LEADER 07453nam 2200745 a 450 001 9910971502003321 005 20240513085019.0 010 $a9786612775079 010 $a9781282775077 010 $a1282775073 010 $a9789027288011 010 $a9027288011 024 7 $a10.1075/lfab.3 035 $a(CKB)2670000000047703 035 $a(OCoLC)673625085 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebrary10417543 035 $a(SSID)ssj0000417425 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)12183913 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000417425 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)10363478 035 $a(PQKB)10826362 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL623351 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebr10417543 035 $a(CaONFJC)MIL277507 035 $a(OCoLC)705533496 035 $a(iGPub)JOBE0001991 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC623351 035 $a(DE-B1597)721090 035 $a(DE-B1597)9789027288011 035 $a(EXLCZ)992670000000047703 100 $a20100504d2010 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurcn||||||||| 181 $ctxt 182 $cc 183 $acr 200 00$aExploring crash-proof grammars /$fedited by Michael T. Putnam 205 $a1st ed. 210 $aAmsterdam ;$aPhiladelphia $cJohn Benjamins Pub. Company$d2010 215 $a1 online resource (315 p.) 225 1 $aLanguage faculty and beyond ;$vv. 3 300 $aBibliographic Level Mode of Issuance: Monograph 311 08$a9789027208200 311 08$a9027208204 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index. 327 $aExploring Crash-Proof Grammars -- Editorial page -- Title page -- LCC data -- Dedication page -- Table of contents -- Preface & -- acknowledgments -- List of contributors -- Exploring Crash-proof grammars -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Defining crash(es) -- 3. Scope and content of this volume -- Works cited -- Part I. Applications of crash-proof grammar -- Computation efficiency and feature inheritance in crash-proof syntax -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Feature inheritance -- 3. Subject-verb agreement -- 4. Subject extraction and Anti-Agreement Effects -- 5. Long distance extraction and agreement -- 6. DONATE, KEEP and SHARE application in crash-proof syntax -- 7. Conclusion -- Implications of grammatical gender for the theory of uninterpretable features -- 1. Introduction -- 1.1 Theoretical overview -- 1.2 Structure of the paper -- 2. Gender and interpretability -- 2.1 Romance gender -- 2.2 Bantu noun class -- 3. Gender agreement in Bantu and Romance -- 4. Why Bantu agreement is independent of case -- 4.1 The proposal: Gender is never deactivated -- 4.2 Against an Agree-with-Agreement approach -- support from semitic -- 5. Activity: A closer look -- 5.1 Strengthening the Activity Requirement -- 6. A problem for Feature Inheritance -- 7. Deriving Goal Deactivation -- 8. Conclusion -- References -- The Empty Left Edge Condition (ELEC) -- 1. Introduction -- 2. A uniform approach to null-arguments -- 3. Germanic argument drop and the ELEC -- 4. More cases of left edge sensitive argument drop -- 5. The emptiness conditions are operative in PF -- 6. Concluding remarks -- References -- Part II. The crash-proof debate -- Grammaticality, interfaces, and UG -- 1. Linguistics as the study of I-language -- 2. Acceptability and grammaticality -- 3. Selection and structure-building -- 4. Prospects for an unprincipled syntax -- A tale of two minimalisms. 327 $a1. Introductory remarks -- 2. The distinguishing feature between the two minimalisms -- 2.1 The crash-proof route -- 2.2 The alternative route -- 2.3 A concise comparison, and why Merge ? has an edge -- 3. On Agree -- 4. Conclusion -- Uninterpretable features -- 1. Unclarities regarding the distinction between crash vs. convergent gibberish -- 2. A pervasive empirical problem for the valuation-transfer analysis -- 3. Designing a perfect system "primarily" for CI and "secondarily" for SM -- 4. A crash-proof system and a remaining question -- References -- Syntactic relations in Survive-minimalism -- 1. Introduction -- 2. "Phrase structure rules" a la the Survive Principle -- 3. Theta Roles in Survive-minimalism -- 4. Cleaning-up crashes -- 5. Consequences and conclusions -- References -- Toward a strongly derivational syntax -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Labeling and First Merge -- 2.1 C-selection is not feature checking -- 2.2 C-selection has no role in labeling -- 2.3 Labeling at First Merge: Agree -- 2.4 Collins' Locus and First Merge -- 2.5 Crash-proof derivation vs. immediate filtering -- 3. The issues facing First and Second Merge -- 4. Toward a strongly derivational syntax -- 4.1 Eliminating the First Merge/Second Merge dichotomy -- 4.2 Eliminating First Merge -- 4.3 A)symmetry in narrow syntax and at the interfaces -- 4.4 Eliminating Merge -- 4.5 Consequences of Eliminating Merge -- 4.6 Transfer and feature checking -- 4.7 Complex specifiers -- 5. Concluding remarks -- On the mathematical foundations of crash-proof grammars -- 1. Rainbow, language, theory -- 2. The concept of crash-proof syntax -- 3. Mechanisms of crash-proof syntax -- 4. Elements, contexts, and formal Systems -- 5. Peano's axioms -- 6. The language-number correspondence -- 7. Conclusions -- Crash-proof syntax and filters -- 1. Introduction -- 2. OT-syntax as a theory of filters. 327 $a3. Crash-proof syntax does not void the need for filters -- 3.1 Movement -- 3.2 Negative sentences -- 3.3 Other differences -- 3.4 The universal generator -- 3.5 Conclusions -- 4. Why developing a crash-proof syntax may be desirable -- 5. Conclusion -- References -- Crash-free syntax and crash phenomena in model-theoretic grammar -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Grammar as system of declarative constraints rather than a system of production operations -- 3. When derivations crash (in performance) -- 4. Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar -- 5. Conclusion -- References -- Index -- the Language Faculty and Beyond series. 330 $aThe Minimalist Program has advanced a research program that builds the design of human language from conceptual necessity. Seminal proposals by Frampton & Gutmann (1999, 2000, 2002) introduced the notion that an ideal syntactic theory should be 'crash-proof'. Such a version of the Minimalist Program (or any other linguistic theory) would not permit syntactic operations to produce structures that 'crash'. There have, however, been some recent developments in Minimalism - especially those that approach linguistic theory from a biolinguistic perspective (cf. Chomsky 2005 et seq.) - that have called the pursuit of a 'crash-proof grammar' into serious question. The papers in this volume take on the daunting challenge of defining exactly what a 'crash' is and what a 'crash-proof grammar' would look like, and of investigating whether or not the pursuit of a 'crash-proof grammar' is biolinguistically appealing. 410 0$aLanguage faculty and beyond ;$vv. 3. 606 $aGrammar, Comparative and general$xSyntax 606 $aGenerative grammar 606 $aMinimalist theory (Linguistics) 615 0$aGrammar, Comparative and general$xSyntax. 615 0$aGenerative grammar. 615 0$aMinimalist theory (Linguistics) 676 $a415 701 $aPutnam$b Michael T$0600539 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910971502003321 996 $aExploring crash-proof grammars$94346348 997 $aUNINA