ON MORPHOLOGICAL MERGER:TOWARD AN EXPLANATION OF VERBAL AGGLUTINATIONIN JAPANESE AND KOREAN*
Hiroshi Aoyagi
Nanzan University

1.

Introduction

Verbal morphology has been one of the central issues in syntax and morphology since
the dawn of generative grammar. In recent terms, in languages where overt movement of V to
T is available, it straightforwardly results in an amalgamation of V and T. For instance, in
French, an VO language, the correct constituent order is as in (1)a, but not (1)b. This fact istaken for evidence that this language has overt movement of V to T across negation, whichintervenes between the two heads, as indicated in (2) (Pollock 1989, Chomsky 1995: chap. 2).
(1) a. Jean (n')embrasse pas Marie.
Johnkissesnot Mary'John does not kiss Mary.'b. *Jean (ne) pas embrasse Marie.
Johnnot kisses
Mary(2) [TP Jean [T -past, 3SM] pas [VP embrasse Marie]]
raising of V to T
Agreeing with Jean in φ-features under Spec-head agreement, T has 3SM features, and the
V+T complex formed in the overt syntax is correctly spelled out as embrasse'kiss.non-past.3SM' (<embrasser 'to kiss').
Unlike French, English does not have overt movement of V to T, as indicated in (3).
(3) a. *John not kisses Mary.
*The materials included in this article have been presented at ISOKL 2005 at Harvard University,
Cambridge, MA, USA, SICOGG 7 at Konkuk University, Seoul, Korea, andCambridge-Hyderabad-Nanzan Joint Seminar on Lexical and Functional Categories at Nanzan
University, Nagoya, Japan. I would like to thank the participants at these meetings. Especially, I havebenefited from discussions with and questions from Yasuaki Abe, Hee-Don Ahn, Duk-Ho An, Dae-Ho
Chung, Susumu Kuno, Chungmin Lee, Ian Roberts, Mamoru Saito, Peter Sells, Yuji Takano, andSaeko Urushibara. However, all remaining shortcomings are my own. The on-going research part ofwhich is presented here has been aided with the Pache Research Grant I-A-1 from Nanzan University.

-1-

Nanzan Linguistics 3: Research Results and Activities 2005

b. *John kisses not Mary.
c. John does not kiss Mary.
In English, neither the inflected main verb nor negation can precede the other. Instead, theuninflected main verb remains in situ and inflection is realized by the dummy verb do. In
contrast, do-support is not triggered when the non-emphatic T is adjacent to the main verb, asshown in (4).
(4) a. John kisses Mary.
b. *John does kiss Mary.
As long as the target of do-support is T, T and the main verb are string adjacent to each otherin (4). Hence, do-support should not be triggered in this case. Instead, the 3S features of T
must be realized on the main verb.
These facts, among others, motivated Bobaljik (1995) and Lasnik (1995) to propose that
T and the main verb in English are amalgamated by morphological merger in PF, as indicatedin (5)a. Since this process requires string adjacency between the two heads to be combined, it
does not apply if negation intervenes as in (5)b.1 2(5) a. [TP John [T -past, 3S] [VP kiss Mary]]√b. [TP John [T -past, 3S] not [VP kiss Mary]]In the case of (5)b, where T[+finite] is stranded, do-support is employed to rescue it, bringing
about (3)c. In this respect, it is rather obvious that morphological merger of T with V is arecapitulation of Affix Hopping proposed by Chomsky (1957, 1965).3
In VO languages like French and English, the relative order between V and negation
constitutes direct evidence for the presence or absence of movement of V to T. On the other
hand, in OV languages like Japanese and Korean, direct evidence is scarce due to their strictly
head-final nature. It is a priori not clear whether the inflected verb [V+T] in languages like
Japanese and Korean is yielded as the result of head movement in the overt syntax as shownin (6)a, or the syntactic tree remains intact until Spell-Out as shown in (6)b. In the latter view,the fact of verbal inflection should be accounted for by a PF-process such as "morphological

1

Morphological merger, as envisaged in the text, was proposed much earlier by Marantz (1984). See
also Marantz (1989) for relevant arguments.

2

In terms of Distributed Morphology proposed by Halle and Marantz (1993), both head movement in
French and morphological merger in English feed fusion of V+T into a single node, to which a lexical
item (i.e. inflected verb) is inserted by Vocabulary Insertion (VI) at PF.

3

See Lasnik (1995) for relevant discussions.

-2-On Morphological Merger (Hiroshi Aoyagi)

merger" to be discussed in detail below.
(6) a.
VP
adjunct
VP
object

T'

b.
T

T'
VP

V T

adjunct
VP
objecttV

T
V

Because the phonological component (=direct predecessor of PF) in the Standard Theory ofChomsky (1965) was only interpretive, it used to be a common exercise to take the simple
fact of agglutination of verb stems and inflectional elements for an indication of a syntactic
operation.4
However, the accumulation of studies on verbal morphology for the past decade or sopoints at the opposite direction. Yoon (1994) makes a type-categorial argument against
V-raising in the overt syntax in Korean. Mainly based on scope facts, Sakai (1998, 2001)
argues against V-raising in Japanese. Drawing on the nature of functional categories and factsof suppletion in Japanese, Aoyagi (2001, 2006b) argues against head raising of any type inthat language. Furthermore, Takano (2005) claims that V-raising is impermissible in OV
languages in general.5 If these authors are on the right track, verbal inflection in Japanese andKorean should be explained away without recourse to overt movement of V to T. The mostpromising candidate seems to be "morphological merger," as suggested by these authors.6
It has been widely held under the minimalist approach advocated by Chomsky (1995)
that while hierarchical configuration is a relavant notion during the derivation from
Numeration to LF, linear order is defined in PF. Consequently, it has been assumed by many
authors (e.g. Marantz 1989, Halle and Marantz 1993, Takano 1996, Fukui and Takano 1998,
Aoyagi 1998b, 2006b, among many others) that configurational structure is preserved until
terminal nodes are linearly aligned in Morphology in the derivation toward PF, as shown
below.7
4

It is still the case that many authors simply assume V-raising in Japanese and Korean. As far as I
know, Koizumi (1995, 2000) is the only exception in that he argues for the presence of V-raising inJapanese on independent grounds. For relevant discussions, see Aoyagi (2006b) and the references
cited therein. Also see Inoue (1976) and Kuroda (1978) for classical assumptions and arguments forpredicate raising.

5

Indeed Takano (2005) makes even a stronger claim that V-raising is not allowed either in the overt
syntax or in PF in head-final languages like Japanese and Turkish.

6

Yoon (1994) is an exception in that he characterizes inflectional elements in Korean as "phrasal
affixes."

7

There are several proposals in this vein. Marantz (1989) and Halle and Marantz (1993) propose an
independent level of representation, Morphological Structure, where morphemes are aligned (bymerger, fusion and fission) and vocabulary insertion takes place. Chomsky (1995) suggests that
Kayne's (1994) Linear Correspondence Axiom applies in PF. Furthermore, Takano (1996) and Fukui
and Takano (1998) propose a linearization convention, by which phrase structure is dissembled byDemerge, and dissembled constituents are aligned by Concatenate. See these references for details.

-3-

Nanzan Linguistics 3: Research Results and Activities 2005

(7) Numeration

Spell-Out
overt syntax

LF

covert syntax
Morphology ←linear alignment of terminal nodes

PF
Under this view, "morphological merger" is only a cover term because its theoreticalimplementation depends on the range of possible operations in Morphology as envisaged in(7). Two immediate candidates are head raising and head lowering, as indicated in (8)a, b,
respectively (linear order irrelevant).
(8) a.

YP
X+Y

b.
XP

tX

YP
XP

tY
...

X+Y

...

