The 15th Japanese/Korean Linguistics Conference
(The Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison, Oct.7-9/05)
Scrambling, resumption, and scope of Neg
Oct./08/05 Kiyoko KATAOKA
(Nihon University, College of Economics)
Outline
1. Introduction 1
2. Possible account 1: A-movement analysis for A-scrambling 2
2.1. A/A'-properties of 'scrambled' object 2
2.2. Possible account 1: A-movement analysis (Miyagawa 2001) 3
2.3. Problem for A-movement analysis: 'resumption' 3
3. Alternative account: base-generation analysis (Ueyama 1998) 4
3.1. 'Resumption' under base-generation analysis 4
3.2. Absence of Neg>QP for A-ScramObj 4
4. Problem in derivational analysis for A/A'-properties of ScramObj (Saito 2003) 5
5. A supporting argument for base-generation analysis of A-ScramObj 5
5.1. A-ScramObj and 'resumption' 5
5.2. Absence of Neg>QP for A-ScramObj 6
6. Conclusion 6
References 6
1. Introduction
♦ Scope ambiguity: It has been observed that the scope relation between Neg and QP is ambiguous in Japanese (e.g., Kuno 1980).[1]
(1) a. [QP itutuizyoo-no ginkoo ]-ga Toyota-ni yuusisi-nak-atta (koto)
5:or:more-GEN bank-NOM Toyota-DAT finace-Neg-Past (Comp)
'Five or more banks did not finance Toyota.'
5-or-moreNeg, Neg5-or-more
b. UFJ-ginkoo-ga [QP itutuizyoo-no kigyoo ]-ni yuusisi-nak-atta (koto)
UFJ Bankt-NOM 5:or:more-GEN company-DAT finance-Neg-Past (Comp)
'UFJ Bank did not finance five or more companies.'
5-or-moreNeg, Neg5-or-more
And the ambiguity continues to obtain in the so-called scrambled
(2) a. Toyota-ni [QP itutuizyoo-no ginkoo ]-ga yuusisi-nak-atta (koto)
Toyota-DAT 5:or:more-GEN bank-NOM finace-Neg-Past (Comp)
5-or-moreNeg, Neg5-or-more
b. [QP itutuizyoo-no kigyoo ]-ni UFJ-ginkoo-ga yuusisi-nak-atta (koto)
5:or:more-GEN company-DAT UFJ Bank-NOM finance-Neg-Past (Comp)
5-or-moreNeg, Neg5-or-more
♦ Absence of scope ambiguity
If the bound variable anaphora (BVA) interpretation is forced to obtain between the object QP1 and the dependent term soko 'it' in the subject NP, however, the 'scrambled' object (henceforth ScramObj) cannot be in the scope of Negg; c. (Cf. (2b).[2]
(3) [Itutuizyoo-no kigyoo]QP1-ni [soko-no torihiki-ginkoo]-ga yuusisi-nak-atta.
5:or:more-GEN-company-DAT it-GEN-dealing:bank-NOM finance-Neg-Past
'To five or more companies, its own bank did not finance.' with BVA, *Neg > QP1
♦ Goal
(4) To provide an account of the absence of the Neg>QP reading in (3). and explore its implications for the analyses of the scrambling construction (I deleted what I did because I thought there is redundancy between that and (5)..
(5) To argue against (5(a) and (5(b), and argue in support of (5(c).
a. Possible account 1: an A-movement analysis of 'A-scrambling' (Miyagawa 2001 among others)
b. Possible account 2: a derivational account of A/A'-properties of 'scrambling' (Saito 2003)
c. Possible account 3: a base-generation analysis of 'A-scrambling' (Ueyama 1998)
2. Possible account 1: A-movement analysis for A-scrambling
(5) a. Possible account 1: an A-movement analysis of 'A-scrambling' (Miyagawa 2001 among others)
2.1. A/A'-properties of 'scrambled' object
(6) Scrambling construction (s?)
a. A'-properties: e.g., reconstruction effects ((7a))
b. A-properties: e.g., the absence of weak crossover effects ((7b))
(Saito 1992, Ueyama 1998, among others).
