16.2463, Review: Syntax/Near Eastern Lang: Karimi (2005)

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-16-2463. Tue Aug 23 2005. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.

Subject: 16.2463, Review: Syntax/Near Eastern Lang: Karimi (2005)

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 Dooley, 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: Lindsay Butler <lindsay at linguistlist.org>
================================================================  

What follows is a review or discussion note contributed to our 
Book Discussion Forum. We expect discussions to be informal and 
interactive; and the author of the book discussed is cordially 
invited to join in. If you are interested in leading a book 
discussion, look for books announced on LINGUIST as "available 
for review." Then contact Sheila Dooley at dooley at linguistlist.org. 

===========================Directory==============================  

1)
Date: 23-Aug-2005
From: Anna Grashchenkova < izmaja at mail.ru >
Subject: A Minimalist Approach to Scrambling: Evidence from Persian 

	
-------------------------Message 1 ---------------------------------- 
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:34:13
From: Anna Grashchenkova < izmaja at mail.ru >
Subject: A Minimalist Approach to Scrambling: Evidence from Persian 
 

AUTHOR: Karimi, Simin
TITLE: A Minimalist Approach to Scrambling
SUBTITLE: Evidence from Persian
SERIES: Studies in Generative Grammar 76
PUBLISHER: Mouton de Gruyter
YEAR: 2005
Announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/16/16-878.html 

Anna Grashchenkova, Department of Theoretical and Applied 
Linguistics, Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia.

INTRODUCTION

The book under review (as stated in the introductory chapter) follows 
three interrelated goals. The first one is to provide in-depth analysis of 
syntactic structure of Persian, and primarily to account for freedom of 
constituent order. The second is to relate inferences from Persian 
data to that provided by other languages in which scrambling occurs. 
The third one, as stated by the author is "to situate the results ... 
within the framework of the Minimalist Program, specifically phase 
theory" 

SYNOPSIS

The book consists of seven chapters. 

Chapter 1: Introduction. The first chapter serves an introduction to the 
monograph. It provides a brief overview of Persian syntax and 
summarizes the basic theoretical assumptions, underlying the 
proposed investigation. 

Providing empirical reasons Simin Karimi rejects the derivational approach 
to word order, advanced by Kayne (1994), and follows the traditional 
parametric approach, considering Persian a SOV language 
underlyingly. She argues nevertheless that Tense Phrase (TP) is 
head-initial in this language. This assumption is based primarily on the 
placement of sentential arguments of the verb, which follow the verb 
obligatorily. Moreover, she states, that all functional heads appear in 
an initial position in this language. 

Analysis advanced in the volume is based on phase theory. Following 
Chomsky (2001), Karimi distinguishes two strong phases: lexical 
phase vP and operator/discourse phase CP. The relevance of such a 
configuration is discussed in the following chapters. Along with basic 
theoretical assumptions of the Minimalist Program (henceforth MP) in 
section 4 she introduces the main ideas underlying the theory of 
Distributed Morphology (henceforth DM), to which help she resorts in 
chapter 2, when analyzing (non)specific object marking.

Some empirical data are also introduced in this chapter. It includes the 
description of Persian basic word order, a rather detailed analysis of 
complex predicates. In section 3 a descriptive discussion of elements 
that undergo scrambling is offered. At the end of the chapter Karimi 
introduces the notion of Specificity that is extremely relevant to the 
analysis advanced in the volume. She argues that specificity is 
responsible for case marking of direct objects, as well as for other 
different properties of specific and nonspecific noun phrases in object 
and certain subject positions. The detailed discussion of the 
phenomenon is offered in chapter 3. 

In section 5 the outline of the content of the monograph is provided.

Chapter 2: Literature on Scrambling. As stated in the introductory 
lines, this chapter is devoted to a review of literature on scrambling in 
the last two decades. The two major approaches to scrambling are 
discussed, namely base-generation approach (henceforth BGA) and 
movement approach (henceforth MA).

BGA within the minimalist framework is associated primarily with 
Boscovic and Takahashi's (1998) paper on Japanese. These authors 
suggest that "... scrambled elements are directly base-generated in 
their surface positions and undergo LF movement (lowering in most 
cases) to the positions where they receive theta roles".  Saito and 
Fukui (1998) argue within the same lines, suggesting that scrambling 
is an optional operation, and thus should be treated as a special case 
of Merge. Both papers maintain the thesis that scrambling is semantically 
vacuous.

