DPs and Demonstratives

[Koontz John E]

On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 jpboyle at uchicago.edu wrote:
> I am just looking at noun phrases that have both a determiner and a
> demonstrative.

> Demonstrative Noun-Determiner
>
> I think this is true for other Siouan languages as well, correct? Has anyone
> thought about how to analyze these constructions (specifically in an X’bar
> framework)?  Are they DPs that have a demonstrative phrase (DemP) in SPEC and
> an NP complement (as in 1)?
>
> 1) [[Dem P [NP ]]DP]

     [ [DemP [ NP ] ] DP]   right?

> This would make it all left branching, which is what we would assume, right?

> Or are they DemPs that take a DP Complement that then take an NP complement
> (as in 2)?
>
> 2 [Dem P [[NP DP]]]

    [ DemP [ [ NP DP ] ] ]  right?

Not to forget where this started, if I understood David and Rory, and if I
am not to X-Bar impaired to be useful, I make it the first.  Forms like Dh
N dem=det and Da N=det dem represent two successive DemP's.

Is it quite right to say DemP and DP in these examples?  Isn't it more
like DetP => [ [ DemP ] Det ] and DemP => [Dem [ NP ] ]?

I don't quite see how to say that in Dh Dem alone is OK, and NP alone, but
not Det alone:  it has to be NP=Det or Dem=Det.  I think in Dakotan it is
Dem or NP alone is OK, not not Det:  it has to be NP=Det.