Suggested answer for Exercise 19

(ii)		XP → XP Y;	XP → XP YP;
		X' → X' Y;	X' → X' YP;
		X → X Y;	X → X YP

The second member of the first pair, the second member of the second pair and the first member of the third pair are exemplified in the text. Bar-level constituents can never appear as adjuncts.

(iii) Adverbial PPs and clauses are discussed in the text as potentially exocentric. Constructions which appear to have more than one head: participles, gerunds.

(iv)
(1)	a	He being the owner, we were all given a free drink.
	b	Who wants ice cream? Me.
	c	Her cheat on him? Never.

The sentence (1a) contains what is traditionally called an absolutive construction, where the subject of the non-finite clause can be in nominative. This construction is also grammatical with an accusative subject in the non-finite clause, though. That is in line with assumptions about the distribution of nominative and accusative forms in English but the nominative form is not, its grammaticality is unexplained – perhaps it is some default form of the pronoun that occurs in situations when no case assigner is present. This is contradicted by the sentence in (1b) where in a structure that contains no case assigner it is the accusative form that appears and not the nominative – perhaps it is the accusative which is the default form in English. The situation is the same in sentence (1c), it is the accusative and not the nominative form that occurs. One can accept the assumption that in English it is the accusative which functions as the default form; the nominative form in (1a) is unexplained.