Warlpiri: Theoretical Implications

Author: J. A. Legate, Year:2002

The issue of non-configurationality is fundamental in determining the possible range of variation in Universal Grammar. This dissertation investigates this issue in the context of Warlpiri, the prototypical non-configurational language. I argue that positing a macroparameter, a single parameter that distinguishes configurational languages from non-configurational, requires variation on a magnitude not permitted by Universal Grammar. After refuting in detail previous macroparametric approaches, I propose a microparametric analysis: non-configurational languages are fully configurational and analysed through finegrained parameters with independent motivation. I develop this approach for Warlpiri, partially on the basis of new data collected through work with Warlpiri consultants and analysis of Warlpiri texts.

Beginning with A-syntax, I show that Warlpiri exhibits short-distance A-scrambling through binding and WCO data. I present an analysis of split ergativity in Warlpiri (ergative/absolutive case-marking, nominative/accusative agreement), deriving the split from a dissociation of structural case and its morphological realization, and the inherent nature of ergative case, rather than from non-configurationality. Extending the analysis to applicative constructions in Warlpiri, I identify both symmetric and asymmetric applicatives. I argue that the principled distinctions between them are explained structurally rather than lexically; therefore the applicative data provide evidence for a hierarchical verb phrase in Warlpiri. The analysis also reveals the first reported evidence for unaccusativity in the language.

Turning to A'-syntax, I argue that word order is not free in Warlpiri; rather Warlpiri displays an articulated left peripheral structure. Thus, word order variations are largely determined by positioning of elements in ordered functional projections based on information structure. Furthermore, I present evidence from WCO and island effects that elements appear in these projections through movement. Finally, I investigate the wh-scope marking construction, arguing for an indirect dependency approach. In developing the analysis, I argue, contrary to standard assumptions, that Warlpiri does have embedded finite complement clauses. On the basis of a poverty of the stimulus argument, I conclude the construction must follow from independent properties of the language. I propose that it follows from the discontinuous constituent construction, which I equate with split DPs/PPs in Germanic and Slavic languages.

The syntactic structure of Warlpiri that emerges from the dissertation strongly supports a configurational analysis of the language, and thereby the microparameter approach to nonconfigurationality.

Thesis Supervisor: Noam Chomsky

Title: Institute Professor of Linguistics and Philosophy

Thesis Supervisor: Sabine Iatridou

Title: Professor of Linguistics

Table of Contents
1	Introduction		12
2	Nonconfigurationality		15
2.1	Introduction		15
2.2	Basic Properties		16
2.3	Analyses		20
	2.3.1	Dual Structure	21
	2.3.2	Pronominal Argument	27
	2.3.3	Secondary Predicate	35
	2.3.4	Conclusion	39
2.4	Issues and Arguments I: Dual Structure		39
2.5	Issues and Arguments II: Pronominal Argument		47
	2.5.1	Arguments for the PAH	47
	2.5.2	Arguments against the PAH	70
	2.5.3	Summary	89
2.6	Issues and Arguments III: Secondary Predicate		90
2.7	Towards a Microparameteric Account		97
2.8	Conclusion		117
3	A-syntax		118
3.1	Introduction		118
3.2	Split-Ergativity		119
	3.2.1	The Grammatical Subject	120
	3.2.2	Split Absolutive	128
	3.2.3	Typology	139
	3.2.4	Previous Analyses	144
	3.2.5	Ergativity and Nonconfigurationality	153
	3.2.6	Conclusions	158
3.3	Applicatives		159
	3.3.1	Ditransitives	160
	3.3.2	Ethical Datives	165
	3.3.3	Implications	167
	3.3.4	A Structural Account	170
	3.3.5	Additional Evidence	178
	3.3.6	Conclusion	189
3.4	Conclusion		189
4	A'-syntax		191
4.1	Introduction		191
4.2	Left Periphery		191
	4.2.1	Topics	197
	4.2.2	Wh-phrases and Foci	203
	4.2.3	Heads	209
4.3	Movement versus Base-generation		213
4.4	Interpretation of Focus		222
4.5	Wh-scope Marking		229
	4.5.1	Basic Properties	231
	4.5.2	Previous Analyses	235
	4.5.3	Warlpiri Background	246
	4.5.4	Warlpiri wh-scope marking	264
	4.5.5	Summary	267
5	Conclusion		269