The purpose of this probe is to analyze the being of the functional ‘D ‘ bed within the projection of Irish bare noun phrases. In peculiar it will supply grounds either for or against a ‘D ‘ bed projection in bare NP ‘s in Irish, which allows bare nouns in certain buildings. Based on an analysis of distribution and behavior of bare nouns, the probe will besides pull on cognition from other influential surveies on NPs in linguistic communications that vary in their licensing of bare nouns. This probe will demo if au naturel nouns in Irish undertaking and empty ‘D ‘ bed, or if, in fact the bare nouns are really ‘bare ‘ . The theoretical model of this survey is Chomsky ‘s model of ‘Principles and Parameters ‘ ( Chomsky, 1981 )
The job and the theoretical background.
The cross-linguistic being of a ‘D ‘ place or bed in the projection of nominal phrases is a affair extremely disputed in the literature. A major focal point on developing an reply to this has been placed on the consideration of distribution and grammaticality of bare nouns across linguistic communications. In many linguistic communications, bare nouns are grammatical in assorted buildings. If a noun phrase is grammatical without a clincher, why, nevertheless can it be true that a ‘D ‘ bed exists in the functional projection of the noun phrase? Some linguists, for illustration Trenkic ( 2004 ) and Compton ( 2004 ) , believe that, where ‘D ‘ is non realized at PF degree, this indicates that the ‘D ‘ bed is non projected. This seems, on first visual aspect to be a logical account. Chomsky ‘s Universal Grammar nevertheless has been polar in steering the way of syntactic theory. Universal Grammar ( UG ) is based on the thought that syntactic belongingss of a linguistic communication are developed from a cosmopolitan ‘innate ‘ grammar. UG is ‘The system of rules, conditions, and regulations that are elements or belongingss of all human linguistic communications ‘ ( Chomsky, 1976:29 )
This theory strives to turn up cosmopolitan rules within linguistic communications, and histories for differences between linguistic communications by situating the being of parametric quantities, that have different scenes that can give jumping surface signifiers of a certain building. These parametric quantities are ‘set ‘ during child linguistic communication acquisition of the linguistic communication. The lingual input sets the parametric quantities of whatever linguistic communication the kid learns, giving an account for linguistic communication fluctuation.
Within UG, an alternate scrutiny of the construction of NP has emerged and has been cardinal to cross-linguistic analysis of the noun phrase.
Initial NP analysis under UG
The first important analysis, every bit good as those following it, under UG have been developed utilizing regulations of Chomsky ‘s X-bar theory that states that each phrase must be headed by a constituent from within the phrase. Under the endocentricity regulation of X-bar theory, a noun phrase was composed basically of a noun constituent. This initial analysis of NP utilizing X-bar theory regulations by Jackendoff ( 1977 ) assigned the noun the caput of the NP. This projection lacked domination by any functional projection, with any other entities in the NP looking as specifiers or complements to the caput N, including the article, D. It must stressed that as pointed out by Alexiadou et Al ( 2007:54 ) , the impression of X-bar theory at the clip of Jackendoff ‘s paper did non hold the same significance associated with the term specifier, as is common now. ‘Specifier ‘ was a term used to depict any component that appeared structurally to the left of the caput. With more recent theoretical developments that apply to X-bar theory, specifiers occupy the place of sister of the phrase formed as a projection of the caput, X. Jackendoff fails to recognize the typical function of the specifier of the NP, as is discussed below. Complements and specifiers under this analysis do non more or delete as units, and unlike normal components, no portion can be designated as a caput ( Jackendoff 1977:104 ) . The fact that specifiers and complements have the same syntactic place and position harmonizing to Jackendoff ‘s analysis, would allow more than one entity to busy the D place.