In either case, Y is a head that is immediately higher than another head X. In (8)a, X raises to
Y in Morphology. In (8)b, on the other hand, Y lowers to X in Morphology. Embick andNoyer (2001) claim that while verbal inflection in French is the result of head raising in theovert syntax, that in English is the result of head lowering in PF. For Embick and Noyer,
lowering of T to V is prohibited by an intervening head, not in the case of (5)b. Thus, in theirterms, the adjacency requirement on morphological merger is attributed to the PF analogue ofthe Head Movement Constraint (HMC) (Baker 1988).
In this article, we will make an empirical argument that the raising and lowering options
should both be allowed in PF. Simply put, while Korean takes the raising option, Japaneseemploys the lowering option. However, we will claim that "lowering" is not the result of
lowering per se as indicated in (8)b, but its effect comes from the morphological nature offunctional categories in Japanese together with a linearization algorithm in PF to be
explicated below.
The organization of this article is as follows. Section 2 presents key features of thepredicate-contrastive construction (PCC), in which the predicate is contrastively topicalized
by the particles -wa and -nun in Japanese and Korean, respectively. The most significant
asymmetry between the two languages is that while Korean allows reduplication of V and T in
the PCC, Japanese does not. To account for this asymmetry in a principled way, we will lay
out a theoretical groundwork in section 3. In section 4, we will claim that both of the twomodes of "morphological merger," as suggested above, are indeed possible. While Korean
opts for head raising, Japanese opts for "lowering." However, head raising in PF forms a chain,but "lowering" does not. Due to the lack of head chains and the "extended" use of su-support,
Japanese allows only one of the types of PCCs that are possible in Korean. Before closing thissection, we will make regression to the noted presence and absence of do-support in English-4-

On Morphological Merger (Hiroshi Aoyagi)

and French negative sentences. In section 5, we will draw independent evidence for ouranalysis from two distinct suppletive processes in Japanese and Korean. Finally, section 6
concludes this article.
2.

Predicate-contrastive constructions in Japanese and Korean

It is well known that simple declarative sentences in Japanese and Korean exhibit
complete symmetry as in (9) modulo the lack of an overt declarative ending (in C) in
Japanese.8(9) a. Mary-ga sushi-o tabe-ta -ø
Mary-nom sushi-acc eat -pst-ø

(Japanese)‘Mary ate sushi.’b. Mary-ka chopap-ul mek-ess-ta
Mary-nom sushi -acc eat -pst -decl(Korean)However, the two languages diverge in predicate-contrastive constructions (PCC). 9 In
predicate-contrastive constructions, the topic particle, -wa in Japanese and -nun in Korean,
separates the verb stem from the sentence-final chunk of inflectional elements. To put aside
the presence of the post-verbal -ki in Korean10 and its absence in Japanese, while Korean
allows either the reduplicated lexical verb or the dummy verb ha 'do' with the sentence-final
inflectional elements, Japanese only allows the dummy verb su 'do,' as shown in (10) and (11).
We will henceforth call the PCC with su or ha as in (10) the dummy contrastive construction(DCC) and the construction with a reduplicated verb as in (11) the reduplicated contrastive
construction (RCC).

(10) a. Mary-ga sushi-o tabe-wa
eat -top

si -tado-pst(J: DCC)8

As discussed by Aoyagi (2006b), the distribution of the suppletive copular da indicates the existenceof an empty C in Japanese declarative sentences like (9)a (also see Nishiyama 1998). Or it might be
the case that after adjunction of T to C takes place, one of the tense markers, -ru 'NON-PAST' or -ta'PAST,' is inserted to the fused node by Vocabulary Insertion in the sense of Halle and Marantz (1993).

9

Earlier (e.g. in Aoyagi 2006a) I referred to these constructions as predicate focus constructions.
However, C.-M. Lee (2002) maintains that the non-thematic use of -nun in Korean and -wa inJapanese induces contrastive topic, distinct from sheer focus.Hence, I will use a more neutral term
predicate-contrastive in the text, following Cho, Kim and Sells (2004).

10

In the literature, -ki is often assumed to be a complementizer or a nominalizer without muchdiscussion. Although a close examination of the nature of -ki is beyond the scope of this article, we
assume with Kang (1988) and Jo (2004a, b) that -ki is inserted in order to "morphologically close"
verb and tense stems. Unlike the Japanese counterparts, verb and tense stems are [+bound] on theirright (see Aoyagi 2006a for relevant discussions).

-5-

Nanzan Linguistics 3: Research Results and Activities 2005‘(What happened was that) Mary ate sushi (, but ...)’
b. Mary-ka

chopap-ul mek-ki-nun ha-ess-ta
eat -ki-top do-pst-decl(11) a. *Mary-ga sushi-o tabe-wa

tabe -taeat -pst(K: DCC)(J: RCC)‘(What happened was that) Mary ate sushi (, but ...)’
b. Mary-ka

chopap-ul

mek-ki-nun mek-ess-ta
eat -ki-top eat -pst-decl(K: RCC)

The examples in (10) and (11) show that Japanese lacks the RCC.
Furthermore, as exhibited in (12) and (13), Korean allows the tense morpheme to be
reduplicated, but Japanese does not.
(12) a. *Mary-ga sushi-o tabe -ta -wa si -ta
eat -pst -top do -pst

(J: DCC)‘(What happened was that) Mary ate sushi (, but ...)’
b. Mary-ka

chopap-ul mek-ess-ki-nun ha-ess-ta
eat -pst-ki -top do-pst-decl(13) a.?*Mary-ga sushi-otabe -ta -wa si -ta
eat -pst -top do -pst

(K: DCC)(J: RCC)‘(What happened was that) Mary ate sushi (, but ...)’
b. Mary-ka

chopap-ul mek-ess-ki-nun mek-ess-ta
eat -pst-ki-top eat -pst -decl(K: RCC)

Since Japanese lacks the RCC, the ungrammaticality of (13)a is expected.11 However, even in
the DCC, Japanese does not allow tense to be reduplicated, as shown in (13)a.
The observations made above are summarized in (14)–(17).
(14) DCC w/o tense reduplication:a. Japanese:√ V-part do-tense
11

Some Japanese speakers accept RCCs like (13)a. I suspect that for those speakers, the abstract noun
koto ‘thing’ in the koto-wa construction, as exemplified in (i), can optionally be deleted.
(i)Mary-gasushi-otabe-ta -koto -wa
eat -pst-KOTO-top

tabe-taeat -pst

Tentatively, we consider that the koto-wa construction includes an adverbial clause of a sort. See
Aoyagi (2006a, note 1) for relevant discussions.

-6-On Morphological Merger (Hiroshi Aoyagi)

b. Korean:√ V-part do-tense(15) DCC w/ tense reduplication:a. Japanese:* V-tense-part do-tense
b. Korean:√ V-tense-part do-tense(16) RCC w/o tense reduplication:a. Japanese:* V-part V-tense
b. Korean:√ V-part V-tense(17) RCC w/ tense reduplication:a. Japanese:* V-tense-part V-tense
b. Korean:√ V-tense-part V-tense
While Japanese allows only the DCC without reduplicated tense, Korean allows all the four
patterns.
Recently, the PCC has drawn much attention in the literature (e.g. Nishiyama and Cho
1998, Choi 2003, Cho, Kim and Sells 2004, Jo 2004a, b). However, except for Nishiyama andCho (1998), none of the existing analyses can readily account for the differences in these
constructions between Japanese and Korean. In what follows, we will claim that the noted
asymmetry automatically follows if verbal agglutination in Korean is the result of V-raising in
PF, whereas that in Japanese results from "lowering" in PF.
3.

Theoretical groundwork

3.1. Phrase structure of Japanese and Korean
We will assume that transitive clauses in Japanese and Korean as in (9) take the phrase
structure in (18) at Spell-Out; however, surface positions of arguments are immaterial to thecurrent discussion, and the constituent order is yet to be determined.12
(18)

CP
TP
vP
DP1
Mary VP
DP2sushi/chopap

3.2.

v'
V
tabe/mekT-ta/ess
v
-ø/ø

C
-ø/ta

Functional heads as bound morphemes

12

Furthermore, lexical items under terminal nodes might be inserted by Vocabulary Insertion in PF in
the sense of Halle and Marantz (1993).

-7-

Nanzan Linguistics 3: Research Results and Activities 2005

On the observational level, it is obvious that the fact of verbal agglutination in Japaneseand Korean results from the general morphological nature of their functional elements. The
functional elements in these languages are bound morphemes that need a stem or host; inother words, they are morphologically specified as [+bound]. If a particle intervenes, stranded
functional elements result in sheer ungrammaticality, as shown in (19) and (20) below.
(19) a. tabe-ta
eat -pastb. *tabe-wa ø-ta
eat -top -past(20) a. mek-ess -ta
eat -past-decl
b. *mek-ki -nun ø-ess -ta
eat -KI-top-past-decl
c. *mek-ess -ki -nun ø-ta
eat -past-KI-top-decl
Since the tense morphemes in Japanese and Korean and the declarative ending in Korean arebound morphemes, they need an appropriate host to hold on to. However, due to theintervention of -wa or -nun, the tense morphemes in (19)b and (20)b and the declarative
ending in (20)c are stranded; hence, sheer ungrammaticality results.
3.3.

