15.3487, Diss: Syntax: Heck: 'A Theory of Pied-Piping'

LINGUIST List linguist at linguistlist.org
Tue Dec 14 04:43:12 UTC 2004

LINGUIST List: Vol-15-3487. Mon Dec 13 2004. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.

Subject: 15.3487, Diss: Syntax: Heck: 'A Theory of Pied-Piping'                                                                                                                                                                 

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry at linguistlist.org>
Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org) 
        Sheila Collberg, U of Arizona  
        Terry Langendoen, U of Arizona  

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, Wayne
State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.

Editor for this issue: Maria Moreno-Rollins <maria at linguistlist.org>

To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at


Date: 10-Dec-2004
From: Fabian Heck < heck at uni-leipzig.de >
Subject: A Theory of Pied-Piping 

-------------------------Message 1 ---------------------------------- 
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 23:37:59
From: Fabian Heck < heck at uni-leipzig.de >
Subject: A Theory of Pied-Piping 

Institution: University of Leipzig
Program: Department of Linguistics 
Dissertation Status: Completed 
Degree Date: 2004 

Author: Fabian Heck

Dissertation Title: A Theory of Pied-Piping 

Linguistic Field(s): Syntax

Dissertation Director(s):
Uli Sauerland
Wolfgang Sternefeld
Gereon Müller
Marga Reis

Dissertation Abstract:

The thesis investigates the phenomenon of pied-piping (see Ross 1967). It is
argued that pied-piping is less idiosyncratic and construction-specific as is
often assumed. Five properties of pied-piping are identified and it is argued
that these hold across a number of different languages and different
constructions. The syntactic problem of pied-piping, which emerges from the
general assumption that only [wh]-marked constituents should be able to undergo
[wh]-movement, is addressed without making reference to the notion of feature
percolation, a concept which is argued to be both empirically and conceptually

The five properties of pied-piping are expressed by five generalizations. The
first three of these generalizations are concerned with pied-piping as it
appears in embedded questions and restrictive relative clauses. The last two
generalizations address massive pied-piping (in the sense of Safir 1986) as it
typically emerges in appositive relative clauses (and maybe also matrix
questions). The generalizations capture (i) transitivity-effects in pied-piping,
(ii) the phenomenon of wh-movement within the pied-piped constituent (internal
wh-movement in the sense of Riemsdijk 1985), (iii) the role of pied-piping as a
repair-strategy, (iv) the emergence of massive pied-piping, and (v)
intervention-environments that block massive pied-piping.

The derivation of these generalizations is embedded within a hybrid theory of
grammar which contains both aspects of the phase-based theory of Chomsky (2001)
and of an optimality theoretic grammar, (see Prince & Smolensky 2004). The core
of the theory is formed by a constraint called Local Agree, which favors local
applications of Chomsky's (2001) operation Agree over remote applications of Agree. 

The leading idea is that on the one hand the non-local character of feature
checking in the context of pied-piping can be accounted for by application of
remote Agree and that on the other hand restrictions on pied-piping, which
suggest that locality requirements play some role for pied-piping after all, can
be captured best if (a) remote Agree is generally minimized and (b) sometimes
even completely blocked. The implementation of (a) makes crucial use of the
assumption that the constraint Local Agree is violable. The derivation of (b) is
based on the notion of a phase (in the sense of Chomsky 2001) and its opaque
character (expressed by Chomsky's PIC). Finally, for the case of massive
pied-piping, which seems not to be subject to any locality requirements on
Agree, it is argued that the gap in locality is bridged by application of the
operation of [wh]-feature movement in the sense of Chomsky (1995).

LINGUIST List: Vol-15-3487	


More information about the Linguist mailing list