A Note on Reprojection and the Dual-Merge Status of DP as a Phase <> Complex Nominal Expressions.
Joseph Galasso
January 2022

Abstract •Looking beyond the broad subcategorization for √Verb, and peering into the more narrow feature selectivity of a specific verb’s Probe-Goal relation (√drink vs √break), coupled with the defining status of DP as Phase, this brief note examines the behavior of complex DP-nominals and attempts to peg Merge-operations to X-bar theory in ways which show how, in reprojection, the lower more prosaic lexical merge-1 (‘Comp of DP-as-Phase’) contrasts with the upper functional merge-2. We suggest the former Merge-1 is a [-AGR] projection, (and not a full-fledge Phrase) while the latter Merge-2 is a full-expansive XP [+AGR] projection. Hence merge has X-bar theory implications. •We’ll come to consider only the full-expansive/Merge-2 XP [+Agr] as valued as the default Head-selection, i.e., that projection which allows for simultaneous projections of either verb type. (See verb in sentence (a’) above as having this default H-selection status: √break selects for either Merge-2 or Merge-1), hence the H-selection of √break as default. Setting out the Problem. Complex DP-Nominals •Let’s consider the complex DP-Nominal Expression, as found in sentence (a’), which seems to require reprojection—viz., where two separate ‘probe-goal’ re-projections apply on a singular surface-structured string: Reprojection of sentence (a’): a. ‘John drank a bottle of beer /*a beer bottle’. a’. ‘John broke a bottle of beer/a beer bottle’ Compound: [beer-bottle], ‘bottle’ is H.  Merge-1 (lexicalized, [-AGR]). Phrase: [bottlej of [beer- __j], ‘beer’ is H.  Merge-2 (phrasal, [+AGR]).
Format: [ pdf ]
Reference: lingbuzz/007079
(please use that when you cite this article)
Published in: unpublished ms. California State University, Northridge
keywords: reprojection, merge, dp, phase, morphology, syntax
Downloaded:84 times


[ edit this article | back to article list ]