* [ The ] 1 [ some ] 2 blue kids
However an model characteristic separating specifiers from adjuncts and complements is that the specifier regulation is non recursive doing the undermentioned building ill-formed ;
*The these ruddy books ( Carnie 2007:172 )
This is grounds that there can merely be one specifier, an of import characteristic of the place and contrary grounds to Jackendoff ‘s proposal that specifiers and complements do non differ syntactically ( 1977:37 ) . Equally good as allowing D to co-occur on the same degree with possible other specifiers, Jackendoff deems the article ( in the D place ) to be a disposable entity in the noun phrase, he includes the article in the group set of optional fillers of specifier place in the demonstratives category ( Jackendoff 1977:104, cited in Alexiadou et Al, 2007:55 ) . The article, nevertheless can non be a totally optional component of a nominal phrase, due to the fact that many NP ‘s are ill-formed when the noun is left bare, i.e. without a preceding clincher. For illustration in English ;
( 1 ) a There is a adult male at the door
b*There is adult male at the door
The ( indefinite ) article and D place, is hence needed to grammaticalize certain NP ‘s and is non disposable as is illustrated by Jackendoff ( 1977:104 ) . This representation of specifiers, in peculiar, D fails to recognize their extra qualities non exhibited by other fillers of the place. D and its peculiar maps is shown to be a more important entity within the noun phrase in ulterior surveies ( Abney 1987 ) , and furthermore is frequently an obligatory entity in certain NP buildings.
Further developments in X-bar theory ( Chomsky, 1986b ) expanded to include functional elements in phrasal projections. Functional classs such as Complementiser phrase ( CP ) and Inflection phrase ( IP ) were now assumed to be projected aboard lexical points at phrase degree. The important point to advert about the DP hypothesis is that that projection of functional elements could be extended to noun phrases as they had been successfully applied to clauses. Abney ‘s ( 1987 ) thesis, constructing on old work by Cinque ( 1980 ) Brame ( 1982 ) and Szabolcsi ( 1983 ) , postulates that the nominal phrase is dominated, non by a noun caput, but by a functional caput in D, and hence supplying us with a clincher phrase, or DP.
X-bar theory extended: Functional classs within NP
The analysis of noun phrases as incorporating functional classs has been widely accepted in the literature and is known as the ‘ DP Hypothesis ‘ and has allowed for farther development in syntactic theory, both typological and cosmopolitan.
A cardinal thought behind the development of the DP hypothesis is the designation of clausal belongingss within noun phrases, and analysis of such belongingss in NP as has been studied greatly within VP ‘s in recent syntactic literature. A recent involvement in the topic has allowed great development in many different linguistic communications, and much has been proven utilizing linguistic communication specific informations, nevertheless several seminal plants have launched this recent rush of involvement ;
1. Abney ( 1987 )
Abney ‘s ( 1987 ) thesis was one of the first to present Chomsky ‘s functional classs into the nominal sphere. The two purposes of his probe were ;
( I ) To turn out the being of a functional caput ruling NP
Abney investigates informations from linguistic communications that show morphological understanding between noun and owner. The illustrations given below from Abney ( 1987 ) , is from Yup’ik, a linguistic communication in which nouns show morphological understanding with their owners
a. angute-t kiputa-a-t
“ the work forces ( pl. ) bought it ”
b. angute-t kuiga-t
“ the work forces ‘s ( pl. ) river ” Abney ( 1987:28 )
In ( a ) , both the verb and the topic are marked with the understanding postfix ( -t ) bespeaking instance. In ( B ) , both the noun and the owner are marked for understanding, in this instance the same postfix ( -t ) is used. These illustrations provide grounds that clauses and noun phrases behave morphologically in the same manner and offer support for the DP hypothesis, that there is a nominal equivalent to the analysis of the clause within the functional class attack to give voice construction. Integration of how nominal phrases and clauses are treated is a important patterned advance in the development of current sentence structure under the Principles and Parameters attack.
( two ) To turn out the clincher as the caput of the antecedently attested NP
Once supplying grounds that there is a functional class above N in the noun phrase, Abney ‘s thesis aims to look into the ‘filler ‘ of the class. Distribution and visual aspect of clinchers vary across linguistic communications. In linguistic communications such as English both definite and indefinite articles appear as independent, open words, and are frequently assumed to be clitics in this sense ;
The chair ( definite )
A chair ( indefinite )
In other linguistic communications, such as Norse linguistic communications, the article appears as a postfix, morphologically attached to the noun ;
Bok ( indefinite )
Boken ( definite )
The book Taraldsen ( 1990:419 )
A theory of cosmopolitan being of a functional place above the noun requires recognition of what really fills the place. The fluctuation of clincher distribution across linguistic communications, and theories that locate different classs other than predicted clinchers in the syntactic place referred to as D, e.g. Proper names ( Longobardi, 1994 ) moreover complicate the issue of placing a cosmopolitan filler of D.