In section 2.3. Karimi analyses Persian data and provides counter 
evidence with respect to the outlined theories. First of all she argues 
that scrambling is not semantically vacuous: a scrambled element in 
Persian may be interpreted as topic or focus based on its stress, 
moreover scrambling provides scope ambiguity even in the case of long-
distance scrambling (henceforth LDS), and thus the copy of the 
scrambled element plays a role in the interpretation of a sentence. 
The most vulnerable point in Boscovic and Takahashi's (1998) paper is 
that only arguments are subject to scrambling. Karimi shows that 
adjuncts in Persian may also undergo LSD and create ambiguity as 
well (for similar evidence from Russian see for example Bailyn (2001)). 
The third argument against BGA to scrambling has to do with 
extraction out of islands. That is, if one assumes that scrambling is the 
result of Merge, then the impossibility of occurrence of scrambled 
elements within syntactic islands (attested in Persian as well as in 
other scrambling languages) cannot be accounted for.

Karimi further reviews the literature on scrambling from a movement 
point of view. She presents a brief survey of clause-bound scrambling 
into Case position, revealing properties of A(rgument)-movement 
(such as raising and passive constructions), such as locality, anti-
Weak Crossover (WCO) effects, FQ (Floating Quantifiers), binding 
relations and lack of reconstruction.

The discussion in this chapter also suggests that scrambling exhibits 
some characteristics of A'- movement (such as wh-movement), such 
as licensing a parasitic gap and reconstruction. Then, attested instances 
of atypical A and A' movement are discussed. Karimi argues for example, 
following May (1977, 1985), that reconstruction sometimes is possible 
from an A-position. She also provides evidence of Persian LDS that allow 
FQ, and other instances of movement that exhibit properties of A as well 
as A'-movement

She also sketches Webelhuth's (1992) proposal (which suggests that 
the landing site of scrambled elements exhibits mixed properties) and 
its criticism. She concludes the discussion of MA pointing out that such 
an approach in terms of A-A' distinction as well as BGA also faces some 
problems.

In the final section of this chapter the author examines properties of 
scrambling languages and their differences from non-scrambling ones. 
She reviews several approaches (Fukui (1993), Müller and Sternefeld 
(1993), Boscovic and Takahashi (1998)), designed to account for this 
problem. She suggests that previously proposed factors (such as 
adjunction sites) cannot be parameterized to account for these 
differences. Following the most recent trends in scrambling theory, 
Karimi advances a hypothesis that scrambling is a feature-driven 
movement, and thus is not an optional syntactic operation. Under this 
assumption all differences between scrambling and non-scrambling 
languages are reduced "to the choice of selecting a certain type of 
feature from the lexicon".

Chapter 3: Local Scrambling and A-movement. This chapter is 
devoted to local scrambling in Persian and its clause structure in 
general.

Section 2 provides an in-depth analysis of Persian subjects. 
Discussing different types of construction (including unaccusatives, so-
called passives as well as raising, subjectless, ECM (exceptional case 
marking) and 'tough' constructions) Karimi comes to the conclusion 
that the subject in Persian is base-generated within the vP phase. She 
argues that the theme of unaccusatives and so-called passives are 
merged inside the PredP (complement of v). Based on the position of 
prepositional phrases and vP adverbials with respect to subjects in 
these constructions, Karimi suggests an asymmetry between specific 
and non-specific subjects (similar to that of objects). She further 
argues that only specific subjects move out of PredP to Spec of vP to 
receive specific interpretation. Case and Agreement are also checked 
in this position. Non specific subjects are argued to stay in-situ, in 
PredP domain that is neutral with respect to Case and Agreement (this 
assumption is supported by necessary evidence). Subjects of 
transitive verbs are claimed to be merged directly in the Spec of vP 
(this is supported by the fact that agents are obligatorily [+ Specific]). 

Additional evidence for the vP-internal hypothesis comes from 
absence of expletives (as argued by Karimi, overt as well as covert). 
Karimi claims that "no element needs to appear in the vP external 
position in a situation when the entire propositional phrase is 
focused". Based on this assumption she further argues that EPP in 
Persian, similar to Nom Case is satisfied by the rich morphological 
inflection on Persian verb. This assumption in its turn calls in question 
the existence of 'pro' and 'PRO'. Karimi argues that their existence is 
justified by two independent factors. 'pro' is suggested to be required 
by Nom Case feature of the verb that must be checked. The presence 
of 'PRO' is argued to be unrelated to Nom Case and determined by 
control.

