Draft (December, 2007)

An Argument for the Derivational Reformulation of theProper Binding Condition*
Kensuke Takita
Nanzan University
Explaining the observation that a sentence-final particle le blocks certain
instances of movement in terms of the CED, Lin (2006) proposes that in
Chinese, vP moves to Spec, AspP, whose head is le, so that the surface
head-final order is derived from the head-initial one. I point out that Lin’s
analysis has two problems, which concern with VP-fronting and an
exceptional behavior of subject-extraction. To solve these problems
maintaining Lin’s idea that AspP in Chinese is head-initial, I propose thatwhat moves to Spec, AspP is VP, and that Lin’s observations should be
explained by the derivational PBC (Saito 2003).

1. Introduction
Investigating some surface head-final structures in Chinese, recent studies on
Chinese syntax argue that the language is underlyingly head-initial, and theapparent head-final orders are derived by movement (contra Huang 1982, Li
1990, among others; see Mulder and Sybesma 1992 for VP; Cheng and Sybesma
1999, Simpson 2005, Saito, Lin and Murasugi 2006 for DP; Simpson and Wu
2002, Hsieh and Sybesma 2007 for CP).
In response to this line of research, this paper discusses a sentence-final
particle (henthforth SFP) le, which is exemplified in (1). Stative predicates likehong ‘red’ in (1a) come to have a change-of state meaning when le appears, as
shown in (1b). 1,2*I would like to show my gratitude to Tomo Fujii, C.-T. James Huang, Tomoko Kawamura,
Masayuki Komachi, T.-H. Jonah Lin, Keiko Murasugi, W.-T. Dylan Tsai, C.-Y. Barry Yang, andespecially Mamoru Saito for their valuable suggestions, discussions and comments. I also would liketo thank the audience at WAFL 4 for their helpful discussions and comments. All errors are due tome.
1 In this paper, I treat the sentence-final le, which is sometimes called le2, and I do not discuss theother, namely the verbal affix type le, which is called le1 (see Shen 2004 and references cited therein
for le1 and le2). Following Shen (2004), I assume that these two les are different elements. As shownin (i), they can co-occur and occupy different positions.
(i)

Women chi-lefan
we
eat-le1 meal
‘We have had meal.’le.
le2(Shen 2004:143)

2 Although Lin (2006) glosses le as PERF, which stands for perfective, I use SFP for it hereafter.

1

(1)

a.

Zhe-duo hua
hong __.
this-clflower red‘This flower is red.’b.

Zhe-duo hua
hong le.
this-clflower red
SFP‘This flower has become red.’c.

(Based on Lin 2006:2-3)[AspP [vP … V0 …] [Asp0 le[+d]]]Shen (2004) proposes that le is a head of Aspect Phrase (henthforth AspP),
which has a [+ dynamic] feature and it takes vP as its complement, as illustratedin (1c). Note that in this structure, AspP is assumed to be head-final.
Recently, Lin (2006) argues that AspP is in fact head-initial, and thesurface head-final order is derived by Complement-to-Spec movement (Kayne
1994) of vP to Spec, AspP. Let us call this the vP-movement analysis. Then, heobserves that le blocks some movement, and explains the observations in term of
the Condition on Extraction Domains (Huang 1982, henthforth CED).
I point out that although Lin’s (2006) general idea that AspP is headinitial is preferable, the vP-movement analysis is not without problems.
Specifically, it is pointed out that the analysis is not compatible with Huang’s(1992) hypothesis on VP-fronting, and it has to stipulate that extraction ofsubjects is exempt from the CED-effect. I argue that these problems can besolved by proposing that what moves to Spec, AspP is VP, not vP. I show that
under this VP-movement analysis, Lin’s (2006) observations on blocking effects
are explained by Saito’s (2003) derivational Proper Binding Condition(henthforth the derivational PBC), supporting the derivational PBC.
This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 briefly summarizes the
vP-movement analysis. In Section 3, I point out some problems of the vPmovement analysis. To solve these problems, I propose a VP-movement analysis.
Section 4 shows that this VP-movement analysis provides an argument for thederivational PBC. Section 5 is a conclusion.
2. The vP-movement Analysis
Lin (2006) proposes that the SFP le is the head of AspP, which takes vP as its
complement, and the surface head-final order is derived by movement of vP to
Spec, AspP. For instance, (2a) has the schematic structure illustrated in (2b).
(2)

a.

b.