(7) a. Sokoi-no torihikisaki-ni [itutuizyoo-no kigyoo]QP1-ga kitaidoori tousisi-ta.
it-GEN client-DAT 5:or:more-GEN company-NOM expectedly invest-Past
'To itsi client, [each of five or more companies]i invested as expectedly.'
ok BVA
b. [Itutuizyoo-no kigyoo]QP1-ni sokoi-no torihikisaki-ga kitaidoori tousisi-ta.
5:or:more-GEN company-DAT it-GEN client-NOM expectedly invest-Past
'To [each of five or more companies]i, itsi client invested expectedly.'
ç A nice pair of examples.
ok BVA
(8) In order for the BVA interpretation to obtain between a QP α and a dependent term b, α must c-command b at their? pre-QR position(s?) (Reinhart 1983, Ueyama 1998, Hoji 2003)
♦ The subject must c-command the object at LF in (7a), and the object must c-command the subject at LF in (7b), in order for the BVA to obtain, respectively.
(9) NP-ACC/DAT NP-NOM V
a. LF1: [ NP-NOM [ NP-ACC/DAT V ] ] → A'-properties / A'-scrambling
b. LF2: [ NP-ACC/DAT [ NP-NOM V ] ] → A-properties / A-scrambling
♦ EThe example (3) shows that the scrambled object with A-properties (henceforth A-ScramObj) cannot be in the scope of Neg.
(3) [Itutuizyoo-no kigyoo]QP1-ni [soko-no torihiki-ginkoo]-ga yuusisi-nak-atta.
5:or:more-GEN-company-DAT it-GEN-dealing:bank-NOM finance-Neg-Past
'To five or more companies, its own bank did not finance.' with BVA, *Neg > QP1
2.2. Possible account 1: A-movement analysis (Miyagawa 2001 ç This implies that Miyagawa 2001 contains this account. Is that indeed the case?)
♦ The A-moved NP undergoes 'quantifier-lowering' (May 1977); (10a) allows the reading in (10b).
(10) a. Someone is likely to address the rally.
b. It is likely that someone will address the rally.
♦ LF-lowering of the A-moved NP is blocked by a negative predicate (Lasnik & Saito 1991); (11a) does not allow the reading in (11b); cf. (11a).
(11) a. Someone is unlikely to address the rally.
b. It is unlikely that someone will address the rally.
(12) Neg blocks 'quantifier-lowering' for the A-moved NP.
(13) The A-ScramObj is moved to its surface position from its theta-position inside the VP by A-movement (Miyagawa 2001, among others).
(14) The scope of α is its c-command domain at LF, and Neg is in the VP (or vP)-adjoined position at LF.
♦ The absence of the Neg>QP reading in (3) can be accounted for, by attributing it to the blocking by Neg of 'quantifier-lowering' for the A-moved NP.
2.3. Problem for A-movement analysis: 'resumption'
(15) A-movement analysis: The A-properties of ScramObj come from A-movement.
♦ What appears to be 'resumption' is compatible with A-properties (cf. (7b)), but it is not compatible with A'-properties (cf. (7a)), as discussed in Hayashishita 1997 and Hoji 2003.
(16) [Itutuizyoo-no kigyoo]QP1-ni sokoi-no torihikisaki-ga soko-ni tousisi-ta.
5:or:more-GEN company-DAT it-GEN client-NOM it-DAT invest-Past
'To five or more companiesi, itsi client invested to it expectedly.' (with BVA)
(17) *Sokoi-no torihikisaki-ni [itutuizyoo-no kigyoo]i-ga soko-ni tousisi-ta.
it-GEN client-DAT 5:or:more-GEN bank-NOM it-DAT invest-Past
♦ Crucially, the ScramObj in (16) cannot be in the scope of Neg.
(18) [Itutuizyoo-no kigyoo]QP1-ni sokoi-no torihikisaki-ga soko-ni tousisi-nak-atta.
5:or:more-GEN company-DAT it-GEN client-NOM it-DAT invest-Neg-Past
with BVA(QP1, soko), * Neg > QP1, ok QP1 > Neg
And this is one of the empirical claims of your that many GGES members do not agree about/with?
(19) 'Resumption' seems compatible with A-properties but not with A'-properties.[3]
♦ The observation is inconsistent with the general assumption that A-movement does not allow resumption.