Morphological selection

Following Lieber (1992), we will assume that functional heads as affixes in Japanese andKorean morphologically select for a particular stem or host. Namely, C selects for T, T selects
for v, and v selects for V, as summarized on table (21).
(21)
functional affixes in J functional affixes in K categories selectional features-ø (decl. mood)-taC+[ T ]-ta (past tense)-essT+[ v ]-ø (light verb)-øv+[ V ]
3.4. Particles as cross-categorial clitic-like adjuncts
Adopting intuitions of many authors (Cho and Sells 1995, Sells 1995, among others),
Aoyagi (1998a, b, 2006b) propose that topic/focus-inducing particles like -wa 'top", -mo 'also',
and -sae 'even' in Japanese are cross-categorial clitic-like adjuncts, and Aoyagi (2006a)
extends this analysis to the Korean counterparts -nun, -to, and -cocha. They arecross-categorial, in the sense that they can be attached to virtually any category, as
exemplified in (22)–(26).
(22) a. Mary-ga [DP sushi]-wa /mo /sae tabe-ta
(DP)
-nom
sushi -top/also/even eat -pst

-8-

On Morphological Merger (Hiroshi Aoyagi)‘Mary ate at least/also/even SUSHI.’
b. Mary-ka [DP chopap]-un /to /cocha mek-ess-ta-nomsushi -top/also/even eat -pst -decl(23) a. daihyoosya -ga [PP New York-kara]-wa/mo /sae
representatives-nom-from -top/also/even

ki -tacome-pst(PP)‘Representatives came at least/also/even FROM NEW YORK.’
b. dayphyoca-ka [PP New York-eyse]-nun/to /cocha wa -ss -ta
representatives-nom-from -top/also/even come-pst-decl(24) a. Mary-ga [VP hon -o yomi]-wa/mo /sae si -ta-nom
book-acc read -top/also/even do-pst(VP)‘Mary at least/also/even READ A BOOK.’
b. Mary-ka [VP chayk-ul ilk -ki]-nun/to /cocha ha-ess-ta-nombook -acc read-KI -top/ also/even do-pst -decl(25) a. shachoo -ga [AP shain -o isogasi-ku]-wa/mo /sae si -ta
president-nom workers-acc busy -KU -top/also/even do-pst(AP)‘The president at least/also/even made HIS WORKERS BUSY.’b. sacang -i [AP cikwen -ul pappu-key]-nun/to /cocha ha-ess-ta
president-nom workers-acc busy -KEY -top/ also/even do-pst-decl(26) a. John-ga [CP Mary-ga sin -da to] -wa/ mo /sae
iw -ta-nom-nom die-pst -comp-top/also/even say-pst(CP)‘John at least/also/even said THAT MARY DIED.’
b. John-i [CP Mary-ka cwuk-ess-ta ko] -nun/to /cocha malha-ess-ta-nom-nom die -pst -decl-comp-top/also/even say -pst -decl
More importantly, they are adjuncts since they have nothing to do with selection, as clearly
illustrated by Sells (1995). Finally, they are clitic-like elements like other functional elementsin the two languages, in the sense that they need a morphophonological host.
Drawing on these facts, Aoyagi (1998a, b, 2006a, b) concludes that particles like -wa and-nun are non-projecting heads that can be adjoined to any category in syntax, as shown in(27)a, and they must be attached to the head of that category in Morphology in the PF-side ofthe derivation, as represented in (27)a.13
13

What distinguishes clitic-like particles such as -wa/nun from functional affixes is their lack of-9-

Nanzan Linguistics 3: Research Results and Activities 2005(27) a. Overt syntax

b. Morphology
XPXP

Y0/max-wa/mo... -nun/to...

... X0+Y0 ...

Under the proposed view of particles like -wa/nun in Japanese and Korean, nothing seems toprohibit them from adjoining to VP, vP and TP, as shown in (28).14(28)

CPTP -part3 C
vP -part2 T -ø/ta
DP1
v' -ta/ess
Mary VP -part1 v
DP2
V -ø/ø
sushi/chopap tabe/mek

4.

The proposals

4.1.

Agglutination in Japanese and Korean

Given the two imaginable modes of "morphological merger" suggested in section 1
above (see (8)), the following two representations of a complex head will be possible for
languages like Japanese and Korean.
(29) a. head raisingb. head lowering
CP

TP
vP
VP
...

tv
tV

CP
C

tT T C
v T
V v

TP
tT

vP
VP
...

tC

tv
V

V

v
T

v
T

C

As long as the linear order of terminal nodes is concerned, either the raising option in (29)a or
the lowering option in (29)b leads to the same result, i.e., V+v+T+C, as indicated in (30).
(30) a. V + v + T + C(tabe + ø + ta + ø →tabe-ta)(Japanese)

categorial selection for their hosts. See Aoyagi (1998b: chap. 2) for relevant discussions.
14

The reason that a particle like -wa/nun is prohibited from being adjoined to the root CP is because it
mediates a Subject-Predicate relation in the sense of Kuroda (1992: chap. 2).

- 10 -

On Morphological Merger (Hiroshi Aoyagi)b. V + v + T + C(mek + ø + ess + ta →mek-ess-ta)(Korean)Thus, the fact of verbal morphology in simple declarative sentences in Japanese and Korean
can be accounted for by either option. Note that the direction of adjunction as the result ofeither head raising or lowering is basically free. However, the order in (30)a, b is virtually the
only permissible one, due to the morphological selectional properties to the effect that each of
the functional elements in Japanese and Korean must be suffixed to a host of a specificcategory (see table (21) above).
4.2.

Head raising in PF in Korean

We propose that verbal morphology in Korean is the result of head raising in PF, as
indicated in (29)a. Thus, the fully inflected verb mek-ess-ta 'eat-past-decl' obtains as shown in
(31).
(31)

CP
TP
vP
VP
...

tv
tV

C
C
tT T
v T
V v
mek -ø-ess-ta

Following Chomsky's (1995) copy theory of movement, we assume that traces are copies, but
departing from Chomsky, we will assume with Nunes (2004) that successive cyclic head
movement in (31) forms an extended chain that consists of four links (i.e. tV, tv, tT, and C).
Furthermore, we assume that a general principle as in (32) governs the pronunciation of chain
links.
(32) The Chain Minimization Principle
Other things being equal, all chain links except the highest one are deleted to minimize
the existing features.
However, the principle in (32) does not prevent non-head links from being put topronunciation by certain morphological requirements. As shown below, the RCC in Korean
provides a case where more than one links in a chain are pronounced.
4.3.
4.3.1.

The PCC in Korean
When -nun adjoined to VPFirst, let us consider the case where -nun is adjoined to VP, the PF derivation provides
the representation in (33). Note that since -nun is an adjunct by hypothesis (see section 3.4
above), it does not block raising. Hence, successive cyclic head raising forms a four-member
chain in the sense suggested above.
(33)
CP- 11 -

Nanzan Linguistics 3: Research Results and Activities 2005

TP
VP
...

vP
-nun1
V
(mek)

C
T

v

v

T
T

v

C
T

V v V v
V* v
(mek -ø) (mek -ø -ess) mek -ø -ess -ta

When a chain is formed, only the highest link is usually pronounced, as stated in (32). In thecase of (33), however, since -nun requires a host (see (27)b above), the lowest link mek must
be pronounced. Hence, (34)b (=the RCC in (11)b) results. According to Nunes (2004), incases like (33), the PF computation may well delete V* under identity with the underlined V,
which is forced to be pronounced, for the purpose of minimization of the existing features. If
it happens, the light verb contained in the highest link will lose its host, resulting in an
ungrammatical surface string in (34)c. However, in such a case, Korean has a rescue operation,
ha-support. If ha-support is employed after the deletion of V*, the grammatical string in (34)d,that is, the DCC in (10)b, obtains.
(34) a. *...

-nun mek-ø-ess -ta-top eat -ø-past-decl

b. √... mek-ki-nun mek-ø-ess -ta
eat -KI-top eat -ø-past-decl
c. *... mek-ki -nuneat -KI-top(RCC in (11)b)-ø-ess -ta(V* deleted under identity with the-ø -past-decl
pronounced link (V); v's morphologicalselection not satisfied)d. √... mek-ki-nun ha-ø-ess -ta
eat -KI-top do-ø -past-decl
4.3.2.

