Subject: kitahara review .

hisatsugu kitahara , ( 1997 ) elementary operations and optimal derivations , mit press , cambridge , mass . 140 pages , $ 15 . 00 . reviewed by julie legate , < jlegate @ mit . edu > this book is very firmly situated within the minimalist approach to syntactic theory that was begun by chomsky ( 1991 ) and perhaps most fully articulated in chomsky ( 1995 ) . it adopts much of the basic architecture of the 1995 version of minimalism ( henceforth mp ) , while deriving several of its principles and assumptions . the first three chapters of the book propose some comparatively minor alterations to the mp system , and demonstrate that these alterations allow several stipulations of the mp to be dropped , while retaining or improving the framework 's empirical coverage . the final chapter retains the proposals of the previous chapters while putting forth a new condition that is a more clear departure from the mp approach . with this condition , kitahara is able to account for several notoriously problematic wh-constructions . kitahara 's first chapter consists of a review of the minimalist syntactic framework . he discusses the conceptual foundation of the approach ( the unflinching application of occam 's razor to every aspect of the computational system ) , the guiding principles of global economy , as well as the internal mechanisms of the computation ( including the creation of syntactic trees through successive operations of merge and of morphological feature-driven move ) . his second chapter contains the core proposals of the book . kitahara replaces the operations of merge , move , and erase by two " elementary operations " : " concatenation " and " replacement " . concatenation is the procedure which joins two objects alpha and beta to form a new object k . replacement , on the other hand , substitutes an object alpha for an object beta , where beta is contained within a larger object sigma . the mp operations are redefined using these elementary operations as follows ( p35 ) : ( i ) cyclic merge = concatenation cyclic move = concatenation noncyclic merge = concatenation + replacement noncyclic move = concatenation + replacement erase = replacement he further redefines the shortest derivation condition ( chomsky 1991 , 1993 ; epstein 1992 ) in terms of these operations , as in ( ii ) ( p26 ) : ( ii ) shortest derivation condition ( sdc ) minimize the number of elementary operations necessary for convergence . given this technology , he proceeds to derive several of the principles and assumptions of mp . first , he considers cyclicity , providing a detailed summary and comparison of the approaches taken in chomsky 1993 , 1994 , and 1995 . he derives that , in simple cases , cyclic convergent derivations should be preferred over noncyclic convergent ones , since cyclic operations yield a shorter derivation . as shown in ( i ) above , cyclic operations involve only one elementary operation : concatenation , whereas noncyclic ones require two : concatenation and replacement . next , he turns to the mp principle of procrastinate : covert movement ( i . e . movement which occurs in the computation after the derivation is sent to pf for pronunciation ) is preferable to overt movement . he separates the discussion into head movement , object shift , and expletive insertion . he adopts the mp assumptions that ( a ) movement results in two instances of identical elements , one in the merged position and the other in the moved position ( i . e . the copy theory of movement ) ; ( b ) if an element is overtly attracted , the entire category moves , whereas if an element is covertly attracted , only the formal features move ; and ( c ) only one of the identical elements created by movement is interpreted at lf . finally , he proposes a novel interpretation of effect of strong features in the grammar , as in ( iii ) ( p37 ) : ( iii ) strong feature condition spell - out applies to sigma only if sigma contains no category with a strong feature . regarding head movement , in languages with overt verb raising , t has a strong v feature and thus overt raising is necessary for convergence . in languages without overt verb raising , the sdc selects derivations with covert , rather than overt , verb raising . although both covert and overt head movement involve one operation of replacement ( since head movement is necessarily non-cyclic ) , kitahara claims that overt head movement , being category movement requires an additional instance of replacement , thus resulting in a longer derivation . his reasoning is as follows . if a verb moves overtly , its semantic features are carried along . therefore , at lf it will be necessary to delete one of the instances of the semantic features , since elements are only interpreted once . this requires an application of replacement that is not needed for covert movement , since covert movement only affects the formal features , not the semantic features as well . notice that the same reasoning will not extend to phrasal movement . overt movement will require one instance of replacement to delete the semantic features of one member of the chain ( just considering a simple two-membered chain ) , however covert movement will also require one instance of replacement , since covert movement is necessarily non-cyclic . thus , the sdc cannot choose between derivations with overt object shift and those without . this predicts the optionality of object shift in languages like icelandic , without resorting to the mp ' optional strong feature ' analysis , which is a simple restatement of the facts . in languages without overt verb movement , object shift is predicted to be impossible , assuming that the object shifts to the outside specifier of vp , the inside specifier being the merged position of the subject , and that multiple specifiers are not equidistant from a higher head , unless head movement renders them equidistant . thus , the shifted object would block movement of the subject to tp , unless the verb has raised to t . kitahara acknowledges ( p144 , fn26 ) , however , that he cannot explain languages like french , that display overt verb raising but prohibit object shift . finally , kitahara considers the timing of expletive insertion . notice that although mp assumes that merge is cheaper than move , kitahara 's reanalysis predicts that merge be equally economical to cyclic move , since both consist of one application of concatenation . since the timing of expletive insertion is the primary empirical motivation for the mp assumption , kitahara demonstrates that this timing is equally captured within his system . consider the familiar sentences ( iv ) and ( v ) . ( iv ) there seems to be a man in the room . ( v ) * there seems a man to be in the room . in ( iv ) , the expletive was inserted in the embedded [ spec , t ] and raised to the matrix tp . in ( v ) , on the other hand , " a man " was raised to the embedded tp and the expletive was inserted directly into the specifier of the matrix tp . mp claimed that ( iv ) is preferred over ( v ) because it is cheaper to merge the expletive into the embedded tp than to move the associate . kitahara claims that these facts follow from his sdc . since expletives are assumed to have no semantic features , overt raising of " there " will not require an application of replacement to delete an instance of semantic features in ( iv ) . in ( v ) , on the other hand , overt raising of " a man " will require replacement to delete one of the resulting two instances of the semantic features of " a man " . therefore , the derivation in ( iv ) is shorter than that in ( v ) and thus preferred . as a side point , notice that this analysis requires that the formal features of " a man " raise covertly directly to the matrix t . if these features raised to the embedded tp covertly , the non-cyclic movement would result in an additional application of replacement , and ( iv ) and ( v ) should be equally economical ( an equivalent situation to object shift ) . kitahara concludes chapter two with a note about the timing of expletive insertion in icelandic transitive expletive constructions . he assumes the mp analysis that the associate ( i . e . the subject of the transitive ) moves into the inner specifier of tp and the expletive merges into the outer specifier of tp , the verb appearing between the two as a verb-second phenomenon . he notes that although this situation is the opposite of the english situation discussed above , i . e . here category movement precedes expletive insertion , this is predicted by the restriction against downwards movement . assuming the associate must move to adjoin to the expletive at lf , the associate must appear lower than the expletive , in order for this movement to be raising rather than lowering . in chapter three , kitahara demonstrates that chomsky 's ( 1995 ) minimal link condition can explain phenomena which had previously received disparate analyses in the literature . ( vi ) minimal link condition ( mlc ) h ( k ) attracts alpha only if there is no beta , beta closer to h ( k ) than alpha , such that h ( k ) attracts beta . kitahara begins with relativized minimality ( chomsky 1993 ) violations , as in ( vii ) , and superiority condition violations , as in ( viii ) . ( vii ) * john seems it is t ( john ) certain to be here . ( viii ) * what did you persuade whom to buy t ( what ) ? the mlc accounts naturally for these facts : in ( vii ) , " it " is closer than " john " to the matrix t , and thus blocks attraction of " john " ; in ( viii ) , " whom " is closer to the matrix cp than " what " and thus blocks attraction of " what " . next , kitahara considers proper binding condition violations , like that shown in ( x ) . ( ix ) proper binding condition traces must be bound . ( x ) * which picture of t ( who ) do you wonder who john likes t ( which picture of t ( who ) ) ? he argues that a proper binding condition analysis of ( x ) is no longer available in minimalist approaches . this condition can no longer apply at s - structure , since s - structure has been eliminated from the model , and lf reconstruction of " picture of t ( who ) " could create a configuration in which the trace of " who " is bound . instead , kitahara offers an mlc solution . he observes that ( x ) involves two violations of the minimal link condition . first , " which " is closer to the embedded cp than " who " and thus blocks the attraction of " who " ( note that " picture of who " would be necessarily carried along with " which " to the embedded cp by an independent convergence condition ) . second , given the illegitimate attraction of " who " to the embedded cp , " who " becomes closer to the matrix cp than " which " , and thus blocks the attraction of " which " . assuming that ( xi ) a derivation employing a greater number of illegitimate steps induces a greater degree of deviance ( p72 ) the derivation in ( xii ) below is preferred over ( x ) because ( x ) involves two violations of the mlc whereas ( xii ) involves only one . ( xii ) ? ? who do you wonder which picture of t ( who ) john likes t ( which picture of who ) ? kitahara extends this analysis to crossing versus nesting dependency data . ( xiii ) nested dependency condition ( pesetsky 1987 ) if two " wh " - trace dependencies overlap , one must contain the other . the paradigm cases are those in ( xiv ) and ( xv ) : ( xiv ) ? ? what did you wonder whom john persuaded t ( whom ) to buy t ( what ) ? ( xv ) ? * whom did you wonder what john persuaded t ( whom ) to buy t ( what ) ? in ( xiv ) , kitahara observes , the mlc is disobeyed once , in the raising of " what " over " whom " to the matrix cp . in ( xv ) , on the other hand , the mlc is disobeyed twice , once in the raising " what " over " whom " to the embedded cp , and a second time in the raising of " whom " over " what " to the matrix cp . thus , following ( ix ) , the grammar prefers ( xiv ) over ( xv ) . finally , kitahara considers scrambling and topicalization in german and japanese , demonstrating that certain restrictions on these phenomena can also receive an mlc treatment . he assumes that both phenomena are feature driven , and that the scrambling / topicalization feature of the attracted element is interpretable , and thus remains accessible to the computation after checking . the basic pattern considered is that it is not possible to scramble an element from a constituent and then scramble the remnant , however it is possible to then topicalize the remnant . german examples are provided in ( xvi ) and ( xvii ) : ( xvi ) scrambling + scrambling of remnant * dass [ t ( das buch ) zu lesen ] keiner [ das buch ] t ( t ( das buch ) zu lesen ) that ( the book ) to read no one the book ( the book to read ) versucht hat tried has " that no one has tried to read the book " ( xvii ) scrambling + topicalization of remnant [ t ( das buch ) zu lesen ] hat keiner [ das buch ] t ( t ( das buch ) zu lesen ) ( the book ) to read has no one the book ( the book to read ) versucht tried " no one has tried to read the book " under these assumptions , ( xvi ) violates the mlc twice , first by scrambling the dp " that book " over the closer vp " that book to read " , and second by scrambling the vp " t ( that book ) to read " over the now-closer dp " that book " . ( xvii ) , on the other hand , does not violate the mlc at all . assuming that the features that drive topicalization and scrambling are distinct , " that book " would be the closest available element with the scrambling feature to the attracting head , since " that book to read " would have a topicalization feature rather than a scrambling feature . similarly , the vp " t ( that book ) to read " is the closest available element to be attracted for topicalization , since " that book " has a scrambling feature not a topicalization feature . in chapter four , kitahara discusses the differences in deviance between derivations which involve one violation of the mlc by a wh-element . he provides the generalization in ( xviii ) , and examples in ( xix ) - ( xxii ) ( p83 - 85 ) : ( xviii ) an mlc violation involving adjuncts , subjects , or quasi objects [ i . e . " how many " phrases ] is far more severe than an mlc violation involving objects . ( xix ) adjunct * how do you wonder [ whether john fixed the car t ( how ) ? ( xx ) subject * what do you wonder [ whether t ( what ) was fixed t ( what ) ] ? ( xxii ) quasi - object * how many pounds do you wonder [ whether john weighed t ( how many ) ] ? ( xxii ) object ? ? what do you wonder [ whether john fixed t ( what ) ] ? in order to explain this phenomenon , kitahara proposes the following condition ( p90 ) : ( xxiii ) chain formation condition an application of move forms 1 or > 1 chain ( s ) only if it is legitimate ( = violation-free ) and assumes that traces may be attracted ( at least covertly ) . he claims that the illegitimate wh-movements in ( xix ) - ( xxii ) do not form a chain . therefore , the wh-elements will not be able to be interpreted at lf , causing the derivation to crash . this accounts for the ungrammaticality of ( xix ) - ( xxii ) . in ( xxii ) , however , kitahara claims that the formal features of the trace of " what " raise covertly to check accusative case , and that it is this movement that saves the derivation . ( notice that covert movement of the traces of the wh-elements in ( xxiv ) - ( xxvi ) will not occur . adjuncts and quasi objects do not check case , and subjects move overtly to check case . ) according to the chain formation condition , the movement of the formal features of the object , being legitimate , may form one or more chains ; in particular , it forms a chain between the raised position of " what " in the matrix cp and the merged position of " what " . thus , the derivation can be interpreted at lf , and has only the status of a mlc violation . kitahara extends the analysis to ( xxiv ) . ( xxiv ) " where " / " when " adjuncts ? ? where / when do you wonder [ whether john fixed the car t ( where / when ) ? he assumes that these adjuncts are the complement of a null preposition . therefore , the formal features of the trace of " where " / " when " must raise covertly to check case with the null preposition , again creating the necessary chain between the moved position of " where " / " when " in the matrix cp and its merged position . this chapter concludes the book . although this book stands solidly on the foundations of previous minimalist syntactic research , it remains accessible to those who are not well-versed in minimalist theory . it provides very clear explanations of the details of previous minimalist approaches , as well as kitahara 's own proposals . furthermore , all relevant derivations are presented step-by - step , at a pace designed to accommodate the non-specialist . thus , it presents a good opportunity for those interested to learn about research and issues in minimalist syntax . those who are familiar with minimalist research should find this to be an interesting reworking and application of 1995 - style minimalism . anyone convinced by recent discussions of computational complexity and local economy ( see collins 1997 , johnson & lappin 1997 , yang 1997 , among others ) , however , will be dissatisfied with the approach , as it continues to rely on global economy conditions . since , of course , not everyone has been convinced by the discussion , this is more a note to prospective readers than a criticism . on a similar note , a crucial assumption for the analyses is that the grammar can count , which is controversial , but not obviously false . note that , regarding cyclicity , the notoriously problematic case of head - movement , which chomsky ( 1995 ) managed to incorporate into " cyclicity " requirements ( forcing it to apply before introduction of another head into the derivation ) , again falls outside the analysis of " cyclicity " . since all head - movement will require an operation of replacement , there is no longer any clear way to force it to apply before another head is introduced . perhaps more serious is the reformulation of the strong feature condition . the various strong feature conditions of previous minimalist approaches are simplified in the first chapter to ( ii ) above , repeated in ( xxv ) below . ( xxv ) strong feature condition spell - out applies to sigma only if sigma contains no category with a strong feature . the difficulty with this formulation is that it renders the strong feature condition an s - structure condition and thus anti - minimalist , since minimalism took great pains to eliminate all s - structure conditions . notice that it would be trivial to reformulate all previous s - structure conditions in a manner parallel to ( xxv ) - - " spell - out applies to sigma only if sigma contains no traces which are not bound " - - thus reducing the minimalist claim that s - structure is redundant to a matter of terminology only . furthermore , in the last chapter , a further condition involving strong features had to be introduced in order to rule out certain noncyclic derivations . this additional condition , given in ( xxvi ) , is essentially a weakened version of chomsky 's ( 1995 ) formulation of the strong feature condition . ( xxvi ) alpha and beta cannot be concatenated if some sublabel of alpha and some sublabel of beta are both strong ( p95 ) thus , the proposed simplification of the strong feature condition actually results in positing two conditions , one of which is an s - structure condition . another seemingly anti - minimalist proposal is the chain formation condition , given in ( xxiii ) above and repeated in ( xxvii ) below . ( xxvii ) chain formation condition an application of move forms 1 or > 1 chain ( s ) only if it is legitimate ( = violation-free ) minimalist theory claims that the computation of human language meets the inclusiveness condition , i . e . no new elements are added during the course of the computation . instead , the computation arranges and rearranges items selected from the lexicon . therefore , under minimalist theory , the notion of a " chain " as an independent entity does not exist , as it would have to be added during the course of the derivation , violating inclusiveness . instead , " chain " is simply a convenient term used to refer to the identical elements in a derivation . the chain formation condition , however , crucially requires chains to have an independent existence in the computation . these comments aside , this book does represent a step forward in the minimalist research program . kitahara is able to derive several assumptions / principles which previously could only be stipulated . the account of optionality in icelandic object shift is more satisfying than the " optional strong feature " approach , although , as was noted , it does raise some cross - linguistic considerations ( e . g . french ) . the systematic application of the minimal link condition to data captured by various other conditions was sorely needed , if only to confirm the intuitions that an mlc would have equal , or superior , empirical coverage . finally , the analysis of " wh " extraction asymmetries presented in the final chapter , is one of the few minimalist treatments of this phenomenon . all in all , the reader will find this book to be very well considered , clearly explained , and thought-provoking . biography julie anne legate is a phd student in the department of linguistics and philosophy at mit . her research interests include syntactic theory and irish syntax . bibliography chomsky , noam . ( 1991 ) some notes on economy of derivation and representation . in principles and parameters in comparative grammar , ed . robert freidin , 417-454 . mit press , cambridge , mass . chomsky , noam . ( 1993 ) a minimalist program for linguistic theory . in the view from building 20 , eds kenneth hale & samuel jay keyser , 1-52 . mit press , cambridge , mass . chomsky , noam . ( 1994 ) bare phrase structure . mit occasional papers in linguistics 5 . mitwpl , cambridge , mass . chomsky , noam . ( 1995 ) the minimalist program . mit press , cambridge , mass . collins , chris . ( 1997 ) local economy . mit press , cambridge , mass . epstein , samuel d . ( 1992 ) derivational constraints on a ' - chain formation . linguistic inquiry 23 , 135-159 . johnson , david & shalom lappin . ( 1997 ) a critique of the minimalist program . linguistics and philosophy . yang , charles d . ( 1997 ) minimal computation . master 's thesis , department of electrical engineering and computer science , mit . - - - - - - end of forwarded message