3. Alternative account: base-generation analysis (Ueyama 1998)
(5) c. Possible account 3: a base-generation analysis of 'A-scrambling' (Ueyama 1998)
(20) The A-ScramObj is base-generated in its surface-position c-commanding the subject. (Ueyama 1998)
♦ The observations in section 2.3 above can be accounted for without any problem.
3.1. 'Resumption' under base-generation analysis
♦ The possibility of 'resumption' is precisely what is expected in the case of A-scrambling.
(21) 'Resumption' is an overt counterpart of an empty argument which occupies the theta-position, and is assumed to function like a null operator in the English tough construction in order to make, establishing a syntactic relation between the theta-position and the ScramObj. (Hoji & Ueyama 1998, Hoji 2003)
3.2. Absence of Neg>QP for A-ScramObj
♦ The absence of the Neg>QP reading in (3) is also as predicted.
In (3), in order for the BVA reading to obtain, the object QP should be base-generated in the position c-commanding the subject NP.
(3) [Itutuizyoo-no kigyoo]QP1-ni [soko-no torihiki-ginkoo]-ga yuusisi-nak-atta.
5:or:more-GEN-company-DAT it-GEN-dealing:bank-NOM finance-Neg-Past
'To five or more companies, its own bank did not finance.' with BVA, *Neg > QP1
♦ The ScramObj QP, consequentlytherefore, is never in the c-command domain of Neg throughout its derivation, as illustrated in (22).
(22) LF: [ [ ... ]QP1-DAT [NegP [Neg' [VP [ ... soko ... ]-NOM V] [Neg -nai] ] ] ]
(23) The ScramObj is never in the c-command domain of Neg throughout the derivation, provided
a. that its base-generated position is outside the c-command domain of Neg (i.e., VP), as extensively argued in Kataoka 2004 and to appear,
and
b. that movement can never be downward.
4. Problem in derivational analysis for A/A'-properties of ScramObj (Saito 2003)
(5) b. Possible account 2: a derivational account of A/A'-properties of scrambling (Saito 2003)
(24) Saito's (2003) derivational analysis for A/A'-properties of ScramObj:
a. The relevant formal relation underlying the A/A'-properties is established or checked derivationally.
b. Every ScramObj must be 'reconstructed' at LF.
♦ If a scope relation between α and b were assumed to obtain based on their c-command relation at some stage of derivation, every ScramObj could be in the scope of Neg, since even an A-ScramObj would certainly be in the c-commanded domain of Neg while being in its theta-position.
♦ The absence of the Neg>QP reading for the A-ScramObj QP would be problematic.
5. A supporting argument for the base-generation analysis of A-ScramObj
♦ QP-scope interpretations involving resumption and Neg show parallelism with the BVA cases.
5.1. A-ScramObj and 'resumption'
♦ The scope relation is ambiguous in the scrambling construction.
(25) [Mittuizyoo-no kigyoo]QP2-ni [itutuizyoo-no ginkoo]QP1-ga kitaidoori yuusisi-ta.
3:or:more-GEN company-DAT 5:or:more-GEN bank-NOM expectedly finance-Past
'To three or more companies, five or more banks financed to it expectedly.'
DR(QP1>QP2), DR(QP2>QP1)
(26) In order for the the DR(QP1>QP2) reading to obtain, the QP1 must c-command the QP2 at LF. (Reinhart 1983, Hayashishita 2004)
♦ Given (26), the subject QP1 must c-command the object QP2 to take a wide-scope, while the object QP2 must c-command the subject QP1 to take a wide-scope.
(27) a. The establishment of DR(QP1>QP2) in (25) → A'-property
b. The establishment of DR(QP2>QP1) in (25) → A-property
♦ Resumption is possible only when the ScramObj QP takes scope over the subject QP, i.e., when it shows A-property.
(28) a. [Mittuizyoo-no kigyoo]QP2-ni [itutuizyoo-no ginkoo]QP1-ga kitaidoori soko-ni yuusisi-ta.
3:or:more-GEN company-DAT 5:or:more-GEN bank-NOM expectedly it-DAT finance-Past
'To three or more companies, five or more banks financed to it expectedly.'
ok { 'resumption' soko-ni & DR(QP2>QP1)}
b. [Mittuizyoo-no kigyoo]QP2-ni [itutuizyoo-no ginkoo]QP1-ga kitaidoori soko-ni yuusisi-ta.
