On Some (A)symmetrical Properties of Scramblings

Ahn, Hee-Don; Cho, Sungeun

doi:10.30961/lr.2022.58.1.1

Lang. Res. 58(1):1-30

pISSN: 0254-4474, eISSN: 2586-7113

DOI: https://doi.org/10.30961/lr.2022.58.1.1

Article

On Some (A)symmetrical Properties of Scramblings

Hee-Don Ahn¹, Sungeun Cho²^,^†

Author Information & Copyright ▼

¹Konkuk University

¹Yeungnam University

^†Corresponding Author: Professor, Department of English Education, Yeungnam University, 280 Daehak-ro, Gyeongsan, Gyeongbuk 38541, Korea, E-mail: scho1007@ynu.ac.kr

ⓒ Copyright 2022 Language Education Institute, Seoul National University. This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Received: Jan 27, 2022 ; Revised: Mar 31, 2022 ; Accepted: Apr 17, 2022

Published Online: Apr 30, 2022

ABSTRACT

This paper investigates symmetrical and asymmetrical properties of clause- internal scrambling and clause-external scrambling in Korean. We first assume that the binding condition applies derivationally while scope interpretation is obtained solely at LF. Concerning binding, the two types of scrambling display (a)symmetric properties that are not well-captured under previous analyses based on the traditional A/A’ distinction. Following Hicks’s (2008) assumption that the binding condition applies throughout the derivation, we show that binding facts can be explained if we examine the derivational history of scrambled elements. We further show that (a)symmetrical scope facts of clause-internal scrambling and clause-external scrambling are not well-captured under the canonical copy-theory of movements. In the case of QP-QP scope interaction, clause-internal scrambling induces scope ambiguity while clause-external scrambling does not. Regarding this contrast, we suggest that the wide scope interpretation of a quantifier in clause-internal scrambling results from the base-generation of the scope-bearing element at a clause-initial position, whereas the narrow scope interpretation of a quantifier in clause-internal scrambling results from the lowering of the moved quantifier. We lend further support to the proposal that the absence of a wide scope interpretation of a quantifier in the case of clause- external scrambling results from the obligatory reconstruction of the moved QP. However, when a negative polarity item is introduced into the sentence, clause-internal and clause-external scrambled QPs take only wide scope over negation. We suggest that symmetric scope facts related to NPI-QP interaction hinge on a ban on Relativized Minimality violation.

Keywords: clause-internal scrambling; clause-external scrambling; binding; quantifier scope; negation; NPI

References

Ahn, H.-D. (1992). Reconstruction effects in Korean. Proceedings of the 1992 Seoul International Conference on Linguistics, 219-227.

Ahn, H.-D., & Cho, S. (2010). Reconstruction asymmetries in ellipsis: Implications for scrambling. Linguistic Analysis, 34, 1-20.

Ahn, H.-D., & Cho, S. (2019). On scrambling and reconstruction. Language and Information Society, 37, 259-286.

Ahn, H.-D., Martin, R., & Kazuhiko, T. (1990). On the proper treatment of scrambling. Proceedings of Formal Linguistic Society of Mid-America, 1, 1-17.

Ahn, H.-D. & Yoon, H.-J. (1989). Functional categories in Korean. In S. Kuno et al. (Eds.), Harvard studies in Korean linguistics III (pp. 79-88). Cambridge (Mass.).

An, S. J. (2008). Sowui saminching taymyengsa 'ku, kunyeuy kinungey tayhaye [The function of third-person pronouns 'ku, kunye']. Hankwuke Hakhoy [Korean Linguistics], 38, 145-164.

Belletti, A. & Rizzi, L. (1988). Psych-verbs and theta-theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6, 291-352.

Bhatt, R., & Keine, S. (2019). Secondary strong crossover in Hindi and the typology of movement. Paper presented at the 49th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society.

Boeckx, C. (2001). Scope reconstruction and A-movement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 19, 503-548.

10.

Boeckx, C. (2003). Islands and chain: Stranding as resumption. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

11.

Boškovi, . & Takahashi, D. (1998). Scrambling and last resort. Linguistic Inquiry, 29, 347-366.

12.

Boškovi, . (2010). Scrambling. In T. Berger, K. Gutschmidt, S. Kempgen, & P. Kosta (Eds.), The Slavic languages, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

13.

Cho, J.-H. (1994a). Scrambling in Korean: Crossover, reconstruction and binding theory (Doctoral dissertation). University of Connecticut.

14.

Cho, J.-H. (1994b). On scrambling: Reconstruction, crossover, and anaphor binding. In Y.-K. Kim-Renaud, (Ed.), Theoretical issues in Korean linguistics (pp. 255-274). Stanford: CSLI.

15.

Cho, J.-H. & Kim, O.-H. (2000). Scrambling without syntactic movement. Studies in Generative Grammar, 10, 151-179.

16.

Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language, its nature, origin and use. New York: Praeger.

17.

Chomsky, N. (1993). A minimalist program for linguistic theory. In K. Hale & S. J. Keyser (Eds.), The view from building 20 (pp. 1-52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

18.

den Dikken, M. (2005). A comment on the topic of topic-comment. Lingua, 115, 691-710.

19.

Ebert, C. & Endriss, C. (2004). Wide scope indefinites as aboutness topic. Proceedings of the 8th Annual Meeting of the Gesellschft für Semantik, 95-110.

