Episode 4b. UTAHEpisode 4b. UTAH

4.3-4.44.3-4.4

CAS LX 522CAS LX 522Syntax ISyntax I

Where we areWhere we are We’ve just come up with an We’ve just come up with an

analysis of sentences with analysis of sentences with ditransitive verbs, such as ditransitive verbs, such as Pat gave books to ChrisPat gave books to Chris that accords with the that accords with the constraints of the syntactic constraints of the syntactic system we have developed system we have developed so far.so far. Merge is binaryMerge is binary -roles are assigned to -roles are assigned to

specifiers and complements.specifiers and complements. The solution is to assume a The solution is to assume a

two-tiered structure, with a two-tiered structure, with a little little vv in addition to the VP. in addition to the VP.

PP

V

V

VP

NP

v

v

vP

NPPat

books

to ChrisNPP

gave

Where we areWhere we are The three The three -roles for -roles for givegive are are

assigned like this:assigned like this: The PP gets a Goal The PP gets a Goal -role.-role. The lower NP gets a Theme The lower NP gets a Theme -role.-role. The highest NP (in the specifier of The highest NP (in the specifier of

vvP) gets an Agent P) gets an Agent -role.-role.

But how did we know that?But how did we know that?

More importantly, how do kids More importantly, how do kids come to know that?come to know that?

Do they memorize this list for Do they memorize this list for each verb they learn?each verb they learn?

PP

V

V

VP

NP

v

v

vP

NPPat

books

to ChrisNPP

gave

Uniformity of Theta Uniformity of Theta AssignmentAssignment

If kids are really memorizing If kids are really memorizing which which -role goes where for -role goes where for each verb, there should be each verb, there should be some verbs that do it in other some verbs that do it in other ways.ways.

For example, there might be a For example, there might be a ditransitive verb with Theme ditransitive verb with Theme in the specifier of in the specifier of vvP, Goal in P, Goal in the specifier of VP, and Agent the specifier of VP, and Agent in the complement of VP.in the complement of VP. E.g., E.g., to tupto tup::

Books tup on the shelf ChrisBooks tup on the shelf Chris‘Chris put books on the shelf.’‘Chris put books on the shelf.’ Agent

V

V

VP

Goal

v

v

vP

Theme?

tup

Uniformity of Theta Uniformity of Theta AssignmentAssignment

But that just never happens.But that just never happens.

It seems that all verbs have It seems that all verbs have -role -role assignment that looks pretty much assignment that looks pretty much the same.the same. If there’s an Agent, it’s the first If there’s an Agent, it’s the first

(uppermost) NP.(uppermost) NP. If there’s a Theme it’s down close to If there’s a Theme it’s down close to

the verb.the verb.

Given that things Given that things seem seem to be to be relatively uniform, it has been relatively uniform, it has been proposed that this is a fundamental proposed that this is a fundamental property of the syntactic system. property of the syntactic system. Each Each -role has a consistent place -role has a consistent place in the structure.in the structure. Agent

V

V

VP

Goal

v

v

vP

Theme

tup

UTAHUTAH The Uniformity of Theta-Assignment The Uniformity of Theta-Assignment

Hypothesis (UTAH):Hypothesis (UTAH): Identical thematic Identical thematic relationships between predicates and their relationships between predicates and their arguments are represented syntactically by arguments are represented syntactically by identical structural relationships when identical structural relationships when items are Merged.items are Merged. That is, all Agents are structurally in the same That is, all Agents are structurally in the same

place (when first Merged). All Patients are place (when first Merged). All Patients are structurally in the same place, etc.structurally in the same place, etc.

We can take this to be a property of the We can take this to be a property of the interpretation. interpretation. When a structure is interpreted, When a structure is interpreted, the the -role an argument gets depends on where it -role an argument gets depends on where it was first Merged.was first Merged.

-roles and structure-roles and structure Great. So, the Agent (Great. So, the Agent (PatPat) in ) in

Pat gave books to ChrisPat gave books to Chris is in is in the specifier of the specifier of vvP. Because P. Because that’s where Agents go.that’s where Agents go.

But.. What about structures But.. What about structures like the ones we had before for like the ones we had before for things like things like Pat called ChrisPat called Chris??