Zhangsan mai shu le.
Zbuy book SFP‘Zhangsan has bought the book.’(Lin 2006:2)[AspP [vP Z. buy book] [Asp' le tvP]]

Then, Lin (2006) argues that since vP is in Spec, AspP, extraction from vPshould be prohibited by the CED, as shown in (3a). On the other hand, he claims

2that if le does not appear in a sentence, vP can remain in a complement position,
so that extraction should be allowed, as in (3b).
(3)

a.

[XP … [ … [AspP [vP … α …] [Asp' le tvP]]]]b.

[XP … [ … [vP … α …]]]

Lin (2006) shows this prediction is borne out. The first evidence comes from
VP-fronting (based on Lin 2006:11).
(4)

a.

b.

Youyongi, Zhangsan neng ei __.
swim
Z
can
‘[As to] swimming, Zhangsan can [do it].’* Youyongi, Zhangsan neng ei le.
swim
Z
can
SFP
‘[As to] swimming, Zhangsan has become able to [do it].’

The contrast in (4) indicates that VP-fronting is blocked if le appears. (4a) and(4b) are analyzed to have the following structures, respectively.3
(5)

a.
b.

[XP swimi [IP … [vP … ti …]]]
* [XP swimi [IP … [AspP [vP … ti …] [Asp' le tvP]]](= (4a))(= (4b))The second evidence concerns with wh-questions. As the contrast in (6)indicates, wh-adverbials like zenmeyang ‘how’ cannot co-occur with le.
(6)a.

Zhangsan zenmeyang xiu
che __?
Zhowrepair car‘How does Zhangsan repair the car?’b.

* Zhangsan zenmeyang xiu
che le?
Zhowrepair car SFP‘How did Zhangsan repair the car?’(Based on Lin 2006:4)

Note, however, that le can appear in wh-questions with nominal wh-phrases, as
shown in (7).
(7)

a.

Zhangsan xiu
shenme __?
Z
repair what
‘What does Zhangsan repair?’3 Lin (2006) is not explicit about whether vP or VP moves. I will come back to this point in Section
2.2.

3

b.

Zhangsan xiu
shenme le?
Z
repair what
SFP
‘What did Zhangsan repair?’(Based on Lin 2006:4)

Following Tsai (1994) and Reinhart (1998), Lin (2006) assumes that whnominals like shenme ‘what’ can be licensed without movement via unselective
binding by the Q-operator in CP, while wh-adverbials like zenmeyang ‘how’
have to move to Spec, CP to be licensed. Given this assumption, examples in (6)and (7) have the following structures, respectively.
(8)

a.
b.

[CP … [IP … [vP … how …]]]
* [CP … [IP … [AspP [vP … how …] [Asp' le tvP]]](= (6a))(= (6b))c.

[CP Q-Op [IP … [vP … what …]]](= (7a))d.

[CP Q-Op [IP … [AspP [vP … what …] [Asp' le tvP]]](= (7b))Among these configurations, only (8b) involves extraction out of a CED-island.
Finally, (9) shows that topicalization of wh-phrases behaves in the sameway (based on Lin 2006:10-11).
(9)a.

Shenme dongxii, Zhangsan fang ei zai chuang-dixia __?
what
thing
Z
put
at bed-under‘(Lit.) What things, Zhangsan put [them] under the bed?’b.

* Shenme dongxii, Zhangsan fang ei zai chuang-dixia le?
what
thing
Z
put
at bed-under
SFP‘(Lit.) What things, Zhangsan has put [them] under the bed?’

Given that topicalization of wh-elements is syntactic movement, examples in (9)are analyzed to have the following structures.4
(10)

a.

