ON THE X' INVISIBILITY MYTH: ANALYZING RESTRICTIONS ON INTERMEDIATE PROJECTIONS

論X'不可見性的迷思：分析句法投射中間層的限制

10.6519/TJL.2018.16(1).2

Gerardo Fernández-Salgueiro

X' Invisibility ； movement ； ellipsis ； sentence fragments ； projection ； selectional features ； X'的不可見性 ； 句法位移 ； 省略 ； 不完整句 ； 投射 ； 選擇特徵

Taiwan Journal of Linguistics

16卷1期（2018 / 01 / 01）

35 - 51

英文

The X' Invisibility Principle claims that intermediate (X') levels of phrase structure are unavailable for syntactic computation (see especially Chomsky 1995). Evidence for this principle comes from the fact that X' constituents resist operations such as movement and ellipsis and cannot be used as segment fragments. In this paper I argue that this principle is problematic on both conceptual and empirical grounds. I claim that movement restrictions are readily accounted for by Extension and Chain Uniformity, while restrictions on ellipsis and sentence fragments can be explained in terms of selectional features and the nature of syntactic projections.

X'不可見性原則」聲稱片語結構的中間層級是不可參與句法計算的(主要參考Chomsky 1995)，支持這個原則的證據來自於X'組詞成分不允許句法移位、省略也不能被用來當作不完整句。在本篇文章中，我認為這樣的原則在概念上和經驗上皆是有問題的。我主張句法移位的限制可以用「擴張和鏈鎖一致性」輕易地說明，而省略和不完整句的限制則可以用選擇特徵和句法投射的本質來解釋。

1. Baltin, M.(ed.),Collins, C.(ed.)(2001).The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory.Oxford:Blackwell.
2. Brody, Michael(2002).On the status of representations and derivations.Derivation and Explanation in the Minimalist Program,Oxford:
3. Chomsky, Noam(1995).The Minimalist Program.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
4. Chomsky, Noam(2005).Three factors in language design.Linguistic Inquiry,36,1-22.
5. Chomsky, Noam(2013).Problems of projection.Lingua,130,33-49.
6. Chung, Sandra,Ladusaw, William,McCloskey, John(1995).Sluicing and logical form.Natural Language Semantics,3,239-282.
7. Cole, Melvyn(2000).University of Manchester.
8. Collins, Christopher(2002).Eliminating labels.Derivation and Explanation in the Minimalist Program,Oxford:
9. Epstein, Samuel D.,Groat, Erich,Kawashima, Ruriko,Kitahara, Hisatsugu(1998).A Derivational Approach to Syntactic Relations.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
10. Epstein, Samuel D.,Seely, T. Daniel(2006).Derivations in Minimalism.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
11. Epstein, Samuel D.,Seely, T. Daniel(2002).Derivation and Explanation in the Minimalist Program.MA:Blackwell.
12. Fernández-Salgueiro, Gerardo(2011).Romance null subjects at the sensory-motor interface.Syntax,14,1-28.
13. Fernández-Salgueiro, Gerardo(2008).University of Michigan.
14. Fortin, Catherine(2007).Some (not all) nonsententials are only a phase.Lingua,117(1),67-94.
15. Frampton, John,Gutmann, Sam(2002).Crash-proof syntax.Derivation and Explanation in the Minimalist Program,Oxford:
16. Goldsmith, John(ed.)(1995).The Handbook of Phonological Theory.London:Blackwell.
17. Haegeman, Lilliane(ed.)(1997).Elements of Grammar.Dordrecht:Kluwer.
18. Holmberg, Anders(2005).Is there a little pro? Evidence from Finnish.Linguistic Inquiry,36,533-564.
19. Lobeck, Anne(1995).Ellipsis: Functional Heads, Licensing, and Identification.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
20. Merchant, Jason(2001).The Syntax of Silence: Sluicing, Islands, and the Theory of Ellipsis.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
21. Rizzi, Luigi(2013).Introduction: Core computational principles in natural language syntax.Lingua,130,1-13.
22. Selkirk, Elizabeth(1984).Phonology and Syntax: The Relation between Sound and Structure.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
23. Truckenbrodt, Hubert(1999).On the relation between syntactic phrases and phonological phrases.Linguistic Inquiry,30,219-255.
24. Uriagereka, Juan(1999).Multiple spell-out.Working Minimalism,Cambridge, MA:
25. Uriagereka, Juan(1998).Rhyme and Reason.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
26. Zhang, Niina(2010).Coordination in Syntax.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.