Pat

called Chris

NP

VP

NPV

V PP

V

V

VP

NP

v

v

vP

NPPat

books

to ChrisNPP

gave

?

-roles and structure-roles and structure Well, if we’re serious about Well, if we’re serious about

working within the constraints working within the constraints of UTAH, we need a of UTAH, we need a vv there there too— to host the Agent.too— to host the Agent.

Hierarchy of Projection: Hierarchy of Projection: vv > V > V

called ChrisNPV

VP PP

V

V

VP

NP

v

v

vP

NPPat

books

to ChrisNPP

gave

v

v

vP

NPPat

-roles and structure-roles and structure Specifier of Specifier of vvP = AgentP = Agent

But where’s the Theme? Isn’t But where’s the Theme? Isn’t that in different places in that in different places in Pat Pat called called ChrisChris and and Pat gave Pat gave booksbooks to Chris to Chris??

called ChrisNPV

VP PP

V

V

VP

NP

v

v

vP

NPPat

books

to ChrisNPP

gave

v

v

vP

NPPat

-roles and structure-roles and structure NP, daughter of NP, daughter of vvP = AgentP = Agent NP, daughter of VP = ThemeNP, daughter of VP = Theme PP, daughter of PP, daughter of V = Goal = Goal

That seems to work, and it That seems to work, and it seems a reasonable seems a reasonable interpretation of UTAH.interpretation of UTAH.

called ChrisNPV

VP PP

V

V

VP

NP

v

v

vP

NPPat

books

to ChrisNPP

gave

v

v

vP

NPPat

VP shellsVP shells NoteNote.. Even though Even though vv may carry a may carry a

“causative” meaning, this does “causative” meaning, this does notnot mean mean that it is synonymous with the English word that it is synonymous with the English word ““causecause”. There is a difference in the ”. There is a difference in the “directness” of the causal connection. What “directness” of the causal connection. What it really seems closest to is “Agent”.it really seems closest to is “Agent”.

The water boiled.The water boiled. Bill boiled the waterBill boiled the water

BillBillii I I ttii vv+boil the water+boil the water Bill caused the water to boilBill caused the water to boil

Bill cause TPBill cause TP

Unaccusatives vs. Unaccusatives vs. unergativesunergatives

Recall that there are two types of single-Recall that there are two types of single-argument (intransitive) verbs in terms of argument (intransitive) verbs in terms of the the -role they assign to their single -role they assign to their single argument. argument.

UnaccusativesUnaccusatives: Have one, : Have one, ThemeTheme -role.-role. Fall, sink, break, closeFall, sink, break, close

UnergativesUnergatives: Have one, : Have one, AgentAgent -role.-role. Walk, dance, laughWalk, dance, laugh

Unaccusatives vs. Unaccusatives vs. unergativesunergatives

UnaccusativesUnaccusatives: Have one, : Have one, ThemeTheme -role.-role. Fall, sink, break, closeFall, sink, break, close

UnergativesUnergatives: Have one, : Have one, AgentAgent -role.-role. Walk, dance, laughWalk, dance, laugh

If we adopt the UTAH, then we are forced to If we adopt the UTAH, then we are forced to a certain view of the original Merges.a certain view of the original Merges. If you’re going to be a Theme, you need to be NP If you’re going to be a Theme, you need to be NP

daughter of VP.daughter of VP. If you’re going to be an Agent, you need to be NP If you’re going to be an Agent, you need to be NP

daughter of daughter of vPvP.. (Is it bad to be forced into an analysis?)(Is it bad to be forced into an analysis?)

UnaccusativesUnaccusatives Let’s go back and consider VP shells a bit in connection Let’s go back and consider VP shells a bit in connection

with unaccusatives.with unaccusatives.

The ice melted.The ice melted. The boat sank. The boat sank. The door closed. The door closed.

The iceThe ice, , the boatthe boat, , the doorthe door are all are all ThemesThemes— the — the argument starts as NP daughter of VP.argument starts as NP daughter of VP.

Unaccusatives have a relatively “inert” Unaccusatives have a relatively “inert” vv, no “causal” , no “causal” meaning.meaning.