In section 3 the analysis of direct objects is proposed. Similar to 
subjects, direct objects are also claimed to be generated within the 
PredP. As well as subjects only specific objects escape the domain of 
existential closure and move into the lower Spec of vP in order to 
receive interpretation and to check case features. Their nonspecific 
counterparts remain in-situ and are not marked by Case, as long as 
the Acc Case feature is locally checked by Agree between the specific 
object in the lower Spec of vP and v.

In section 4 Karimi advances the hypothesis that Persian is a topic-
prominent language. This assumption is based primarily on the fact 
that Persian does not use grammatical constructions (such as 
passive) to extract a non-subject topic as subject-prominent 
languages do. She argues (and discusses in detail in chapter 4) that 
elements extracted out of vP are discourse marked. She further 
argues that T in Persian optionally selects the feature [+Topic], and 
thus Spec of TP is a topic position in this language. 

In conclusion Karimi briefly surveys the nature of the landing site of 
vP internal scrambling in Persian (Spec of vP) and comes to the 
conclusion that it cannot be considered a typical A-position. (It is 
discussed in more detail in chapters 5, 7). And thus local scrambling is 
not a typical A-movement as has been suggested throughout the 
literature.

Chapter 4. Operator/Discourse Domain and A'-Scrambling. This 
chapter addresses syntactic properties of the operator/discourse 
phase. Karimi proposes the following phrase structure for this domain:

[CP [TopP [FP [TP [T' [...]]]]]]

Discussion in this and previous chapters is based on the distinction 
of two different types of EPP: the first one is based on Chomsky's 
(1982) original idea regarding the requirement that every sentence have 
a subject. This type is labeled *grammatical* EPP (EPPg). The other 
EPP, based on Chomsky (2000), is suggested to be a strong feature 
responsible for movement of phrasal categories. This type is called 
*syntactic* EPP (EPPs). In chapter 3 Karimi advanced the idea that 
EPPg in Persian is satisfied by rich verbal inflection. In this chapter 
she argues that movement out of vP (lexical phase) is trigged by 
EPPs, which places the XP in the Spec of FocP or one of the two topic 
positions. In the case of the former, the XP receives a contrastive 
focus (as apposed to an informational focus that does not involve 
movement) interpretation. The higher topic position (Spec of TopP) is 
reserved for the switched topic, and the lower one (Spec of TP) 
represents the background topic. The claim that all these movements 
are feature-driven is supported by the fact that the movement of two 
(for example, scope-bearing) elements belonging to the same 
category is subject to MLC (Minimal Link Condition (Chomsky 1995)).

Providing evidence of cooccurrence of wh-phrase together with a
complementizer, Karimi argues that wh-phrases do not undergo 
movement to Spec of CP, but may move to Spec of FocP to receive 
contrastive interpretation. She then distinguishes wh-arguments and 
wh-adjuncts, assuming that the former have a D-head, while the latter 
are purely quantificational (and thus move to a different position). In 
order to account for an interrogative interpretation of a sentence in 
the absence of a wh-phrase in the Spec of CP, Karimi assumes 
(following (Aoun and Li 1993)) that there is a wh-operator in the Spec 
of CP and the wh-feature moves to C for a local Agree relation with 
the wh-operator. It is further argued that the focus feature of non-wh-
phrases moves to be adjoined to Foc. These claims are based on the 
fact that the movement of a Foc feature and wh-feature is blocked 
when the XP carrying one of them is in the domain of another scope 
bearing element (such as a Negative Polarity Item).

Chapter 5: Scrambling, Scope and Binding. This chapter concentrates 
on the semantic impact of scrambling with respect to scope and 
binding relations.

Section 2 is devoted to scope marking. Karimi provides evidence that 
movement of quantificational elements, local as well as long-distance, 
alters their scope. In a similar way scrambling affects scope between a 
quantified element and a wh-phrase. Scope of adjuncts and 
interaction of negation with existential and universal quantifiers also 
contradict the assumption that LDS is subject to radical reconstruction. 
Analyzing these data Karimi arrives at the conclusion that scope 
relations are determined in overt syntax and that there is no need for 
covert XP movement, as suggested by Chomsky (1995).