3:or:more-GEN company-DAT 5:or:more-GEN bank-NOM expectedly it-DAT finance-Past
* { 'resumption' soko-ni & DR(QP1>QP2)}
5.2. Absence of Neg>QP for A-ScramObj
♦ The ScramObj QP involving resumption cannot be in the scope of Neg.
(29) [Mittuizyoo-no kigyoo]QP2-ni [itutuizyoo-no ginkoo]QP1-ga soko-ni yuusisi-nak-atta.
3:or:more-GEN company-DAT 5:or:more-GEN bank-NOM it-DAT finance-Neg-Past
ok { 'resumption' soko-ni & DR(QP2>QP1)}, but then *Neg>QP2
♦ If we assume that the ScramObj QP is base-generated in its surface position c-commanding the subject, resumption is as expected, and the absence of Neg>QP for the ScramObj QP is as predicted since the ScramObj in (29) is outside the c-command domain of Neg throughout the derivation.
6. Conclusion
♥ It is concluded that we should adopt Ueyama's base-generation analysis for the A-ScramObj over the other alternative analyses put forth in the literature.
(20) The A-ScramObj is base-generated in its surface-position c-commanding the subject. (Ueyama 1998)References
Hayashishita, J.-R. 1997. "On the scope ambiguity in the scrambling construction in Japanese." ms. USC.
Hayashishita, J.-R. 2004. Syntactic Scope and Non-Syntactic Scope. Doctoral Dissertation. USC.
Hoji, H. 2003. "Falsifiability and repeatability in Generative Grammar: a case study of anaphora and scope dependency in Japanese." Lingua. Vol.113, No.4-6. 377-446.
Lasnik, H. and M. Saito 1991. "On the subject of infinitives" in Papers from the 27th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society.
Kataoka, K. 2004. Hiteibun-no koozoo: kakimaze-bun to hiteekoohyoogen (Syntactic structure of Japanese negative sentences: scrambling construction and negation-sensitive elements). Doctoral dissertation. Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Kataoka, K. to appear. "'Neg-sensitive' elements, Neg-c-command and scrambling in Japanese." JK14.
Kuno, S. 1980. "The Scope of the question and negation in some Verb-final languages." CLS 16. 155-169.
May, R. 1977. The Grammar of Quantification. Doctoral Dissertation. MIT.
May, R. 1985. Logical Form: Its Structure and Derivation. The MIT Press.
Miyagawa, S. 2001. "The EPP, Scrambling, and wh-in-situ." Ken Hale: A Life in Language. Kenstowicz, M. (ed.). 293-338. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Reinhart, T. 1983. Anaphora and Semantic Interpretation. The University of Chicago. Chicago.
Saito, M. 2003. "A derivational approach to the interpretation of scrambling chains." Lingua. Vol.113, No.4-6. 481-518.
Ueyama, A. 1998. Two Types of Dependency. Doctoral Dissertation. USC. Distributed by GSIL Publications, USC, Los Angeles.
Ueyama, A. 2003. "Two Types of Scrambling Constructions in Japanese," Anaphora: A Reference Guide. A. Barss, (ed.), Blackwell, Cambridge. 23-71.
5
[1] I wonder if you want to add a footnote here, saying that the Neg>QP reading corresponds to (i) and the QP>Neg reading to (ii), just so as to make it easier for the JP reader to figure out what two readings are being discussed.
(i) [QP itutuizyoo-no ginkoo ]-ga Toyota-ni yuusisi-nak-atta wake dewa nai
(ii) Toyota-ni yuusisi-nak-atta no wa [QP itutuizyoo-no ginkoo ] da.
[2] A footnote here too, providing a couple examples illustrating the readings in question?
[3] Although there have been conflicting views on the acceptability of 'resumption' in the scrambling construction (Saito 1985 vs. Ueyama 1998), it examples with ‘resumption’ is are accepted by the majority of speakers (16 out of 19) who I have consulted with in my surveys. The source of judgmental variation on 'resumption' is discussed in Hoji 2003: sec. 3.