(-nun having no host to cliticize to)(DCC in (10)b; ha-support)

When -nun adjoined to vP

When -nun is adjoined to vP, the PF derivation provides the representation in (35), where
almost the same thing happens as in (33), due to the null phonetic content of the light verb.
(35)

CP
TP
vP
VP
...

V
(mek)

C

T
T
C
-nun2
v
v
T
v* T
V v V vVv(mek -ø) (mek -ø -ess) mek -ø-ess -ta

In (35), what -nun forces to be pronounced is the underlined light verb v. In thestraightforward case, (36)b (=the RCC in (11)b) results. If the starred light verb v* containedin the highest link is deleted under identity with the underlined v, the same rescue operation,
ha-support, comes in to rescue the stranded T, yielding (36)d (=the DCC in (10)b).

- 12 -

On Morphological Merger (Hiroshi Aoyagi)(36) a. *...

-nun mek-ø-ess -ta-top eat -ø-past-decl(-nun having no host to cliticize to)b. √... mek-ø-ki -nun mek-ø-ess -ta(RCC in (11)b)
eat -ø-KI-top eat -ø-past-decl
c. *... mek-ø-ki-nun
eat -ø-KI-top-ess -ta-past-decl(v* deleted under identity with (v); T'smorphological selection not satisfied)d. √... mek-ø-ki-nun ha-ø-ess -ta
eat -ø-KI-top do-ø-past-decl
4.3.3.

(DCC in (10)b; ha-support)

When -nun adjoined to TP

Finally, when -nun is adjoined to TP, the representation in (37) is derived in PF.
(37)

CP
TP

-nun3
C
+
vP
T
T
C
VP
v
v
T
v* T
...
V
V
v V v
V
v
(mek)
(mek -ø) (mek -ø -ess) mek -ø-ess -ta
In (37), the underlined T is forced to be pronounced by the presence of -nun. If nothing else
happens, (38)b (=the RCC in (13)b) obtains.
(38) a. *...

-nun mek-ø-ess -ta-top eat -ø-past-decl(-nun having no host to cliticize to)b. √... mek-ø-ess -ki -nun mek-ø-ess -ta (RCC in (13)b)
eat -ø-past-KI-top eat -ø-past-decl
As noted above, the PF computation may well delete a certain constituent in the highest
link under identity with some other pronounced links. If deletion is allowed up to
recoverability, it should target and delete v*, instead of T+ which is adjoined to C. This isbecause the root C must generally be tensed in Korean, as indicated by the examples in (39).
(39) a. Mary-ka
chopap-ul mek-nun -ta-nom sushi -acc eat -pres-decl‘Mary eats sushi.’b. Mary-ka

chopap-ul

mek-ess -ta- 13 -

Nanzan Linguistics 3: Research Results and Activities 2005

-nom sushi -acc eat -past-decl‘Mary ate sushi.’c. *Mary-ka chopap-ul mek-ø-ta-nom sushi -acc eat -ø-decl
Either a present or a past tense morpheme is attached to the root C in (39)a, b, respectively,
but in (39)c, there is no tense morpheme, hence, ill-formed.15 Given this constraint ondeletion, it is expected that v* but not T+ can be deleted in (37). This is borne out.
(40) a. *... mek-ø-ess -ki-nun
eat -ø-past-KI-top-ess -ta(v* deleted up to recoverability; T's-past-decl morphological selection not satisfied)b. √... mek-ø-ess -ki -nun ha-ess -ta(DCC in (12)b; ha-support)
eat -ø-past-KI-top do-past-decl
After the deletion of v* in (37), T+ adjoined to C is stranded, as shown in (40)a, but it can besaved by ha-support, as indicated in (40)b.
However, rather surprisingly, the most straightforward application of deletion is also
possible, as exhibited in (41) below (Jo 2004a, b). Namely, T+ adjoined to C can be deleted
under strict identity with the underlined T in (37).
(41) a. * ...mek-ø-ess -ki -nuneat -ø-past-KI-top
b. √... mek-ø-ess -ki -nuneat -ø-past-KI-top

-ta
-decl
ha-ta
do-decl(T+ deleted under identity with T; C'smorphological selection not satisfied)(DCC; "extended" ha-support)

As noted by Jo (2004a, b), ha-support in Korean has an extended use that rescues the stranded
C as well. This is the source of the DCC with ha without tense in (41)b.16
Adopting Fukui's (1995) functional specification of categories (i.e. [±F(unctional),±L(exical)]) as well as the lexical categorial features [±N, ±V] widely held since Chomsky(1970), Aoyagi (2006b) proposes that the Japanese dummy verb su is specified as [+L, –N,
15

This applies to verbs only. The suffix for adjectives in the present (or non-past) is -ø in Korean.

16

However, many Korean speakers show preference of the use of a theme vowel -e/a as an informal
sentence-ending element over -ta, the formal sentence-ending particle. For those speakers, (i)b sounds
better than (i)a.
(i)a.(?)Mary-ka
chopap-ul mek-ess -ki -nun ha-ta.
-nom sushi -acc eat -past-KI-top do-FORMAL'(What happened was that) Mary ate sushi (, but ...)'
b. Mary-ka
chopap-ul mek-ess -ki -nun ha-e.
-nom sushi -acc eat -past-KI-top do-INFORMAL- 14 -

On Morphological Merger (Hiroshi Aoyagi)+V] being neutralized with respect to the [±F] feature, so that it may substitute either the mainverb V or the light verb v, where V, a pure lexical category, is specified as [–F, +L, –N, +V]
and v, a hybrid, as [+F, +L, –N, +V].17 Furthermore, Fukui suggests that T is a purefunctional category with verbal nature, being specified as [+F, –L, –N, +V]. If so, a naturalextension is to assume that the Korean dummy verb ha belongs to a further generalized verbal
category, [–N, +V], being underspecified with respect to [±L] as well as [±F]. The following
table provides the feature specification of the relevant functional categories in Japanese andKorean.
(42)Functional Specification+F, –L+F, +L–F, +L+Lnone

T in J and K
v in J and K
V in J and K
su in J
ha in K

Lexical Categorial Features–N, +V–N, +V–N, +V–N, +V–N, +VTo sum up this section, it has been shown that our PF head raising approach to Korean
verbal morphology provides a principled account of the four possible patterns of the PCC in(14)–(17). Furthermore, our approach can provide an account of the fifth pattern, exemplified
in (41)b, as a subtype of the DCC. This is possible because the Korean dummy verb ha ismade to rescue stranded C as well as T and v.
4.4.

Lowering as the result of Linearization

Recall that we are proposing that while Korean takes the raising option, Japanese takes
the lowering option in PF. However, lowering per se, as proposed by Embick and Noyer(2001), is not without problems. First of all, it is not entirely clear why traces in PF are
innocuous to the Proper Binding Condition (PBC) (Fiengo 1980, Saito 1989). If the inflectedverb from tabe-ta 'eat-past' is the result of successive cyclic head lowering as in (43), thetraces of C, T and v are left unbound.
(43)

CP
TP
tT

vP
VP
...

tC

tv
V

V

v
v

T

T C
tabe -ø -ta -ø
The treatment of so-called VP adverbs other than not in English poses another problem.
17

See Aoyagi (2006b: chap. 2) for relevant discussions.