20.

Fox, D. (1999). Reconstruction, binding theory, and the interpretation of chains. Linguistic Inquiry, 30, 157-196.

21.

Fox, D. & Pesetsky, D. (2005). Cyclic linearization of syntactic structure. Theoretical Linguistics, 31, 1-46.

22.

Fukui, N. (1984). Studies on Japanese anaphora I: The adjunct subject hypothesis and zibun. Ms. MIT.

23.

Gallego, A. (2009). On freezing effects. Iberia, 1, 33-51.

24.

Hicks, G. (2008), Why the binding theory doesn't apply at LF. Syntax, 11, 255-280.

25.

Huang, C.-T. James. (1982). Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar (Doctoral dissertation). MIT.

26.

Jackson, K. (2008). The effect of information structure on Korean scrambling (Doctoral dissertation). University of Hawaii.

27.

Johnston, J. & Park, I. (2001). Some problems with a lowering account of scrambling. Linguistic Inquiry, 32, 727-732.

28.

Kawashima, R. & Kitahara, H. (1992). Licensing of negative polarity items and checking theory: A comparative study of English and Japanese. Proceedings of Formal Linguistic Society of Mid-America, 3, 139-154.

29.

Kim, K.-S. (1998). Anti-connectivity (Doctoral dissertation). University of Maryland at College Park.

30.

Kim, R. (2003). Scrambling and minimalist program. Studies in Generative Grammar, 13, 3-19.

31.

Kim, Y.-H. (1999). Scrambling and economy of representation. Studies in Modern Grammar, 16, 1-38.

32.

Ko, H. (2018). Scrambling in Korean Syntax. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics.

33.

Kuroda, S.-Y. (1988). Whether we agree to not: A comparative syntax of English and Japanese. In W. Poser (Ed.), Papers from the second international workshop on Japanese Syntax, (pp. 83-143). Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford University.

34.

Lebeaux, D. (1988). Language acquisition and the form of the grammar (Doctoral dissertation). University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.

35.

Lebeaux, D. (2000). Language acquisition and the form of the grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

36.

Lee, H. (2001). Interpreting selo as a variable: The syntax and semantics interface. Language Research, 37, 293-309.

37.

Lee, H. (2006). A comparative study of reciprocals in English and Korean: Their distribution and interpretation. Studies in Generative Grammar, 16, 129-152.

38.

Lee, H. (2006). A study on scrambling in Korean: The minimalist approach. Studies in Generative Grammar, 16, 425-460.

39.

Lee, H. (2008). Left periphery in Korean: Topicalization, focalization, and scrambling. Studies in Generative Grammar, 18, 137-171.

40.

Lee, H. (2010). Locality of QR and scrambling. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal, 18(3), 17-36.

41.

Lee, I.-S. & Chae, W. (1999). Kwukemwunpeplonkaguy [Lecture of Korean Grammar]. Seoul: Hakyensa.

42.

Lee, Y.-S. (1993). Scrambling as case-driven obligatory movement (Doctoral dissertation). University of Pennsylvania.

43.

Lee, Y.-S. (1994). Scrambling as case-driven movement. Studies in Generative Grammar, 4, 495-533.

44.

Mahajan, A. (1990). The A/A-bar distinction and movement theory (Doctoral dissertation). MIT.

45.

Miyagawa, S. (2001). The EPP, scrambling, and wh-in-situ. In M. Kenstowicz (Ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language (pp. 293-338). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

46.

Miyagawa, S. (2021). Case, late merge, and A/A'-movement. Paper presented at Syracuse/Cornell Workshop on Word Order and Scrambling.

47.

Postal, P. (1971). Cross-over phenomena. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

48.

Rizzi, L. (1990). Relativized minimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

49.

Rizzi, L. (2006). On the form of chains: criterial positions and ECP effects. In L. Cheng & N. Corver (Eds.), Wh-Movement: Moving on (pp. 97-133). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

50.

Safir, K. (1999). Vehicle change and reconstruction in A-chains. Linguistic Inquiry, 30, 587-620.

51.

Saito, M. (1985). Some asymmetries in Japanese and their theoretical implications (Doctoral dissertation). MIT.

52.

Saito, M. (1992). Long distance scrambling in Japanese. Journal of East-Asian Linguistics, 1, 69-118.

53.

Sauerland, U. (1998). On the making and meaning of chains (Doctoral dissertation). MIT, Cambridge, MA.

54.

Sohn, K.-W. (1994). NPI as focus barriers: LCC or RM? In V. Samiian & J. Schaeffer (Eds.), Proceedings of the western conference on linguistics (pp. 251-265). Fresno: California State University, Department of Linguistics.

55.

Sohn, K.-W. (1995). Negative polarity items, scope, and economy (Doctoral dissertation). University of Connecticut, Storrs.

56.

Tada, H. (1993). A/A' partition in derivation (Doctoral dissertation). MIT, Cambridge.

57.

Takahashi, S., & Hulsey, S. (2009). Wholesale late merger: Beyond the A/A distinction. Linguistic Inquiry, 40, 387-426.

58.

Wasow, T. (1972). Anaphoric relations in English (Doctoral dissertation). MIT, Cambridge, MA.

59.

Yoon, J. (1991). The syntax of a chains: A typological study of ECM and scrambling (Doctoral dissertation). Cornell University.