[XP what thingi [IP … [vP … ti …]]](= (9a))4 Lin (2005) argues that topicalization of wh-elements is syntactic movement, based on theobservations that it induces the island effect as shown in (ia), and that it can license parasitic gaps,
as indicated in (ib) (exp = experiencer aspect, mod = modifier marker).
(i)

a. *

Shenme yui, Laowang yu-guo [[ej xihuan ei de] renj]?
what
fish Lmeet-exp
like
mod person‘What fish is it such that Laowang met persons who like it?’b.

Sheii, Laowang [zai huijian pgi zhiqian] jiu
kaichu-le ei?
who L
at meetbefore already fire-le1‘Which person is it who Laowang fired before meeting?’ (Based on Lin 2005:300)

4

b. * [XP what thingi [IP … [AspP [vP … ti …] [Asp' le tvP]]]](= (9b))Summarizing so far, it was shown that the vP-movement analysis
correctly predicts that the presence of le requires vP to move to its Spec position,
so that extraction out of vP is blocked due to the CED.
3. Problems of the vP-movement Analysis and a Solution
In what follows, I point out that the vP-movement analysis has two problems,
which concern VP-fronting and exceptional behaviors of extraction of subjects.
Then, I propose a solution to these problems.
3.1 Problems
First, let us reconsider what moves in the ungrammatical VP-fronting case,repeated in (11).
(11)

a.

* Youyongi, Zhangsan neng ei le.
(= (4d))
swim
Z
can
SFP
‘(Lit.) [As to] swimming, Zhangsan has become able to [do it].’b.

* [XP swimi [IP … [AspP [vP … ti …] [Asp' le tvP]]](= (5d))In order to rule out (11a) by the CED, what moves in (11b) should be smaller
than vP. Then, let us assume what moves to the sentence-initial position is VP.
This assumption, however, contradicts with what has been observed on
VP-fronting. Huang (1993) observes that the matrix subject in (12b) cannot bindthe anaphor contained in a fronted predicate, unlike the case of wh-movement in(12a). (12c) indicates that the same pattern is observed in Chinese.
(12)

a.

Which picture of himself did John think Mary saw t?

b.

* Criticize himself, John thinks Mary would not t. (Huang 1993:107)c.

Piping ziji de pengyou, Zhangsan zhidao wo juedui
bu hui.
criticize self’s friendZknow I definitely not will
‘Criticize my/*his own friend, Zhangsan knows I definitely willnot.’
(Huang 1993:118)

Based on this observation, Huang (1993) proposes that what is fronted is vP,
which contains the trace of the embedded subject, and the trace blocks thebinding relation between the matrix subject and the anaphor.
Notice that if VP can also move in VP-fronting, Huang’s (1993)
explanation of the paradigm in (12) would be lost. On the other hand, if whatmoves to the sentence-initial position in (11) is vP, the sentence should begrammatical, because the CED no longer blocks movement of vP.

5

The second problem concerns with the extraction of subjects. As in(13a), ren ‘person’, which is the argument of the unaccusative verb si ‘die’ canstay in the object position.
(13)

a.

b.

c.

Si-le renle.
die-le1 person SFP‘Some one is dead.’(Based on Liu 2007:197)

Ren
si san-tian le.
person die three-day SFP‘The person has been dead for three days.’(Barry Yang, p.c.)[IP personi [AspP [vP die ti three-day] [Asp' le tvP]]

On the other hand, (13b) indicates that it can move to the subject position. Notethat in this example, the SFP le appears. This indicates (13b) has the structure in(13c), where the subject moves out of the moved vP. The fact that (13b) isgrammatical suggests that under the vP-movement analysis it should be assumed
that movement of subjects is exempt from the CED-violation. This assumption,
however, is clearly problematic because it is unclear why it should be the case.
3.2 A solution
To solve those problems of the vP-movement analysis, I propose the following
analysis, which I call the VP-movement analysis.
(14)

What moves to Spec, AspP is VP, not vP.

Under the VP-movement analysis, the example in (2a), repeated in (15a), is
derived in the following manner:
(15)

a.