- 15 -

Nanzan Linguistics 3: Research Results and Activities 2005

Compare the examples in (44) with our earlier examples in (3)a, c, reproduced as (45)a, b.
(44) a. John never/often/always kisses Mary.
b. *John does never/often/always kiss Mary.
(45) a. *John not kisses Mary.
b. John does not kiss Mary.
Unlike not, adverbs as in (44) do not trigger do-support. Noting this asymmetry, Embick andNoyer (2001) maintain that not is inherently a head, but other adverbs are maximal
projections on their own; hence, only the former is visible with respect to the HMC. However,on bare phrase theoretic terms, they are indistinguishable in that they are both X0 and Xmax
simultaneously, just like topic/focus particles in Japanese and Korean in our terms. If theadverbs in (44)a as maximal projections are invisible to lowering of a head, the same should
apply to not in (45)a, contrary to fact.
To circumvent the problems noted above, we will claim that the lowering effect obtains
as the result of Linearization in the sense of Takano (1996) and Fukui and Takano (1998).
Unlike Kayne (1994), these authors contend that the base constituent order is universally
specifier-complement-head, and languages are parametrized with respect to head movementin the overt syntax; V raises to (the domain of) T in French, to v in English, but it stays in situ
Japanese, etc. As an alternative to Kayne's Linear Correspondence Axiom (LCA), Fukui and
Takano propose Linearization, which consists of Demerge and Concatenate, as in (46).18(46) Linearization (Fukui and Takano 1998: 41)
Applied to Σ, Demerge yields {α, {Σ – α}}, α an Xmax constituent of Σ, and Concatenate
turns {α, {Σ – α}} into α + (Σ – α).
As we have assumed (see section 1 above), linear order is yet to be determined in early stagesof the PF-side of the derivation. Linearization in (46) is an algorithm that applies to anarbitrary syntactic object Σ and determines its constituent order. If Linearization applies to Σ =XP below, Demerge first strikes out XP, as indicated in (47)a, and then Concatenate let YP(=[Spec, XP]) precede the rest of XP (i.e. X') since the former is a maximal projection, as
shown in (47)b.
(47) a. Demerge
Σ = XP =Xmax
YP
X'
ZP
X

b. Concatenate
YP – X'

Linearization applies successive counter-cyclically, erasing the mother node and aligning its
daughters in a linear string. On the next stage, when Linearization applies to X' in (48)a, Xmax
at this point, Demerge erases X', and Concatenate let ZP precede X, as indicated in (48)b.
18

For some arguments against the application of the LCA to OV languages like Japanese, see Takano(1996) and Aoyagi (1998b).

- 16 -

On Morphological Merger (Hiroshi Aoyagi)(48) a. Demerge
Σ = X' =Xmax
ZP
X

b. Concatenate
ZP – XAs a result, the constituent order of XP is determined as YP – ZP – X. For Takano (1996) andFukui and Takano (1998), this is what happens in languages like Japanese.
Note that in terms of Takano (1996) and Fukui and Takano (1998), Linearization is notsensitive to the morphological nature of heads. For instance, X (=X0) in (48) may be either
free or bound. Now we will add one point to Linearization: the moment that a [+bound] headis detached from its mother node by Demerge, it must be adjoined to the immediately lower
head. If X in (48)a is [+bound], X is adjoined to the head of ZP as soon as Demerge applies toX', as shown below.
Σ = X'ZP
WP
Z+X[+bound](49)

We take this to be the way that the lowering version of "morphological merger" is exercised inlanguages like Japanese. Applied to the phrase structure in (18) from the topmost CP down to
vP, Linearization yields the complex head as in (50) (where the arguments are suppressed for
expository reasons).
(50)

CP
TP
vP
VP
...

V
V

v
v

T

T C
tabe -ø -ta -øNotice that the conceptual problem associated with unbound traces in Embick and Noyer's(2001) analysis does not arise in our approach because the lowering effect is only aby-product of Linearization.19
4.5. The PCC in Japanese
Based on the discussions above, we will account for the fact that Japanese allows only
the DCC among the variety of PCCs that are allowed in Korean in this section.
19

Naturally, Linearization should apply after head raising in PF in Korean. We will turn to this point
in section 4.6.

- 17 -

Nanzan Linguistics 3: Research Results and Activities 2005

4.5.1.

When -wa adjoined to VPFirst, we consider the case where -wa is adjoined to VP. Linearization applies successive
counter-cyclically, first to the topmost CP, and then to TP. Since C and T are both [+bound],each head must be adjoined to the immediately lower head as soon as it is detached byDemerge. The representation after Linearization applied to TP is like (51), where C isadjoined to T and T is adjoined to v.
(51)

CP
TP
vP
-wa1

VP
...

V
tabe

v
T

v
-ø

T
-ta

C
-ø

On the next cycle down, where Linearization applies to vP, v is detached by Demerge. Since v
is [+bound] by assumption, it must be adjoined to the immediately lower head -wa. Next,
when Linearization applies to the upper segment of VP, -wa is detached by Demerge. Since
this particle is also [+bound], it must instantly be adjoined to V.20 Eventually, the complex
head as in (52) will be formed.
(52)

V
V
tabe

-wa
-wa

v
v
-ø

T
T
-ta

C
-ø

Recall that each functional head in Japanese is morphologically subcategorized for aparticular stem (see table (21) above). In (52) the morphological requirements of C and T are
met. However, v is stranded from V due to the intervention of the particle -wa; hence, thelinear string in (53)a is impermissible. However, Japanese is equipped with a rescue operation,su-support, which is an analogue of ha-support in Korean. Su-support rescues the stranded v,
yielding (53)b, that is, the DCC in (10)a.
(53) a. *... tabe-wa-ø-ta -ø(v's morphological selection not satisfied)

20

Exactly speaking, the result of Demerge applied to the upper segment of VP is a set of syntactic
objects consisting of two maximal projections, the lower segment of VP (=Vmax) and -wa0/max. As
pointed out by Aoyagi (1998b) and Takano (2005), adjuncts in general are problematic to Fukui and
Takano's (1998) Linearization as well as Kayne's (1994) LCA. In this case, however, given that themorphological requirement of the particle (i.e. [+bound]) must be satisfied immediately, the general
problem associated with adjuncts does not arise.

- 18 -

On Morphological Merger (Hiroshi Aoyagi)

eat -topb. √... tabe-wa
eat -top
4.5.2-ø-past-ø
si -ø-ta -ø
do-ø-past-ø

(DCC in (10)a; su-support)

When -wa adjoined to vP

When -wa is adjoined to vP, Linearization applies in a similar way. The only difference isthe order of adjoined heads. In this case, the complex head in (54) is finally formed.
(54)

V
V
tabe

v
v
-ø

-wa
-wa

T
T
-ta

C
-ø

In (54) the morphological requirements of C and v are satisfied. However, T is stranded fromv by the presence of -wa, which will end in an impermissible string in (55)a.
(55) a. *... tabe-ø-wa
eat -ø-topb. √... tabe-ø-wa
eat -ø-top-ta -ø
-past-ø
si -ta -ø
do-past-ø(T's morphological selection not satisfied)(DCC in (10)a; su-support)

As argued by Aoyagi (1998b, 2006b), the Japanese dummy verb su is a generalized verb thatcan substitute either V or v (see table (42) above). Hence, su-support can be employed to savethe stranded T, which is subcategorized for v. The use of su-support yields the permissible
linear string in (55)b, which turns out to be the same as (53)b, since v is morphologically ø.
Hence, either (53)b or (55)b can be the source of the DCC in (10)a.
4.5.3

When -wa adjoined to TP

Theoretically speaking, adjunction of -wa to TP should be possible in Japanese as well. If-wa is adjoined to TP, successive counter-cyclic application of Linearization produces thecomplex head in (56).
(56)

V
V
tabe

v
v
-ø

T
T
-ta -wa-waC-ø

In (56) the morphological requirements of T and v are satisfied, but that of C is not, because it- 19 -

Nanzan Linguistics 3: Research Results and Activities 2005

is stranded from T by the presence of -wa, resulting in an impermissible string in (57)a.
(57) a. *... tabe-ø-ta -wa
eat -ø-past-top-ø-ø

(C's morphological selection not satisfied)b. *... tabe-ø-ta -wa
eat -ø-past-top

su -ø
do-ø

(No "extended" su-support)

Recall that in Korean, ha-support can rescue stranded C (as well as T and v) owing to its
underspecified feature composition (see table (42) above). However, unlike ha-support in
Korean, su-support in Japanese is not able to rescue stranded C. After all, adjunction of -wa to
TP, though theoretically possible, may not generate a permissible linear string.
To sum up sections 4.3 and 4.5, our proposal can make a principled account of all facts
observed in our earlier examples in (10)–(13). Specifically, the presence of RCC in Korean
and its absence in Japanese follows from our proposal that while Korean employs head raisingthat forms a non-trivial chain in PF, Japanese exhibits the effect of head lowering as the resultof Linearization. Furthermore, the possibility of adjoining a particle to TP in Korean and its
impossibility in Japanese need not be stipulated. It follows from different modes of verbal
agglutination and the presence and absence of the "extended" use of the dummy verb.
4.6

Head movement in PF and Linearization in Korean

We will return to the question as to how head raising in PF interacts with Linearization in
Korean. To begin with, let us consider simple declarative sentences. Naturally, head raisingtakes place before Linearization applies. Furthermore, due to the Chain Minimization
Principle in (32), all chain links except the highest one are deleted, as shown in (58).
(58)

CP
TP
vP
VP
...

tv
tV

C
C
tT T
v T
V v
mek -ø-ess-ta

Linearization applies to the structure in (58) from top to bottom in exactly the same way it
does in Japanese. First, Demerge erases the topmost CP, and then Concatenate let TP precedeC, as indicated in (59).
(59) a. Demerge

⇒
TP
...

