On feature interpretability and inheritance
-
Marcel den Dikken
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to evaluate the theoretical motivations given for feature inheritance, and the workings and distribution thereof. The standard motivations for feature inheritance in the literature are shown not to be tenable. The rationale for feature inheritance given in the literature is based on the requirement that Value and Transfer happen at the same time. This requirement falls through, however; hence, feature ineritance cannot be derived on that basis. Feature inheritance can instead be enforced as the only way to meet a constraint to the effect that the EPP property of a phase head must be satisfied within the minimal structure created by Merge of the phase head with its complement. Syntax then requires feature inheritance as long as ‘EPP’ is necessary and is defined as a Spec–Head relation. Both of these premises are subjected to close scrutiny in the paper, as is the question of whether the predicates ‘(un)interpretable’ and ‘(un)valued’ both need to be recognised by syntactic theory.
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to evaluate the theoretical motivations given for feature inheritance, and the workings and distribution thereof. The standard motivations for feature inheritance in the literature are shown not to be tenable. The rationale for feature inheritance given in the literature is based on the requirement that Value and Transfer happen at the same time. This requirement falls through, however; hence, feature ineritance cannot be derived on that basis. Feature inheritance can instead be enforced as the only way to meet a constraint to the effect that the EPP property of a phase head must be satisfied within the minimal structure created by Merge of the phase head with its complement. Syntax then requires feature inheritance as long as ‘EPP’ is necessary and is defined as a Spec–Head relation. Both of these premises are subjected to close scrutiny in the paper, as is the question of whether the predicates ‘(un)interpretable’ and ‘(un)valued’ both need to be recognised by syntactic theory.
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Preface 1
- List of contributors 5
-
I. Minimalism: Quo Vadis?
- A program for the Minimalist Program 9
-
II. Exploring features in syntax
- On feature interpretability and inheritance 37
- On the need for formal features in the narrow syntax 56
- Adjunct Control and edge features 79
- On the uninterpretability of interpretable features 109
- The Merge Condition 130
-
III. Radicalizing the interfaces
- Chains in Minimalism 169
- Multiattachment syntax, “Movement” effects, and Spell-Out 195
- Flavors of movement 236
- Minimalism and I-Morphology 267
- A minimalist approach to roots 287
- Computations at the interfaces in child grammar 304
- Intensionality, grammar, and the sententialist hypothesis 315
- What is and what is not problematic about the T-model 350
- Regarding the Third Factor 363
- The role of arbitrariness from a minimalist point of view 392
- Index 417
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Preface 1
- List of contributors 5
-
I. Minimalism: Quo Vadis?
- A program for the Minimalist Program 9
-
II. Exploring features in syntax
- On feature interpretability and inheritance 37
- On the need for formal features in the narrow syntax 56
- Adjunct Control and edge features 79
- On the uninterpretability of interpretable features 109
- The Merge Condition 130
-
III. Radicalizing the interfaces
- Chains in Minimalism 169
- Multiattachment syntax, “Movement” effects, and Spell-Out 195
- Flavors of movement 236
- Minimalism and I-Morphology 267
- A minimalist approach to roots 287
- Computations at the interfaces in child grammar 304
- Intensionality, grammar, and the sententialist hypothesis 315
- What is and what is not problematic about the T-model 350
- Regarding the Third Factor 363
- The role of arbitrariness from a minimalist point of view 392
- Index 417