The old analysis that postulated the noun has the caput of the NP is challenged by Abney in his thesis. Evidence in favor of the old ‘Standard analysis ‘ showed that lexical clinchers were in incompatible distribution with owners, i.e. they can look in the same place and are ill-formed if they co-occur.
*The her cat
Under Abney ‘s ( 1987 ) ‘Det as caput analysis ‘ , this regulation is updated to demo that AGR can non look in D along with lexical clinchers. Abney so provides grounds from Magyar to demo that owners and clinchers can coincide, and that, in Magyar they appear where expected to is busying the D place.
As possessive instance is assigned when there is AGR in D, hence leting the visual aspect of owners. The non-occurence of owners with lexical clinchers is explained. However due to the needed restraint mentioned above for the Det-as-head analysis, disposition is towards the ‘standard analysis ‘ . Hungarian is a linguistic communication in which clinchers and owners can coincide, and where they occur, the clinchers appear in D place.
Szablolcsi ( 1987 ) as cited by Abney ( 1987:173 ) provides Magyar informations in which clinchers and owners co-occur, where the English equivalent is non grammatical ;
“ Peter mindket kalapja “ “ Peter ‘s both hat ”
Melyik which Szabolsci ( 1987 )
The distributional difference in English is so that merely that the understanding restraint introduced by Abney is non applied. This eliminates the old ‘standard analysis ‘ that postulated different NP constructions for English and Hungarian.
Further grounds that clinchers are in fact the fillers of the projected D place within noun phrase, is that clinchers that can ‘stand entirely ‘ . Abney shows that in old analysis of these clinchers, the clincher is treated much like an adjective ;
( 8 ) NP NP
N ‘ DetP N ‘
AP N Det N Abney ( 1987:176 )
When AP appears outside NP, it can non be substituted in places where an NP would give a grammatical vocalization ;
( 9 ) ( a ) She is [ cold ] AP
( B ) * [ cold ] AP has gone losing
Given the mentioned similarities, it is expected that DetP behave like the AP, nevertheless it does non, it behaves like an Neptunium
( 10 ) ( a ) She wants [ that ] DetP
( B ) [ That ] DetP has gone losing
( 11 ) ( a ) She wants [ downy ] NP
( B ) [ Fluffy ] NP has gone losing
Abney ‘s account for this is that, the clincher itself ‘is a noun phrase ‘ ( 1987:177 ) , Existence of NP ‘s incorporating base entirely determiners farther support for the Det-as-head analysis, contending the clincher as the natural filler of D. Abney besides argues syntactic position of pronouns, and besides position of clinchers as functional elements[ 1 ]. Abney presents a convincing and thorough statement back uping the theory that clinchers do in fact occupy the D place as portion of his presentation of the ‘DP hypothesis ‘ .
2. Szabolcsi ( 1987 )
Evidence by Szabolcsi back uping the DP hypothesis has already been mentioned supra, as cited by Abney ( 1987 ) . Szabolsci argues extensively in her 1987 thesis that DP is syntactically parallel to CP. Using informations from Hungarian, a nominative/accusative linguistic communication that shows the same instance understanding morphology on nouns and verbs, she shows indistinguishable understanding characteristics between two. In the undermentioned illustrations illustrated in Bernstein ( 2007 ) the instance bespeaking postfix on the caput noun agrees in individual and in figure, is the same as the postfix bespeaking the same information in the clausal topic ;
( a ) Mari-o vendeg-e-o
( the ) Mary-Nom guest-Poss-3Sg
“ Mary ‘s invitee ”
“ Mary slept ” Bernstein ( 2007:539 )
As is seen in the illustrations above, both the noun phrase and clause receive nominative instance and are morphologically marked as 3rd individual remarkable with the morpheme o . This parallel capable understanding is farther grounds towards contending a functional class above N, analogue to C in the clause.
