加藤 孝臣

In this paper, I propose a unifying analysis of Japanese scrambling and English heavy NP shift which incorporates Boskovic and Takahashi's (1998) insights. Unlike their analysis, however, my analysis is embedded in the single cycle model of grammar developed by Chomsky (2000, 2001a, 2001b) and Nissenbaum (2000). The basic idea is that a scrambled/HNPSed phrase is merged to its surface position and lowers to its θ-position for θ-feature checking. I argue that the optionality of those operations is reduced to the absence of restrictions on the selection of lexical subarrays. I also argue that the difference in locality between the two operations is derived from the difference between Japanese and English in the inventory of functional categories, in combination with a hypothesis on the timing of Spell-Out.

This paper investigates Zanuttini's (1997) generalization about the incompatibility between sentential negation and true imperatives and proposes issues that her generalization raises can be resolved by taking into account the scope relation between the imperative mood and negation. On the basis of Han's (1998) observation that the imperative mood necessarily takes scope over negation and that the reverse scope relation is impossible, it is argued that true imperative verbs carry a clause type feature encoding the imperative mood and that this feature must not be c-commanded by the sentential negation ; otherwise, the sentence fails to receive an appropriate interpretation.

This paper investigates the two idiosyncratic syntactic properties of English imperatives : the cooccurrence of auxiliary do with have/be and the appearance of do either before or after an overt subject. The first property results from no V-to-I movement in imperatives and it is analyzed with a slightly modified version of Lasnik's (1995) theory of verbal morphology : the parametric characterization oflnfl in imperatives is +affixal and weak regardless of the types of verbs. The second property results from optional I-to-C movement of do in imperatives and it is analyzed with the notion of ""internal diglossia"" : grammars with strong IMP and weak IMP coexist in the mind/brain of English speakers.