The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

"So easy to look at, so hard to define”: tough movement in the minimalist framework

Hicks, Glyn (2003) "So easy to look at, so hard to define”: tough movement in the minimalist framework Department of Language and Linguistic Science, Masters Thesis , 90pp.

Record type: Thesis (Masters)

Abstract

This dissertation addresses the syntactic analysis of the (English) tough construction (TC), a syntactic construction in which (typically) adjectival predicates in the semantic class of 'tough' and 'easy' may participate:
(i) John is tough/easy/impossible/a cinch to please e
In this construction, the matrix subject is coreferent with the understood (nonovert) object of the embedded infinitival, as the non-TC paraphrase in (ii) shows:
(ii) It is tough/easy/impossible/a cinch to please John
A theoretically and empirically adequate analysis of such constructions has long proved elusive in generative syntactic frameworks: on the one hand due to apparent incompatibility with the theoretical principles of Case-theory, theta-theory, and movement constraints, on the other due to a range of largely contradictory empirical facts suggesting that TCs involve both NP-movement (‘A-movement’) and wh-movement (‘A-bar-movement’). The very fact that within previous Principles and Parameters models TCs have proved “in principle unexplainable” (Holmberg, 2001:839) appears detrimental to the credibility of such syntactic frameworks. I attempt to fill this previously conspicuous ‘gap’ in the empirical adequacy of Principles and Parameters syntax, arguing that recent revisions to the minimalist framework (particularly Chomsky 2000; 2001a) should inspire a rethinking of TCs, thus lending further support to the current minimalist framework and the manner in which core theoretical principles are reworked therein.
Chapter 2 provides a range of evidence to support the claim that the lexical argument structure of 'tough'-class predicates is identical in both TC and non-TC configurations. Chapter 3 briefly introduces crucial additions to the recent minimalist framework concerning agreement, movement and feature-checking. Chapter 4 details the various problems encountered by the most common analyses of TCs within generative syntax, and the reasons why each is incompatible with a specific set of basic theoretical assumptions. Drawing on this, chapter 5 outlines an analysis of TCs consistent with these assumptions as stated in the current framework, based on an innovative approach to the syntax of null wh-operators. Chapter 6 explores some consequences of extending this analysis to provide an account for a set of constructions apparently related to TCs.

PDF MA_Dissertation.pdf - Other
Download (494kB)

More information

Published date: September 2003
Additional Information: The core of this MA dissertation is due to be published in shortened form in 'Linguistic Inquiry', Autumn 2009. The analysis is modified slightly in that version (available at http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/64785/), though more detail is provided in this dissertation
Keywords: tough constructions, minimalism, null operators, movement

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 65390
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/65390
PURE UUID: caceeb99-4287-4438-a5fc-7700669580c5

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 27 Feb 2009
Last modified: 07 Aug 2017 13:46

Export record

Contributors

Author: Glyn Hicks
Thesis advisor: Bernadette Plunkett

University divisions

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×