Equally good as morphological similarities that are apparent between NP and VP. Syntactic construction and more exactly word order besides provides grounds that matching characteristics of VP can be found in NP. An illustration in which such syntactic analogues are observed between NP and VP is in the building of interrogative VP ‘s and DP ‘s in Greek. Within the interrogative clause, the Wh-element Ti moves from concluding place ( in which an reverberation inquiry is formed ) to initial place to organize the question ;
‘He did what? ‘
‘What did he make? ‘ Horrocks and Stavrou ( 1987 ) , illustrated in Alexiadou et.al ( 2007:81 )
Matching Wh-movement is observed internally in the nominal building ;
To vivlio tinos?
The book who-GEN
‘Whose book? ‘
Tinos to vivlio?
Who-GEN the book?
‘Whose book? Horrocks and Stavrou ( 1987 ) , illustrated in Alexiadou et.al ( 2007:81 )
Matching motion between NP and VP in this illustration once more provides grounds in support of the DP-hypothesis. Movement within DP has besides been analysed in regard to the DP analysis by Longobardi ( 1994 ) , which advances us to another seminal paper in sing development of the DP-hypothesis.
3. Longobardi ( 1994 )
Longobardi provides grounds in support of the DP hypothesis via a theory of noun motion, and caput to head motion within the NP. Through an analysis of ‘bare ‘ NPs and proper names in peculiar, Longobardi provides grounds for a functional bed above N within nominal phrases, and that D is the place that accommodates the affected N. Longobardi ‘s illustration below exemplifies noun motion in Italian ;
My house is beautiful
( 1 ) La mia casa e bella
( 2 ) Casa mia e bella
In ( 1 ) , it is assumed that the clincher La is situated in the D place, whereas in ( 2 ) , the absence of a clincher component the caput noun has moved to the D place. ( Longobardi argues that this motion is needed so that the N can be an statement, an issue that will be discussed subsequently. ) Contending the noun in the D place in ( 2 ) allows for the noun Casa to be positioned to the left of mia. Evidence that this analysis is right is provided by the ungrammaticality of the buildings below ;
( 3 ) *La casa mia e bella
( 4 ) *Casa La mia e bella Longobardi ( 1994, 1996 ) illustrated in Alexiadou et.al ( 2007:81 )
These are ill-formed as the noun has moved to the left of mia, it is assumed to hold moved to D, and hence the clincher component can non be provided for. The diagram below shows the motion proposed by Longobardi ( 1994 ) ;
The caput to head motion within the NP as shown above can merely be explained if another c-commanding caput is present, this is assumed to be D within the ‘DP hypothesis ‘ .
A more in-depth analysis of N to D motion will be provided at a ulterior phase, but a reference of Longobardi ‘s part to outgrowth of the widely accepted ‘DP Hypothesis ‘ is of import at this phase.
The basic thought behind the ‘DP hypothesis ‘ as explained above, is that NP ‘s contain ( at least one ) functional class above the caput noun. X-bar theory provinces that noun phrases must incorporate a noun component and the development of the ‘DP ‘ hypothesis within the rules and parametric quantities framework is an extension of that regulation, integrating nominal equivalents of functional ‘layers ‘ found in clausal constructions. The DP hypothesis postulates the below construction as stand foring NP ‘s.
In this analysis the DP is presumed to be the maximum functional class that is projected by the closed category of clinchers, and heads the NP. What was antecedently referred to as noun phrase or NP is now widely accepted to be ‘determiner phrase ‘ or DP. Most normally the D bed is occupied with clinchers, furthermore it has been accepted that articles seem to be the lone class tht occupy the caput D place, uncontroversially and crosslinguistically. Guisti ( 1992, 1995 ) shows occurence of atoms such as demonstratives alongside articles, and posits these in specifier places instead than in caput of DP. This revised construction of noun phrases poses a job for instances in which nouns appear bare, without an open clincher and has been answered with more than one theory. The state of affairs of the DP construction in bare nouns and even in determinerless linguistic communications must necessitate farther account. For the inquiry in manus, it is of import to look at reading noun phrases in those state of affairss. In the following subdivision, the analysis of determinerless and bare noun phrases will be examined.