adjective phrase (AP)

a phrase headed by an adjective. In the complement position we can find PPs and finite and non-finite CPs. DPs and exceptional clauses are excluded since adjectives are not Case assigners. APs are complements of DegPs.

ambiguity

a structure is ambiguous if it can be interpreted in more than one way. We differentiate lexical ambiguity from structural ambiguity.

clause

a structure containing a (visible or invisible) subject and a predicate.

constituency test

a test for deciding whether a certain string of words is a constituent or not, e.g. coordination, preposing, extraposition, substitution etc.

constituent

a linguistic expression that functions as a unit in grammatical structure. A group of words that undergo syntactic processes together.

determiner phrase (DP)

a phrase headed by a central determiner or the possessive ’s morpheme. The complement of a DP is an NP, the specifier the DP the possessive ending attaches to.

distribution

the set of positions that the grammar determines to be possible for a given category. Words that distribute in the same way will belong to the same categories, words that distribute differently will belong to different categories.

interrogative clause

a structure mainly used to ask for information, either in the form of a yes–no question or a wh-question.

language

a system that enables people who speak it to produce and understand linguistic expressions.

movement

S-structure constituents do not always appear in the position where they are base-generated in D-structure, they often move from their base positions to other structural positions. There can be various reasons motivating movement, see wh-movement and DP-movement.

noun phrase (NP)

a phrase headed by a noun. Noun heads can take PP or CP complements, DP complements are excluded since nouns are not Case assigners. The specifier position of an NP is occupied by what are generally called post-determiners. NPs are complements of DPs.

object

a DP complement immediately following the verb. It can move to the subject position in passive sentences. See also direct object, indirect object.

object position

the specifier position of VP.

preposition phrase (PP)

a phrase headed by a preposition. It usually takes a DP complement but certain types of CPs can also appear in the complement position of PPs. PPs themselves can be complements of different constituents such as verbs, nouns and adjectives.

topic

an element appearing in front of the subject with a special interpretation (something like ‘as far as topic is concerned’). Topics have either already been mentioned before in a conversation or can be interpreted as easily accessible due to the context.

topicalisation

a process which moves an element interpreted as a topic to the front of the sentence.

verb phrase (VP)

a phrase headed by a verb. It is in the VP together with the vp(s) that the basic argument structure of the clause is formed, thus, theta-role assignment takes place here. The specifier position of the VP is occupied by the constituent bearing the theme/patient theta role. In passive structures this constituent has to move from the specifier position of the verb to the specifier position of IP in order to get Case. A VP can have different types of complements such as a DP, CP, IP, PP.

wh-element

question word. Question words often but not always begin with these letters, e.g. where, what, when, who, whom. The question word how is also considered a wh-element. Whether, although a word beginning with wh is not considered to be a wh-element in this sense.

wh-movement

the movement of wh-element to the beginning of the clause. This movement is obligatory in English.

previous next

Basic English Syntax with Exercises

2.3.2 Movement

There are other aspects of distribution we might use to support a structural analysis of a clause. For example, the distribution of an element refers to the set of positions that that element may occupy. Sometimes we can identify a number of positions that an element might be able to occupy in related sentences:

(96)a the policeman searched the bishop
bthe bishop, the policeman searched

Both of these sentences are grammatical in English, though the second one seems to have a special status and the first is more ‘normal’ in this respect. To start with, the second sentence seems to give a special interpretation to the bishop. The meaning can be understood in a context in which there are a group of people being searched, including the bishop, and these are being searched by various people. We might therefore have an extended context:

(97) the policewoman searched the nun, the chief constable searched the vicar and the bishop, the policeman searched.

We call the element in front of the subject that has this interpretation the topic.

Note that in this case the topic is also interpreted as the object: the one being searched. This is why this structure seems to be special with respect to the one in (96a), where the object has no extra aspects to its interpretation. From a syntactic point of view, the interesting observation is that the topic is a separate position, somewhere in front of the subject. We might account for why the element which sits in this position is interpreted as both the object and the topic by proposing that the object is moved into the topic position:

(98)

Obviously, such movement processes determine aspects of the distribution of an element: an element which can be moved from one position to another must be able to occupy both positions. Turning this the other way round, something which moves has a certain distribution and we know that anything that has a distribution is a constituent.

It therefore follows that anything that moves is a constituent, and we can use movement phenomena to test assumptions about the structure of a sentence. For example, the movement involved in topicalising the object in (98) can be taken as support that the object is a constituent of this sentence.

In the following sentence we see that the VP can also undergo a similar movement, supporting the claim that the verb and its object form a constituent:

(99)

Thus these movement facts support the following analysis of the structure of this sentence:

(100)

There are many instances of movements to be found in language. One of the most obvious is found in certain questions. Many English questions involve a word like which, what, where, why, etc. at the beginning of the sentence. However, these words have a dual function, being associated with some function within the clause as well as indicating the interrogative status of the clause by appearing at its beginning. For example, in the following the word what is interpreted not only as an interrogative but also as the object of the sentence:

(101) what did they find

One way to account for this interpretation is to claim that the wh-element does not start in the clause initial position, but is moved to this position from the object position. In this way we can claim that what IS the object and hence account for its interpretation. The movement may be indicated thus:

(102)

These interrogative elements are called wh-elements as they tend to be spelled with the letters w and h at the beginning, though this does not reflect the current pronunciation of these words. In the above example, the wh-element can be categorised as a DP, originating from object position, which is a DP position. We can also find wh-APs and PPs:

(103)a where did they find the gun (A = under the bishops mitre)
bhow did the judge find the bishop (A= guilty!)

The fact that the answer to (103a) is a preposition phrase and that to (103b) is an adjective phrase is an indication that these wh-elements are prepositional and adjectival respectively.

Not every kind of phrase can be questioned in this way, however. For example, there is no wh-element that corresponds to a VP, nor one for an NP. However the fact remains that only constituents can undergo this movement and so it can act as a fairly reliable test for the constituent structure of most parts of a sentence.

It is important to note that only one constituent can undergo any particular movement and that two constituents cannot move together. To demonstrate this, consider the following sentence:

(104) the bishop killed the bank manager with the gun

This sentence can be interpreted in one of two ways depending on who is seen as having the gun. If it is the bank manager who has the gun, then the PP with the gun acts as a modifier within the DP the bank manager with the gun. If, on the other hand, the bishop has the gun, then the PP is interpreted as modifying the VP killed the bank manager with the gun. In the first interpretation the PP is a kind of locative modifier, locating the gun with the bank manager and in the second it is an instrumental modifier saying what was used to kill the bank manager. The important point to note is that in the first case the PP forms a single constituent with the DP, whereas in the second it is a separate constituent from this. Thus we have the two structures:

(105)a
b

Suppose we topicalise the object in (105a), moving the DP to the front of the clause. As the PP is part of the DP it will be carried along with the rest of it and we will derive the following sentence:

(106)

This sentence is no longer ambiguous between the two meanings. This is because we must interpret the moved element as a single constituent and not as two separate constituents that have been moved together. The same point can be made with the movement of wh-elements, as shown by the following:

(107)

Again this sentence is unambiguous and the PP must be interpreted as modifying the DP and not the VP. An overall conclusion about movement is therefore that anything that can be moved is a single constituent and hence movement provides a relatively robust and useful test for constituent structure.

previous next