Section 3 concentrates on scrambling with respect to anaphoric 
relations. Analyzing Persian data Karimi suggests that scrambling 
does not affect Principle A, feeds but does not bleed Principles B and 
C of Binding Theory. However some typological data, presented in 
this chapter, evidence that at least some languages allow scrambling 
to feed Principle A. Karimi suggests that this possibility is subject to 
parametric differences between languages.

Karimi's analysis of binding relations (as well as that of scope 
interaction) contradicts the traditional assumption that scrambled 
elements are radically reconstructed.

Finally Karimi argues that movement theory based on phase cannot 
account for some cases of binding relations (such as relations 
between pronominal and its antecedent, when the latter is in the 
higher clause, or Principle C violations). She concludes by assuming 
that "binding interpretations are not established by derivation, but 
rather by representation". This issue is discussed in more detail in 
chapter 7.

Chapter 6: Long Distance Scrambling and Island Constraints. In this 
chapter Karimi examines the differences between LDS and typical 
instances of operator movement such as structural wh-movement and 
topicalization.

In section 2 Karimi shows that LDS is not subject to the type of 
constraint that blocks wh-movement. LDS in Persian can dislocate 
several elements out of CP, without rendering a sentence 
ungrammatical. This contrasts with structural wh-movement in English 
and German, where wh-phrases move cyclically through the same 
intermediate position, namely Spec of CP. Karimi argues that in the 
case of LDS when more than one element represents contrastive focus, 
they occupy multiple specifiers of FocP.

In section 3 Karimi provides a set of novel LDS data. She shows that 
an element cannot scramble into a higher clause if another element 
with the same grammatical function already exists in that clause or in 
the intermediate clause. Karimi formulates this condition as follows:

(1) Condition on LDS
LSD is blocked in the configuration:
*[phase YP1[alpha]   XP[alpha] ....... [t1]], where [alpha] represents a 
specific grammatical function (e.g. subject)

She shows that this condition does not hold in the case of a typical 
operator movement such as wh-movement in English. Karimi further 
argues that this condition cannot be accounted for on the basis of 
processing theories. Two processing strategies are introduced and 
rejected in section 4.

In section 5 additional data are provided in defense of (1). Karimi 
argues that (1) is not a restriction on A-movement into the argument 
position, based on facts that pro in the target clause does not block 
movement of the embedded subject, and that LDS of adjuncts is also 
subject to (1). She further suggests that this condition (when restated 
in terms of features) accounts for operator movement as well. The 
only distinction is the domain of application of this constraint: while CP 
is the island domain for operator movement, vP serves as the island 
domain for LDS. Karimi further argues, that since this condition accounts 
for both A and A' movements, it represents a problem for the typology of 
movement. This issue is discussed in more detail in the final chapter.

In section 6 Karimi discusses the instances of left-dislocation and ATB 
(Across the Board) and argues as in the previous chapter that 
interpretation cannot be solely based on cyclic derivations within a 
phase, but need to be applied representationally in certain cases.

Chapter 7: Theoretical Consequences. This chapter concentrates on 
the theoretical outcome of the analysis advanced in this work.

Section 2 reviews the typology of movement. Karimi examines three 
types of syntactic properties that have been assumed throughout the 
literature to be diagnostic for A/A' distinction. These are reconstruction 
(suggested to be exclusively the property of A'-movement), Anti-WCO 
effects and FQ (both considered to be possible only when A-
movement is involved). The data provided in this section show, 
however, that there is no clear cut distinction between A and A' 
movement based on these factors.

In section 3 the improper interaction of movement is considered. 
Karimi discusses impossibility of interaction of wh-movement with 
scrambling and topicalization in English and German (languages that 
exhibit structural movements for both wh-phrases and topic). She then 
presents two solutions previously offered to account for this problem: 
Epstein's (1992) approach, based on Economy of Derivation and 
Müller and Sternefeld's (1993, 1996) account based on Principle of 
Unambiguous Binding (PUB). She further proposes an alternative 
account, suggesting that the observed restrictions on the interaction of 
different types of movement is determined by the position where XP 
receives interpretation, rather than by the typology of movement. That 
is if XP moves into a Spec of a functional head, where it receives its 
interpretation, it cannot move into a new position to receive a different 
interpretation. Based on this assumption the following constraint is 
suggested:

(2) Constraint on Interpretation (CI):
Within the functional domain, If XP receives interpretation in [alpha] it 
cannot be interpreted in [beta].