Zhangsan mai shu le.
Zbuy book SFP‘Zhangsan has bought the book.’b.

[AspP le [vP Z. [VP buy book]]]c.

[AspP [VP buy book] [Asp' le [vP Z. tVP]]]d.

[IP Z.i [AspP [VP buy book] [Asp' le [vP ti tVP]]]](= (2a))At the point where Asp0, namely le, is introduced to the derivation as in (15b),
VP moves to Spec, AspP, as in (15c).5 Then, in (15d), the subject moves to Spec,

5 I assume the following definition of the Phase Impenetrability Condition (cf. Chomsky 2001:14).

6

IP. Notice that the VP-movement analysis immediately solves the second
problem of the vP-movement analysis. Since subjects are located outside of theVP (or, can be moved to that position in the case of unaccusatives/passives), VPmovement to Spec, AspP does not block movement of subjects to Spec, IP.
Let us now turn to the first problem. Under the proposed analysis, theexample (4d), repeated in (16a), has the derivation illustrated in (16b)-(16c).
(16)

a.

* Youyongi, Zhangsan neng ei le.
(= (4d))
swim
Z
can
SFP
‘(Lit.) [As to] swimming, Zhangsan has become able to [do it].’b.

[AspP [VP swim ] [Asp' le [vP Z. tVP]]]c.

[IP Z.i [AspP [VP swim ] [Asp' le [vP ti tVP]]]]

Following Huang (1993), I assume that in VP-fronting, the only available option
is to move vP. Then, it is impossible to derive the surface order in (16a) from(16c) because vP contains only traces.
Then, how can the proposed analysis rule out the other ungrammaticalcases? First, let us consider the following schematic derivation.
(17)

a.

[AspP le [vP α v0 [VP … tα …]]]b.

[AspP [VP … tα …] [Asp' le [vP α v0 tVP]]]c.

[XP α [ … [AspP [VP … tα …] [Asp' le [vP t’α v0 tVP]]]]]

Suppose that α can make use of the edge of vP before VP moves, as illustrated in(17a). Then, even though the moved VP becomes a CED-island as in (17b), α
can move further, as shown in (17c). In other words, the CED no longer blocks
extraction from VP under the VP-movement analysis.
Now, I claim that Saito’s (2003) derivational PBC in (18) plays acrucial role.
(18)

(i)

a.

α is subject to Merge only if α is a complete constituent.

b.

α is a complete constituent =df (i) α is a term, and (ii) if a position
within α is a member of a chain γ, then every position of γ iscontained within α.
(Saito 2003:507-508)

The domain of a strong phase HP is not accessible to operations at the next higher strong
phase ZP; only H and its edge are accessible to such operations.

Since Asp0 is not a strong phase, it can attract VP, which is located in the domain of vP.

7

Put simply, the derivational PBC forbids to Merge/Move a constituent whichcontains only a subpart of a chain. Hence, the step in (17b), where the moved VP
contains only the trace of α, violates this condition. The cases of covert whmovement in (6b), repeated in (19a) has the derivation in (19b)-(19c).
(19)

a.

b.
c.

* Zhangsan zenmeyang xiu
che le?
Zhowrepair car SFP‘How did Zhangsan repair the car?’[vP(= (6b))… [VP … how …]]* [AspP [VP … how …] [Asp' le [vP… tVP]]]As in (19b), the wh-adverbial covertly moves to the edge of vP. 6 Then, thederivational PBC blocks movement of VP in (19c), hence the derivation crashes.
The case of topicalization of wh-elements in (9b), repeated in (20a), is
ruled out in the same manner.
(20)

a.

b.
c.