CP

b. Concatenate
CtT

TP – C

Note that the complex C need not be adjoined to any host because the morphologicalrequirements of the functional affixes are all satisfied inside that complex. At ensuing cycles,- 20 -

On Morphological Merger (Hiroshi Aoyagi)

Linearization applies from TP down. Since (59)b entails that all constituents included in TP
precede the complex C, the strict head-finality of Korean is ensured.
Next, let us consider the case of PCCs where -nun is adjoined to vP, for instance, as
discussed in section 4.3.2. After head raising in PF, Linearization applies successive
counter-cyclically. First, Demerge erases the topmost CP in the same way that it does in (59)a,and then Concatenate let TP precede the complex C in the same way that it does in (59)b.
(60) a. Demerge ⇒ CP
TP
C
T C
vP
tT
vP
-nun
v T
VP
v
V v
...
tV V v(mek -ø)b. Concatenate
TP – Cmek -ø-ess-ta

Again, (60)b ensures that the verb stem together with a chunk of functional affixes will appear
sentence-finally. What makes (60) distinct from (58) is the presence of -nun adjoined to vP.
When Linearization applies to the upper segment of vP, -nun must be adjoined to the trace of v,
which is composed of V+v, as soon as Demerge erases that segment. Recall that the trace of v
must be put to pronunciation because -nun requires a non-silent host. On the next cycle,
Demerge erases the lower segment of vP, and Concatenate let VP precede the head (=the traceof v) to which -nun is adjoined, as demonstrated in (61).
(61) a.

b.

vP

VP – ((V+v)+nun)

vP
VP
...

v
tV

-nun

v
V

v

(mek

-ø)

All in all, Linearization correctly yields the surface constituent order in the PCC. The moststraightforward output is the RCC in (11)b, SUB-OBJ-mek-ki-nun mek-ess-ta'sub-obj-eat-KI-top eat-past-decl.' If the complex headed by v within the highest link C isdeleted under identity with the link to which -nun is adjoined, the DCC in (10)b, mek-ki-nun
ha-ess-ta 'eat-KI-top do-past-decl,' will result.21

4.7.

English vs French

21

Note that the position of subject at Spell-Out, whether it is in [Spec, TP] or [Spec, vP], does notaffect the text discussion. In either position, it is detached earlier than the complex head that includes-nun in (61)a. The same qualification applies to object as well. (61)b ensures that all constituents
included in VP precede the complex head in which -nun is included. See Fukui and Takano (1998) for
relevant discussions.

- 21 -

Nanzan Linguistics 3: Research Results and Activities 2005

Before closing this section, we will reconsider the presence and absence of do-support inEnglish and French negative sentences. Following Fukui and Takano (1998), we will assume
that head movement in the overt syntax is "substitution" to a specifier. In this respect, head
movement in the overt syntax is distinct from head raising in PF because the latter takes theform of head-to-head adjunction, as we have assumed above.22 Recall that for Fukui and
Takano, specifier-complement-head is the base constituent order across languages, andlanguages are parametrized with respect to V-raising. In OV languages like Japanese andKorean, there is no V-raising in the overt syntax; hence, the head finality is maintained. On
the other hand, both English and French employ V-raising, but they exhibit a difference in
how far V can raise. Fukui and Takano claim that while V in French can raise as high as thedomain of TP, V in English can only raise to the domain of vP. Given this, simple transitive
sentences in these two languages will have the following representations at some point in thederivation.
(62) a. English

b. French
TP

SUB

TP
T'

T'
0/max

T

vP
tSUB

SUB
V

v'
0/max

V

T

vP
tSUB

v'

VP
OBJ

T'
v'

VP

v
tV

OBJ

v
tV

V in English raises to an inner specifier position of vP as shown in (62)a, and V in Frenchraises to an inner specifier position of TP as shown in (62)b.
Departing from Fukui and Takano (1988)23, we assume that T in English and French ismorphologically specified as [+bound] and +[V ], and that the inflected verb is the result of
fusion of [V+T] in the sense of Halle and Marantz (1993).24 Fusion can be fed by movementor "morphological merger" in the sense that we have elaborated on above. Now we proposethat French, but not English, further allows movement of T to V either in the overt syntax orin PF. If it takes place in the overt syntax, it ends up in the form of adjunction to a specifier(=Xmax) as indicated in (63)a. If, on the other hand, it takes place in Morphology in PF, it is an
instance of head-to-head adjunction as indicated in (63)b.
(adjunction to specifier in the overt syntax)(63) a. [V0/max [V0/max + T0/max]]
22

It can be taken that heads do not project in PF in the same way that they do in the overt syntax. For
an alternative approach to head movement in the overt syntax and its effect on Linearization, see
Takano (1996).
23
It seems that Fukui and Takano tacitly assume that verbs in English and French are inflected at
Numeration, and they are checked against a relevant functional head (i.e. T or v) during the course ofderivation.
24

On the other hand, we assume with Fukui and Takano (1998) that the light verb v does not havesuch morphological specifications, hence, negligible in terms of Linearization in these languages.

- 22 -

On Morphological Merger (Hiroshi Aoyagi)b. [V0/max [V0 + T0]]

(head-to-head adjunction in PF)

In either case, French successfully feeds fusion of [V+T] before Linearization applies in PF,
as shown in (64).
(64) French (before Linearization)
TP
SUB
T'
V+T
T'
vP
tT
tSUB
v'
VP
v
OBJ
tV
Naturally, Linearization applies to (64) from top to bottom in French as well. It first applies tothe topmost TP, Demerge erases TP, and Cocatenate let the subject precede T'. On the next
cycle, Demerge erases the upper segment of T', and Concatenate let [V+T] precede the lower
segment of T' since [V+T], formed in either way in (63), counts as a maximal projection. Thus,
successive counter-cyclic application of Linearization eventually yields the correct
SUB-[V+T]-OBJ order.
On the other hand, English is not able to feed fusion of [V+T] before the application ofLinearization at PF. Linearization first targets the topmost TP. Demerge erases it, andConcatenate let the subject (=Xmax) precede T'. On the next cycle, Linearization applies to T'.
Since T in English is [+bound] by assumption, it must be adjoined to the closest head below,that is V, as soon as Demerge detaches it from T', as shown in (65).
(65) English (Morphology in PF)
TP
T'
vP
v'
tSUB
V+T
v'
VP
v
OBJ
tV
Because the [V+T] complex thus formed is not distinct from (63)b, Linearization, whenapplied to the upper segment of v', let the [V+T] complex as Xmax precede the lower segmentof v'. After all, SUB-[V+T]-OBJ, the same surface constituent order as in French, results in
English.
However, English and French diverge when sentential negation comes into play a role(see our earlier example in (1) and (3)). Suppose that NEG is a head and a maximal projection
simultaneously (i.e. NEG0/max) which is adjoined to vP, the smallest CFC. Then, the following- 23 -

Nanzan Linguistics 3: Research Results and Activities 2005

representations will obtain after V-raising takes place in each language.
(66) a. English

b. French
TP

SUB

TP
T'

T'
0/max

T

vP
NEG

SUB
V

vP
tSUB

T

vP
NEG

v'
0/max

V

vP
tSUB

v'

VP
OBJ

T'

v'
VP

v
tV

OBJ

v
tV

What happens in French is rather straightforward. T is adjoined to V either in the overt syntax
or in PF exactly in the same way as in (64), and Linearization, applied successive
counter-cyclically, yields the SUB-[V+T]-NEG-OBJ order as in (1)a, a favorable result.
On the other hand, what happens in English negative sentences is a little more
complicated. At the second cycle from the top, as soon as Demerge erases T', T must be
adjoined to NEG, but not V, because the former is the closest head from T, as shown in (67).
(67) English (Morphology in PF)
TP
T'
vP
NEG+T
vP
tSUB
v'
0/max
V
v'
VP
OBJ
tV

v

Since NEG is not an appropriate host to realize the verbal and agreement features of T, the[NEG+T] complex, as it is, may not yield a correct PF output. In such a case, we propose, therelevant features of T are discharged by fission in the sense of Halle and Marantz (1993).
According to Halle and Marantz, fission is an operation that discharges a subset of featuresfrom one morphological head so that the discharged features and the residue will be spelled
out in two separate vocabulary items. Suppose that the features of T, including tense,
agreement and verbal features, are discharged from the [NEG+T] complex by fission, as in(68). Then, Vocabulary Insertion may target the discharged features of T and the residue of
NEG separately, as in (69)a, b, respectively.25(68) fission
25

According to Choe (2006), the Korean preverbal ("short-from") negation is also the result offission.

