clarification on query

[Andrew Carnie]

Hi All,

I think my previous message wasn't clear. I'm really looking at
clarification over the notion of domination. What I'm asking is if
given some node X that dominates Y and Z,  does
	-X  *replace* Y and Z (as in  TG); meaning that the representation
		contains only Y and Z; X is a historial artifact (or vice
		versa, the representation contains only X, and Y and Z are
		historical artifacts.
	- or does X *contain* Y and Z (as in MP), there is one object in
		the representation (X), which contains all the material
		formerly in Y and Z. Y and Z no long exist except
		derivationally
	- or does it *represent* Y and Z (as in GB), X, Y and Z are all
		identifiable objects in the representation (and
		derivation). They are related through structural relations.
	-  or something entirely different?

Hope that makes the question marginally less incoherent.

AC



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     O  O  O  O  O  		Andrew Carnie, Ph.D.
    <|\/|\/|\/|\/|>  		Asst. Professor of Linguistics
     =  =  =  =  =  		Department of Linguistics
    << << << << << 		Douglass 200E, University of Arizona
    ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 		Tucson, AZ 85721

				Tel: (520) 621 2802
				Cell: (520) 971 1166
				http://linguistlist.org/~carnie