Karimi's approach allows not to stipulate an LF movement to account 
for the problematic data.

Section 4 concentrates on the interaction of phase theory with the
interpretation that was briefly discussed in chapter 5. She discusses 
several cases that pose a problem to phase theory with respect to 
interpretation. Karimi argues that co-reference of an embedded 
pronoun with the left-dislocated DP cannot be accounted for within a 
purely derivational model based on phase. Additional problems are 
provided by ATB cases and resumptive pronouns in island 
constructions, where movement is not an option. Based on this data 
Karimi suggests "that UG (Universal Grammar) must allow 
interpretation based on representation, in addition to derivation, if 
phase theory is to be maintained".

Karimi concludes the final chapter with a brief discussion of 
unresolved issues, left for further research.

EVALUATION

It is perfectly obvious that Karimi's book represents an important 
contribution to scrambling as well as to syntactic theory in general. 
Analysis advanced in this work addresses the main problems that 
scrambling poses to syntactic theory. It is argued in this volume 
that scrambling is triggered by EPPs, has a semantic effect on the 
output of the derivation and is not syntactically optional. Moreover a 
set of novel, interesting data, not previously attested in scrambling 
languages, is provided. 

Certain imperfection of the work that pretends to postulate universal 
patterns seems to be the lack of typological data. Some 
generalizations (such as the [+Topic] feature of T), made by the 
author, call for a more representative sample of languages. It should 
be mentioned in conclusion that the book is highly reader-friendly. 
Each chapter opens with an introductory section and concludes with a 
brief summary of the most important issues. And the whole book is 
structured in the same way.  

REFERENCES

Aoun, Joseph and Yen-hui Audrey Li (1993) Wh-elements in-situ: 
Syntax of LF? Linguistic Inquiry 24 (2): 199-238.  

Bailyn, John (2001) On scrambling: A reply to Bo?covi? and 
Takahashi. Linguistic Inquiry 32(4): 635-657. 

Boscovic, Zeljko and Daiko Takahashi (1998) Scrambling and last 
resort. Linguistic Inquiry 29 (2): 347-366.

Chomsky, Noam (1982) Some Concepts and Consequences of the 
Theory of Government and Binding. Cambridge/London: The MIT 
Press.

Chomsky, Noam (1995) The Minimalist Program. Cambridge/London: 
The MIT Press.

Chomsky, Noam (2000) Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Step 
by Step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, R. 
Martin, D. Michaela, and J. Uriagereka (eds.), 89-155. 
Cambridge/London: The MIT Press. 

Chomsky, Noam (2001) Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A life in 
language, M. Kenstowicz (ed.), 1-52. Cambridge/London: The MIT 
Press. 

Epstein, David (1992) Derivational constraints on A'-chain formation. 
Linguistic Inquiry 23 (2): 235-259.

Fukui, Naoki (1993) Parameters and optionality. Linguistic Inquiry 24 
(3): 399-420. 

Kayne, Richard (1994) The Antisymmetry of Syntax. 
Cambridge/London: The MIT Press.

May, Robert (1977) The Grammar of Quantification, Ph. D. Diss., 
Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, Massachusetts Institute of 
Technology. MIT. [Published 1990, New York: Garland]

May, Robert (1985) Logical Form: Its Structure and Derivation. 
Cambridge/London: The MIT Press.

Müller, Gereon and Wolfgang Sternefeld (1993) Improper movement 
and unambiguous binding. Linguistic Inquiry 24 (3): 461-507.

Müller, Gereon and Wolfgang Sternefeld (1996) A'-chain formation 
and economy of derivation. Linguistic Inquiry 27 (3): 480-511.

Saito, Mamoru and Naoki Fukui (1998) Order in phrase structure and 
movement. Linguistic Inquiry 29 (3):439-474.

Webelhuth, Gert (1992) Principles and Parameters of Syntactic 
Saturation. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Anna Grashchenkova has defended her diploma work at the Moscow 
State University, Russia. Her graduate work deals with reflexive 
binding within the Adjective Phrase. Her research interests include 
syntax, syntactic theories and typology.





-----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-16-2463