- 24 -

On Morphological Merger (Hiroshi Aoyagi){T} {NEG}(69) Vocabulary Insertiona. /does/b. /not/[NEG+T]{[–past], [3S], [–N, +V], ...}{[+neg]}Inasmuch as the English do-support can be conceived of this way, Linearization, applied to
the negative sentence in English of the form in (67), eventually yields the correct surface
constituent order, i.e., SUB-does-not-V-OBJ, as in (3)c.26
The purpose of this subsection is to make regression to English and French negative
sentences. As we have seen, our analysis of verbal morphology in Japanese and Korean withrecourse to Linearization is not orthogonal to the presence and absence of do-support inEnglish and French negative sentences.
5. Further evidence
Our proposal that while the appropriate mechanism for verbal agglutination in Korean ishead raising in PF, that in Japanese is the lowering effect of Linearization not only accounts
for the PCC in the two languages, but it also receives an empirical support from some otherfacts of Japanese and Korean morphology.
5.1.

Honorific suppletion in KoreanFirst, honorific suppletion in Korean seems to support our view that Korean opts forhead raising. Korean has a productive honorific suffix -(u)si, which can generally be attached
to verbs as well as adjectives, as exemplified in (70) and (71).
(70) a. ka -n -ta
go-pres-decl
c. ka-ss -ta
go-past-decl

b. ka-si -n -ta
go-hon-pres-decl
d. ka-si -ess -ta
go-hon-past-decl(71) a. ilk -nun -ta
read-pres-decl
c. ilk -ess -ta
read-past-decl

b. ilk -usi -n -ta
read-hon-pres-decl
d. ilk -usi -ess -ta
read-hon-past-decl

However, some verbs take suppletive forms. For example, the past tense honorific forms of26

Our current approach to do-support in English does not instantly account for the noted asymmetry
between not and other adverbs (see our earlier examples in (44) and (45)). This asymmetry led
Bobaljik (1995) to stipulate that adverbs other than not are invisible to morphological merger.
However, adverbs other than not may appear either much higher in the domain of TP or lower than V
within the domain of vP. Indeed, Boskovic and Lasnik (2003) point out the possibility that adverbs
other than not in English are base-generated higher than T. I would like to thank Yuji Takano fordrawing my attention to Boskovic and Lasnik's work.

- 25 -

Nanzan Linguistics 3: Research Results and Activities 2005

ca-ta 'to sleep' and mek-ta 'to eat' are cwumwusi-ta 'to sleep.hon' and capswusi-ta 'to eat.hon,'respectively, but not *ca-si-ta or *mek-usi-ta. This suppletive process affects neither tense nor
the declarative ending, as shown by the parallelism in the functional domain between theregular cases in (70)–(71) and the suppletive cases in (72)–(73).27(72) a. ca -n -ta
sleep-pres-decl
c. ca -ss -ta
sleep-past-decl

b. *ca -si -n -ta / cwumwusi-n -ta
sleep-hon-pres-decl / sleep.hon -pres-decl
d. *ca -si -ess -ta / cwumwusi-ess -ta
sleep-hon-past-decl / sleep.hon -past-decl(73) a. mek-nun -ta
eat -pres-decl
c. mek-ess -ta
eat -past-decl

b. *mek-usi -n -ta / capswusi-n -ta
eat -hon-pres-decl / eat.hon -pres-decl
d. *mek-usi -ess -ta / capswusi-ess -ta
eat -hon-past-decl / eat.hon -past -decl

This indicates that this suppletive process only targets the verb stem (i.e. “root”) and thehonorific feature. Given that the relevant honorific feature resides in v, and only constituentscan be targets of suppletion (or Vocabulary Insertion in the sense of Halle and Marantz 1993),
V and v can form a constituent that excludes T and C only if the raising option is taken, as
exhibited in (74).
(74) a. head raising
CP
TP
tT

vP
VP
...

C

tv
tV

T
T

v
V

C

v

b. head "lowering"
CP
TP
vP
VP
...
V
V
v
v
T
T
C

The complex head formed by head raising includes a constituent that consists only of V+v, asshown in (74)a, but the complex head formed as the result of Linearization does not, as shownin (74)b. This can be taken that while the verb root (√V) suffixed with a [–honorific] v is
spelled out as a non-honorific verb, the same verb root with a [+honorific] v as an honorificverb, as domonstrated in (75)a, b, respectively.
(75) a. √eat + v[–hon]/mek/(non-honorific verb)

27

In Korean, the present and past tense suffixes exhibit allomorphism. The present tense suffix
appears as -nun for consonant-stem verbs like mek 'eat,' but it appears as -n for vowel-stem verbs likeca 'sleep.' The choice of the theme vowel contained in the past tense suffix depends on the final vowelof the verb stem. If it is [a] or [o] ("light vowel"), the past tense suffix is -ass; however, if the vowel
stem verb ends in [a], the suffix gets shortened to be -ss, as in (58)c. On the other hand, if the final
vowel of the verb stem is anything else ("dark vowel"), the past tense suffix is -ess.

- 26 -

On Morphological Merger (Hiroshi Aoyagi)b. √eat + v[+hon]/capswu/(honorific suppletive verb)

This is a welcome result for our analysis of Korean verbal morphology.28
5.2

Adjectival suppletion in Japanese

Furthermore, our proposal sheds light on the fact of adjectival inflection in Japanese.
Adjectives in Japanese exhibit a seemingly irregular paradigm with respect to tense inflection,
as shown in (76) and (77).
(76) a. (yama -ga) taka -i(mountain-nom) high-pres'The mountain is high.'b. (yama-ga) taka -katta
high-pst'The mountain was high.'(77) a. (michi-ga) hiro -i(road-nom) wide-pres'The road is wide.'b. (michi-ga) hiro -katta
wide-pst'The road was wide.'

It is rather transparent that the past tense ending -katta in (76)b and (77)b comes from three
separate morphemes; i.e., ku+ar+ta, of which -ku is a functional ending for an adjective stem(presumably, the light adjective a, analogous to the light verb v, proposed by Takano 1996), ar
is a be-verb, and -ta is past tense. Usually, replacing -ta with -ru provides the present tense
form. However, the present ending of adjectives is -i, as shown in (76)a and (77)a, but not*-ku ar-(r)u, which is impermissible under normal contexts.29 However, when a particle like
-wa is inserted to the right of an adjective stem, the expected three morphemes, -ku, ar and -ru,
resurge, as shown in (78)b and (79)b.
(78) a. *taka -i
28-wa / *taka-wa -i

b. taka -ku-wa

ar -ruFor potentially problematic cases of honorific suppletion in Japanese, see Aoyagi (2006a: note 7).

29

The expected chunk of morphemes -ku ar-u may appear in some very limited (mainly archaic or
written) contexts even in Modern Japanese, as exemplified below ((i)b due to Saeko Urushibara(p.c.)).
(i)a. (kokorozasi-wa)
ambition -topbesitaka-ku ar -u
high-abe-pres should‘((One's) ambition) should be high.’b. (kokorozasi-wa)
ambition -toptaka-ku ar -u
maihigh-a be-pres might.not‘((One's) ambition) might not be high.’
As noted by Aoyagi (1998b), the non-suppletive present tense form of the adjective taka 'hight' isembedded under an archaic auxiliary in each case. As exhibited by its adnominal form beki, thedeontic modal besi is in direct descent from Old Japanese spoken until circa the 15th century. Also, thenegative prospective modal mai is the descendant of the Old Japanese auxiliary mazi. Thus it cansafely be concluded that the expected chunk of morphemes for adjectives in the present tense isprohibited under normal contexts in the present-day spoken Japanese.