* Shenme dongxii, Zhangsan fang ei zai chuang-dixia le?
(= (9b))
what
thing
Z
put
at bed-under SFP‘(Lit.) What things, Zhangsan has put [them] under the bed?’[vP what thingi … [VP … ti …]]* [AspP [VP … ti …] [Asp' le [vP what thingi … tVP]]]

Summarizing so far, it was shown that the VP-movement analysis cansolve the problems of the vP-movement analysis in a compatible way with
Huang’s (1993) proposal that what moves in VP-fronting is vP and Lin’s (2006)
idea that AspP is also head-initial. Then, it was argued that the otherungrammatical cases are ruled out by the derivational PBC.
One might claim that the derivational PBC wrongly rules out sentenceswith unaccusative verbs like (13b), where the fronted VP contains the trace ofthe deep object. Saito (2003), however, assumes that A-movement does notleave a trace (Lasnik 1999), so that the trace of A-movement does not induce the
PBC-effect. Then, the grammaticality of (13b) follows.
Besides, the proposed analysis further solves one potential problem of
the vP-movement analysis. Under the vP-movement analysis, what rules out
covert wh-movement is the CED. Originally, however, the CED is a constraint
on overt syntax (Huang 1982, Lasnik & Saito 1992), and recent studies try to
reduce it to some mechanism of linearization (see Uriagereka 1999, Nunes &Uriagereka 2000, among others). Then, it becomes unclear how the CED canconstraint covert movement. On the other hand, the derivational PBC, which
6 Following Nissenbaum (2000) and Chomsky (2004), I assume the model where overt and covert
operations succeed each other. I will indicate covertly moved elements as
exposition.

8

for ease of

plays a crucial role under the proposed analysis, is a constraint on derivation.
Hence, it is natural to expect that it interacts with covert operations.7
4. Consequences
This section shows that the proposed analysis provides an argument for thederivational PBC in two respects: (i) the PBC should be considered as aconstraint on derivation, and (ii) it is necessary as an independent condition.
4.1 The PBC as a constraint on derivation
Saito (2003) proposes that the PBC should be considered as a constraint onderivation, rather than a LF-condition, based on the paradigm in (21).
(21)

a.

[TP Taro-ga [CP Hanako-ga [PP Sooru-ni] iru to] omotteiru].
T. -nom H.
-nom Seoul-in be that think‘Taro thinks that Hanako lives in Seoul.’b.

[TP [PP Sooru-ni]i Taro-ga [CP Hanako-ga ti iru to] omotteiru].
‘(Lit.) [In Seoul]i, Taro thinks that Hanako lives ti.’c.

[TP [CP Hanako-ga [PP Sooru-ni] iru to]i Taro-ga ti omotteiru].
‘(Lit.) [That Hanako lives in Seoul]i, Taro thinks ti.’d.

* [TP [CP Hanako-ga ti iru to]j [PP Sooru-ni]i Taro-ga tj omotteiru].
‘(Lit.) [That Hanako lives ti]j [in Seoul]i, Taro thinks tj.’(21b) and (21c) are derived from (21a) by scrambling of PP and CP, respectively.
Although both operations are possible, it is impossible to scramble the PP out of
the CP first, and then to scramble the remnant CP, as in (21d).
Saito’s (2003) point is that given the radical reconstruction property ofscrambling (Saito 1989), the LF-representation of (21d) is equivalent to that of(21a). Then, if the PBC would apply to the output of derivation, that is, the LFrepresentation of (21d), it is predicted that (21d) is grammatical, contrary to fact.
Then, Saito (2003) argues that the PBC should apply derivationally. That is,(21d) is ungrammatical because the derivational PBC prohibits scrambling of CP,
which contains only the trace of PP.
Now, let us reconsider the Chinese cases. (22a) is the step where theremnant VP, which contains only the tail of the wh-adverbial chain, is fronted toSpec, AspP. Suppose that the derivation proceeds to the step where the whadverbial (covertly) moves from the edge of vP to Spec, CP, as in (22b).
(22)

a.

[AspP [VP … twh …] [Asp' le [vP wh … tVP …]]]

(cf. (19c))b.

