholar
Pan, Victor Junnan. 2011. Interrogatives et quantification: une approche générative. Presses Universitaires de Rennes.Google Scholar
Paul, Waltraud. 2014. Why particles are not particular: Sentence-final particles in Chinese as heads of a split CP. Studia Linguistica 68 (1) : 77–115.Google Scholar
Paul, Waltraud. 2015. New perspectives on Chinese syntax. Berlin : De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Ross, John Robert. 1967. Constraints on variables in syntax. Thèse de Doctorat, MIT.Google Scholar
Rouveret, Alain. 1994. Syntaxe du gallois : Principes généraux et typologie. Paris: Editions CNRS.Google Scholar
Rouveret, Alain. 2002. How are resumptive pronouns linked to the periphery? Linguistic variation yearbook 2 : 123–184.Google Scholar
Rouveret, Alain. 2008. Phasal agreement and reconstruction. Dans Foundational issues in linguistic theory : Essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud, sous la direction Freidin, de Robert, Otero, Carlos P., et Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa, 167–195. Cambridge, Mass : MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rouveret, Alain. 2011. Some issues in the theory of resumption : A perspective on early and recent research. Dans Resumptive Pronouns at the Interfaces, sous la direction Rouveret, d'Alain, 1–62. Amsterdam : John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sells, Peter. 1984. Syntax and semantics of resumptive pronouns. Thèse de Doctorat, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar
Shi, Dingxu. 2000. Topic and topic-comment constructions in Mandarin Chinese. Language 76(2) : 383–408.Google Scholar
Tellier, Christine. 1991. Licensing Theory and French Parasitic Gaps. Dordrecht : Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Zaenen, Annie, Engdahl, Elisabet, et Maling., Joan M. 1981. Resumptive pronouns can be syntactically bound. Linguistic Inquiry 12(4) : 679–682.Google Scholar