There are two kinds of There are two kinds of vv, the causal one that needs an , the causal one that needs an NP (Agent), and a non-causal one.NP (Agent), and a non-causal one.

What if we pick the causal What if we pick the causal v v (and provide an Agent NP)?(and provide an Agent NP)?

NP

VP

Vthe icemelt

vP

v

VP shellsVP shells Bill melted the iceBill melted the ice..

Straightforward enough. The Straightforward enough. The causal causal vv adds an Agent. adds an Agent.

Bill was the agent/instigator of Bill was the agent/instigator of a melting that affected the ice.a melting that affected the ice.

Why isn’t the unaccusative Why isn’t the unaccusative version version Melted the iceMelted the ice, , though?though? (English being head-initial, after (English being head-initial, after

all)all)

v

v

vP

NP

VP

Vthe icemelt

NPBill

PreviewPreview Why isn’t the unaccusative version Why isn’t the unaccusative version

Melted the iceMelted the ice, though?, though? (English being head-initial, after all)(English being head-initial, after all)

We will turn to this question more We will turn to this question more thoroughly next. But to a first thoroughly next. But to a first approximation, we say that:approximation, we say that:

Sentences need subjects.Sentences need subjects. Subjects come first.Subjects come first.

Since there is only one NP here, it has Since there is only one NP here, it has to be the subject, and it has to come to be the subject, and it has to come first.first.

We suppose that a We suppose that a movementmovement operation operation (something like what (something like what happens to happens to give give when it moves up to when it moves up to vv) ) carries the subject over to the left of carries the subject over to the left of the the vvP.P.

vP

v

NP

VP

Vthe icemelt

PreviewPreview Sentences need subjects.Sentences need subjects. Subjects come first.Subjects come first.

Since there is only one NP here, it Since there is only one NP here, it has to be the subject, and it has to has to be the subject, and it has to come first.come first.

We suppose that a We suppose that a movementmovement operation operation (something like what (something like what happens to happens to give give when it moves up when it moves up to to vv) carries the subject over to the ) carries the subject over to the left of the left of the vvP.P.

As for where it goes (how it is As for where it goes (how it is integrated into the structure), integrated into the structure), we’ll concern ourselves more we’ll concern ourselves more with that next week.with that next week.

vP

v+V

NP

VP

V<the ice><melt>

melt

NPthe ice

Bill lied.Bill lied. Just to address the last case, Just to address the last case,

the unergatives, consider the unergatives, consider Bill Bill liedlied..

That’s got an Agent, so it’s got That’s got an Agent, so it’s got a a vv..

So, it would look like this.So, it would look like this.

v

v

vP

VPlie

NPBill

Auxiliary selectionAuxiliary selection Molte ragazze telefonanoMolte ragazze telefonano

many girls phonemany girls phone‘Many girls are phoning.’‘Many girls are phoning.’

Molte ragazze arrivanoMolte ragazze arrivanomany girls arrivemany girls arrive‘Many girls are arriving.’‘Many girls are arriving.’

Molte ragazze hanno telefonatoMolte ragazze hanno telefonatomany girls have phone[past-part.3sg]many girls have phone[past-part.3sg]‘Many girls phoned.’‘Many girls phoned.’

Molte ragazze sono arrivate.Molte ragazze sono arrivate.Many girls are arrive[past-part.3pl]Many girls are arrive[past-part.3pl]‘Many girls arrived.’‘Many girls arrived.’

Auxiliary selectionAuxiliary selection Molte ragazze telefonanoMolte ragazze telefonano

many girls phonemany girls phone‘Many girls are phoning.’‘Many girls are phoning.’

Molte ragazze arrivanoMolte ragazze arrivanomany girls arrivemany girls arrive‘Many girls are arriving.’‘Many girls are arriving.’

Molte ragazze hanno <molte ragazze> telefonato Molte ragazze hanno <molte ragazze> telefonato many girls have phone[past-part.3sg]many girls have phone[past-part.3sg]‘Many girls phoned.’‘Many girls phoned.’

Molte ragazze sono arrivate <molte ragazze>.Molte ragazze sono arrivate <molte ragazze>.Many girls are arrive[past-part.3pl]Many girls are arrive[past-part.3pl]‘Many girls arrived.’‘Many girls arrived.’