- 27 -

Nanzan Linguistics 3: Research Results and Activities 2005

high-pres-top / high-top-preshigh-ku-top

be-pres(79) a. *hiro -i -wa / *hiro -wa -i
wide-pres-top / wide-top-presb. hiro -ku-wa
wide-ku-top

ar -rube-presThis can be explained if we assume that the constituent that is composed all and only of
ku+ar+ru ‘a+be+pres’ can be replaced with -i by suppletion (or the relevant set of features isreplaced with /i/ by Vocabulary Insertion in the sense of Halle and Marantz 1993), as
indicated in (80).
(80) a. {ku, ar, ru}
b. {ku, wa, ar, ru}

/i/
/i/

*

(suppletion available)(suppletion unavailable)

If adjectival inflection in Japanese is the result of head raising, the resultant complex headed
by T necessarily includes the adjective stem, as shown in (81)a. There is no constituent that
includes ku+ar+ru 'a+be+pres' but excludes the adjective stem. This means that we need toposit as many rules of suppletion as the number of adjectives in the registry of Japanese; inother words, the rule of suppletion which replaces hiro-ku ar-(r)u with hiro-i ‘wide-pres’should be separately set from that which replaces taka-ku ar-(r)u with taka-i ‘high-pres’. Thisis an undesirable situation.
(81) a. head raising
TP
VP
tT

aP
AP
...

T

ta
tA

V
V

a
A

T

a

...

b. head "lowering"
TP
VP
aP
AP
A
A
a
a
V
V
T

On the other hand, if our proposal that Japanese does not employ head raising for
agglutination is extended to adjectival inflection, the fact of adjectival suppletion can be
accounted for straightfowardly. The complex head formed as the result of Linearization
should look like the one in (81)b. The complex headed by the adjective stem in (81)b includes
a constituent that includes ku+ar+ru 'a+be+pres' but excludes the adjective stem (i.e., theupper segment of a). This makes it possible to posit a single rule that replaces a constituent
with -i, irrespective of the adjective stem. To the extent that the current discussion is on theright track, our approach to Japanese verbal morphology is further supported by otherwise
mysterious facts of adjectival inflection in this language.

6.

Conclusion- 28 -

On Morphological Merger (Hiroshi Aoyagi)

In this article, we have argued that the discrepancy between Korean and Japanese verbal
morphology, especially in predicate-contrastive constructions, results from the choice between
options for verbal agglutination allowed in PF. Korean takes the raising option, whereas
Japanese has recourse to the lowering effect of Linearization. This view receives further
support from other morphological phenomena in the two languages, and it is not orthogonal tofacts in typologically different languages like English and French.

References
Aoyagi, H. (1998a) "Particles as adjunct clitics," NELS 28, GSLA, University of Massachusetts,
Amherst.
Aoyagi, H. (1998b) On the Nature of Particles in Japanese and Its Theoretical Implications, Ph.D.
dissertation, University of Southern California.
Aoyagi, H. (2001) "Nihongo ni okeru jutsugo to jisei-youso no kouchaku ni tsuite (On agglutination ofpredicates and tense elements in Japanese)," Academia 70, Nanzan University.
Aoyagi, H. (2006a) "On the predicate focus construction in Korean and Japanese," Harvard
Studies in Korean Linguistics XI.
Aoyagi, H. (2006b) Nihongo no Joshi to Kinoohanchuu (Particles and Functional Categories inJapanese), Hituzi Syobo, Tokyo.
Baker, M. (1988) Incorporation. The University of Chicago Press.
Bobaljik, J. (1995) Morphosyntax: the Syntax of verbal inflection, Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
Boskovic, Z. and H. Lasnik (2003) "On the distribution of null complementizers," Linguistic Inquiry
34.
Cho, S.-Y., J.-B. Kim, and P. Sells. (2004) "Contrastive verb constructions in Korean," Harvard
Studies in Korean Linguistics X.
Cho, Y.-M. and P. Sells. (1995) "A lexical account of inflectional suffixes in Korean," Journal of
East Asian Linguistics 4.
Choe, J.-H. (2006) "Kankokugo no hiteibun no tougokouzou (Syntactic structures of negative
sentences in Korean)," paper presented at the 132nd Meeting of the Linguistic Society of Japan,
Tokyo University.
Choi, K.-Y. (2003) "The echoed verb construction in Korean," Japanese/Korean Linguistics 11.
Chomsky, N. (1957) Syntactic Structures. Mouton, The Hague.
Chomsky, N. (1965) Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Chomsky, N. (1995) Minimalist Program. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Chomsky, N. (2001) "Derivation by phase," In M. Kenstowicz, ed., Ken Hale: A Life in Language,
MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Embick, D., and R. Noyer. (2001) "Movement operations after syntax," Linguistic Inquiry 32.
Fiengo, R. (1980) Surface Structures. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Fukui, N. (1995) "The principles and parameters approach: a comparative syntax of English andJapanese," In M. Shibatani and T. Bynon, eds., Approaches to Language Typology, Clarendon
Press, Oxford.
Fukui, N. and Y. Takano. (1998) "Symmetry in syntax: Merge and Demerge," Journal of East Asian
Linguistics, 7.
Halle, M. and A. Marantz. (1993) "Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection," In K. Haleand S. J. Keyser, eds., The View from Building 20, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Jo, J.-M. (2004a) "Grammatical effects of topic and focus information," Ph.D. dissertation, University- 29 -

Nanzan Linguistics 3: Research Results and Activities 2005of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
Jo, J.-M. (2004b) "Variations in predicate cleft constructions in Korean: epiphenomena at the syntaxPF interface," Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics X.
Kang, M.-Y. (1988) Topics in Korean syntax: Phrase structure, variable binding and movement, Ph.D.
dissertation, MIT.
Kayne, R. (1994) The Antisymmetry in Syntax. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Kuroda, S.-Y. (1992) Japanese Syntax and Semantics. Kluwer, Dordrecht.
Lasnik, H. (1995) "Verbal morphology: Syntactic Structures meets the Minimalist Program," In H.
Campos and P. Kempchinsky, eds, Revolution and Evolution in Linguistic Theory: Essays inhonor of Carlos Otero, Gerogetown University Press.
Lee, C.-M. (2002) "Contrastive topic and proposition structure," In A.M. Di Sciullo, ed., Asymmetry inGrammar, John Benjamins.
Lieber, R. (1992) Deconstructing Morphology, The University of Chicago Press.
Marantz, A. (1984) On the Nature of Grammatical Relations. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Marantz, A. (1989) "Clitics and phrase structure," In M.R. Baltin and A.S. Kroch, eds., Alternative
Conceptions of Phrase Structure, The University of Chicago Press.
Nishiyama, K. (1998) "Adjectives and copulas in Japanese," East Asian Linguistics 8.
Nishiyama, K., and E. Cho. (1998) "Predicate cleft constructions in Japanese and Korean: the role ofdummy verbs in TP/VP-preposing," Japanese/Korean Linguistics 7.
Nunes, G. (2004) Linearization of Chains and Sideward Movement, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Pollock, J.-Y. (1989) "Verb movement, universal grammar and the structure of IP," Linguistic Inquiry
20.
Saito, M. (1989) "Scrambling as semantically vacuous A'-movement," In M.R. Baltin and A.S. Kroch,eds, Alternative Conceptions of Phrase Structure, Chicago University Press.
Sakai, H. (1998) "Feature checking and morphological merger," Japanese/Korean Linguistics 7.
Sakai, H. (2001) "Kotenteki ruikeiron to hikaku tougoron (Classical typology and comparativesyntax)," Kyoto Daigaku Gengogaku Kenkyu 19, Kyoto University.
Sells, P. (1995) "Korean and Japanese morphology from a lexical perspective," Linguistic Inquiry 26.
Takano, Y. (1996) Movement and Parametric Variation in Syntax, Ph.D. dissertation, University ofCalifornia, Irvine.
Takano, Y. (2005) "On vacuous verb raising," In J. Abe, ed., A Minimalist View of Components inGenerative Grammar, Tohoku Gakuin University.
Yoon, J. H.-S. (1994) "Korean verbal inflection and checking theory," MIT Working Papers in
Linguistics 22.
Yoon, J. H.-S. (1995) "Nominal, verbal, and cross-categorial affixation in Korean," Journal of East
Asian Linguistics 4.

- 30 -