[CP wh …[ …[AspP [VP … twh …] [Asp' le [vP t’wh … tVP …]]]]]

7 In fact, Saito (2006, 2007) suggests that the derivational PBC is also operative in covert Merge.

9Notice that in the representation in (22b), all the traces can be bound by the whphrase in Spec, CP. Hence, if the derivational PBC would apply at LF, it iswrongly predicted that the example is grammatical. On the other hand, thederivational PBC rules out the step in (22a). Therefore, the proposed analysis
supports the claim that the PBC should apply derivationally.
4.2 Beyond Müller’s generalization
Observing that remnant movement is possible in some circumstances, Müller
(1996) proposes the generalization in (23).
(23)

Remnant XPs cannot undergo a certain type of movement if theantecedent of the unbound trace has undergone the same type of
movement.
(Müller 1996:375)

Kitahara (1997) provides an explanation of this generalization in terms of the
Minimal Link Condition (Chomsky 1995). He also suggests that if scrambling is
also feature-driven, the paradigm in (21) can be explained in the same way.
Arguing that scrambling is not feature-driven, however, Saito (2003)
points out that there is one case where Müller-Kitahara’s theory cannot explain
whereas the derivational PBC can. (24) is the relevant paradigm.
(24)

a.

Hanako-ga Taro-ni [PRO Sooru-made iku koto]-o meizita.
H.
-nom T. -to
Seoul-togo N -acc ordered‘Hanako ordered Taro to go to Seoul.’b.

Hanako-ga [Sooru-made]i Taro-ni [PRO ti iku koto]-o meizita.
‘(Lit.) Hanako, [to Seoul]i, ordered Taro to go ti.’c.

[PRO Sooru-made iku koto]i-ga Taro-ni ti meizirareta.
Seoul-togo N -nom T. -toordered-was‘(Lit.) [To go to Seoul]i was ordered Taro ti.’d.

* [PRO ti iku koto]j-ga [Sooru-made]i Taro-ni tj meizirareta.
‘(Lit.) [To go ti]j, [to Seoul]i, was ordered Taro tj.’

As in (24b), PP can be scrambled out of the infinitival complement. Besides,
because of its nominal nature, the infinitival complement can be passived, as in(24c). The ungrammaticality of (24d) indicates that it is impossible to scramble
the PP prior to passivization of the complement. Notice that Müller-Kitahara’s
theory fails to explain the ungrammaticality of (24d), because the relevant
types/features are different. On the other hand, the derivational PBC correctly
rules out (24d) because the passive subject contains only the trace of the PP.
Returning to the Chinese cases in (6b) and (9b), it is obvious that therelevant features are different which are involved in the first movement to theedge of vP in (25a) and the second movement where VP moves to Spec, AspP in(25b).

10

(25)

a.
b.

[vP wh/topici … [VP … ti …]]* [AspP [VP … ti …] [Asp' le [vP wh/topic … tVP]]](cf. (19b)/(20b))(cf. (19c)/(20c))

The first movement is driven by [+wh]/[+topic], whereas the second one
involves [+dynamic] (Shen 2004, Lin 2006). Hence, whatever the precise
characterization of [+dynamic], Müller-Kitahara’s theory cannot rule out thestep in (25b). In contrast, the derivational PBC can rule out this step. In thisway, the proposed analysis provides further evidence for the derivational PBC.
5. Conclusion
In this paper, I pointed out that Lin’s (2006) vP-movement has some problems,
although the analysis is conceptually preferable in light of the hypothesis that
Chinese is strictly head-initial. Specifically, I pointed out that the analysis is notcompatible with Huang’s (1993) analysis of VP-fronting, and that it has tostipulate that movement of subjects are insensitive to the CED. To solve these
problems, I proposed that what moves to Spec, AspP is VP, and that Lin’s(2006) observations should be explained by Saito’s (2003) derivational PBC,
maintaining Lin’s (2006) general idea that the surface head-final order is derived
from the head-initial one. Then, I showed that the proposed analysis supports thederivational PBC in that it should be considered as a condition on derivation,and that it is necessary as an independent condition.
References
Cheng, Lisa and Rint Sybesma (1999). Bare and not-so-bare nouns and the structure of
NP. Linguistic Inquiry 30: 509-542.
Chomsky, Noam (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Chomsky, Noam (2001). Derivation by phase. In Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A
Life in Language, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, pp. 1-52.
Chomsky, Noam (2004). Beyond explanatory adequacy. In Adriana Belletti (ed.),
Structures and Beyond, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 104-131.
Hsieh, Feng-fan and Rint Sybesma (2007). On the linearization of Chinese sentence final
particles: Max Spell Out and why CP moves. Ms., MIT and Leiden University.
Huang, C.-T. James (1982). Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar.
Doctoral dissertation, MIT.
Huang, C.-T. James (1993). Reconstruction and the structure of VP: Some theoreticalconsequences. Linguistic Inquiry 24: 103-138.
Kayne, Richard (1994). The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Kitahara, Hisatsugu (1997). Elementary Operations and Optimal Derivations. Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT Press.
Lasnik, Howard (1999). Chains of arguments. In Samuel Epstein and Nobert Hornstein(eds.), Working Minimalism, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, pp. 189-215.
Lasnik, Howard and Mamoru Saito (1992). Move α. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Li, Y.-H. Audrey (1990). Order and Constituency in Mandarin Chinese, Dordrecht:
Kluwer.
Lin, T.-H. Jonah (2005). Does wh-in-situ license parasitic gaps? Linguistic Inquiry 36:
298-302.

11

Lin, T.-H. Jonah (2006). Complement-to-Specifier movement in Mandarin Chinese. Ms.,
National Tsing Hua University.
Liu, Feng-hsi (2007). Auxiliary selection in Chinese. In Raul Aranovich (ed.), Split
Auxiliary Systems: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective, Amsterdam: John
Benjamins, pp. 181-205.
Mulder, René and Rint Sybesma (1992). Chinese is a VO language. Natural Language
and Linguistic Theory 10: 439-476.
Müller, Gereon (1996). A constraint on remnant movement. Natural Language andLinguistic Theory 14: 355-407.
Nissenbaum, Jon (2000). Investigation of Covert Phrase Movement, Doctoral dissertation,
MIT.
Nunes, Jairo and Juan Uriagereka (2000). Cyclicity and extraction domains. Syntax 3: 2043.
Reinhart, Tanya (1998). Wh-in-situ in the framework of the Minimalist Program. Natural
Language Semantics 6: 29-56.
Saito, Mamoru (1989). Scrambling as semantically vacuous A’-movement. In Mark Baltin
and Anthony Kroch (eds.), Alternative Conceptions of Phrase Structure,
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 182-200.
Saito, Mamoru (2003). A derivational approach to the interpretation of scrambling chains.
Lingua 113: 481-518.
Saito, Mamoru (2006). Expletive replacement reconsidered: Evidence from expletive
verbs in Japanese. In Patrick Brandt and Eric Fuss (eds.), Form, Structure, andGrammar: A Festschrift Presented to Günter Grewendorf on Occasion of His
60th Birthday, Berlin: Akademie Verlag, pp. 255-273.
Saito, Mamoru (2007). PBC as a condition on overt and covert Merge. Paper presented at
the First Cambridge-Nanzan Syntax Workshop, University of Cambridge.
Saito, Mamoru, T.-H. Jonah Lin, and Keiko Murasugi (2006). N’-ellipsis and the structureof noun phrases in Chinese and Japanese. Paper presented at International
Conference on East Asian Linguistics, University of Toronto.
Shen, Li (2004). Aspect agreement and light verb in Chinese: A comparison withJapanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 13: 141-179.
Simpson, Andrew (2005). Classifiers and DP structure in southeast Asia. In Guglielmo
Cinque and Richard Kayne (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative
Syntax, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 806-838.
Simpson, Andrew and Zoe Wu (2002). IP-raising, tone sandhi and the creation of S-final
particles: Evidence for cyclic Spell-out. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 11:
67-99.
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan (1994). On Economizing the Theory of A-bar Dependency, Doctoral
dissertation, MIT.
Uriagereka, Juan (1999). Multiple Spell-out. In Samuel Epstein and Nobert Hornstein(eds.), Working Minimalism, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, pp. 251-282.

Graduate School of Humanities
Nanzan University
18 Yamazato-cho Showa-ku
Nagoya, 466-8673
JAPAN
k-takita4strings@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp12