- Email: [email protected]
Remarks on Japanese subjects
Lingua
85 (1991) 3033319.
North-Holland
303
Remarks on Japanese subjects Mineharu
Nakayama
and
Masatoshi
Depcrrimenr of East ASKWI Lunguages
Koizumi*
and Lireratures,
The Ohio Stnie University.
are base-generated
under VP (VP internal
Columbus.
OH
43210. USA
Received
May 1991
It has been proposed sis). In this paper, base-generated pieces temporal
phrases;
and direct unaccusatives
subject
hypothesis
under VP and move above VP at S-structure
of evidence
of unergative
that subjects
we argue that the VP internal are
discussed:
and secondary
and transitive passives
floating
depictive
numeral
predicates.
verbs are base-generated
are base-generated
under
be above VP at S-structure
is not warranted
quantifiers;
in Japanese.
pseudo-cleft
These collectively
indicate
Four
constructions; that the subjects
above VP while the subjects of unaccusatives
VP (i.e., the object
and the direct passives are different
subject hypothe-
that allows the subject to be
in that the subjects
while the subject of the unaccusative
position)
in Japanese.
The
of the direct passives
must
can be at the object position.
1. Introduction In recent syntactic theories, it has been proposed that subjects are basegenerated under VP (e.g., Fukui 1986, Kitagawa 1986, Kuroda 1988, Koopman and Sportiche 1988, Sportiche 1988). In this paper, we argue that the VP internal subject hypothesis that allows the subject to be base-generated under VP (i.e., the SPEC of VP) and move above VP (i.e., SPEC of IP) at Sstructure is not warranted in Japanese. We will discuss floating numeral quantifiers, pseudo-clefts, temporal phrases, and secondary depictive predicates. We conclude that the subjects of unergative and transitive verbs are base-generated above VP while the subjects of unaccusatives are base* Different versions Wisconsin, University
of the content of this paper have been presented of Rochester, and the LSA annual meeting. We thank
at University the participants
those talks and in particular, Heedon Ahn, Hiroko Y. Butler, Kyle Johnson, Yuki Kuroda. Anoop Mahajan, Shigeru Miyagawa, and Kazuhiko Tajima
Yoshi Kitagawa, for their helpful
comments and discussions. Any shortcomings are, or course, ours. The second author the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA.
0024-3841/91,‘$03.50
cm 1991 -
Elsevier Science Publishers
B.V. (North-Holland)
of of
is now at
304
M. Nukayama. M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japunese
SUBJECTS
generated under VP in Japanese. The unaccusatives and the direct passives are different in that the subjects of the direct passives must be above VP at S-structure while the subject of the unaccusative can be at the object position. The organization of the paper is the following: in section 2, we provide four pieces of evidence that suggest that the subjects in the transitives are base-generated above VP. In section 3, we discuss the subjects of unergatives, unaccusatives, and direct passives. Section 4 provides our concluding remarks including some theoretical implications of our hypothesis. Throughout the paper, we assume the theoretical framework of Government and Binding (e.g. Chomsky 198 1).
2. Subjects of transitive verbs In this section, we discuss the subjects of transitive verbs. First, we provide a theoretical assumption, and then we present four pieces of evidence that suggest that subjects are base-generated above VP.l It is well known that quantifiers in Japanese take scope according to their linear order. A quantifier takes wide scope over its c-commanding quantificational elements and it does not take narrow scope (Hoji 1985, cf. Kuroda 1970).” For instance, sentence (1) is not ambiguous: daremo ‘everyone’ takes wide scope over dareka ‘someone’, but it cannot have narrow scope. (1) Daremo-ga dareka-o everyone-Nom someone-Act ‘Everyone loves someone.’
aishiteiru. loves
Observing this phenomenon, Hoji (1985) claims the rigidity of the structure of Japanese. The subject in Japanese appears higher than the indirect and direct objects at base and the indirect object is higher than the direct object. The relevant
sentences
are in (2).
1 Nakayama et al. (1991) used VP-preposing constructions by Hoji (1989) as one piece of evidence to support our claim here. However, it has been pointed out that the construction could be compatible with the VP internal hypothesis. See Hasegawa (1989). * The definition of c-command we are assuming here is essentially that of Reinhart’s (1976). (i) a c-commands nor p dominate
p iff the first branching
the other.
node dominating
a also dominates
p. and neither a
M. Nakayama. M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japanese subjects
305
shookaishita. dareka-ni John-o -Act introduced everyone-Nom someone-Dat ‘Everyone introduced John to someone.’ shookaishita. daremo-ni dareka-o (2b) John-ga
(24 Daremo-ga
-Nom
(W
everyone-Dat
someone-Act
introduced
‘John introduced someone to everyone.’ shookaishita. John-ni dareka-o Daremo-ga -Dat someone-Ace introduced everyone-Nom ‘Everyone introduced someone to John.’
In sentence (2a), the subject daremo takes wide scope over the indirect object and in (2b), the indirect object daremo has wide scope over the direct object dareka. In sentence (2~) the subject takes wide scope over the direct object. Therefore, the subject c-commands the indirect object and the indirect object c-commands the direct object (see also Saito 1985 and Whitman 1987).3
dareka,
2.1. Floating numeral quantifiers A phenomenon called floating quantifiers suggests that there is no subject trace under VP in active transitives. Miyagawa (1989a) argues that for an NP to be construed with a numeral floating quantifier (NQ), they must ccommand each other. VP-internal elements such as an instrumental phrase, the indirect and direct objects cannot appear between the subject and the NQ with which it is construed. This is shown in (4).
3
(44 Gakusei-ga
3-nin kono naihu-de
students-Nom ‘Three students (4b) *Gakusei-ga students-Nom ‘Three students (4c) *Gakusei-ga students-Nom ‘Three students (4d) *Gakusei-ga students-Nom ‘Three students
3-CL this knife-with meat-Act cut cut the meat with this knife.’ kitta. kono naihu-de 3-nin niku-o this knife-with 3-CL meat-Act cut cut the meat with this knife.’ niku-o 3-nin kitta. meat-Act 3-CL cut cut the meat.’ John-ni 3-nin tegami-o kaita. -Dat 3-CL letter-Act wrote wrote letters to John.’
Hoji (1985) also uses weak crossover
phenomenon
niku-o
to support
kitta.
the rigidity
claim.
306
M. Nakayama, M. Koizumi 1 Remarks on Japanese subjects
Sentence (4a) contains the NQ that is associated with the subject. No elements intervene between the subject and the NQ and the sentence is wellformed. In sentence (4b), the instrumental phrase appears between the subject and the NQ while the direct object intervenes between the subject and the NQ in (4~). Both sentences are ill-formed. In sentence (4d), the indirect object is between the subject and the NQ. The ill-formed sentences (4bd) indicate that no element can intervene between the subject and the NQ that it is construed with. On the other hand, time adverbials such as kinoo ‘yesterday’ and kyoo ‘today’ may occur between the subjects and the NQ. This is because a time adverbial can be generated outside the VP as well (cf. Miyagawa 1989a: 30, Koizumi 1990b, McNulty 1988: 9, and Travis 1989, among others). 3-nin kinoo students-Nom 3-CL yesterday ‘Three students bought a book 3-nin Gakusei-ga kinoo students-Nom yesterday 3-CL
(54 Gakusei-ga
(5b)
hon-o book-Act yesterday.’ hon-o book-Act
katta. bought katta. bought
Suppose that the subject NP originates in the SPEC of VP, and is moved into the SPEC of IP for some reason (e.g., the Extended Projection Principle (Chomsky 1981), and/or the Case Filter (Chomsky 1981)) at S-structure. Then, (4b) and (4~) could have structures such as (6a) and (6b), respectively, assuming that the maximal projections are allowed to adjoin only to the maximal projections (e.g., scrambling (see Saito 1985)). (6a) [ip Gakusei,-ga (6b) [ir Gakusei,-ga
[VP kono naihu-de [vr ti 3-nin niku-o [vr niku,-o [vr ti 3-nin tj kitta]]
kitta]]
In these structures, the trace of the subject NP in the VP and the NQ ccommand each other. Therefore, the sentences should be well-formed. These are different from direct passive sentences such as (7) where the numeral quantifier appears after the instrumental phrase. basu-de 30-nin hakobareta. (7) Shuujin-ga prisoner-Nom bus by 30-CL carried were ‘Thirty prisoners were transported by bus.’ Since sentence
(4b) is ill-formed
whereas
(7) is well-formed,
the subjects
of the
M. Nakayama, M. Koizumi i Remarks on Japanese subjects
307
active transitives and the direct passives must be in different positions. The passive (7) is well-formed because there is a trace of the surface subject in the object position which is under VP and c-commands the numeral quantifier (see Miyagawa 1989a, b and section 3). However, the ill-formed sentences in (4) suggest that the subject is not base-generated under VP as in (6), but rather base-generated above VP in the transitives. 2.2.
VP-cleft construction
There is a construction in Japanese similar to the English pseudo-cleft sentence. We are particularly interested in pseudo-clefting of VP, i.e. the one involving the verb suru ‘do’ at the presupposed position as in @a). Let us call it the VP-cleft construction. In VP-cleft constructions, the indirect object cannot remain with the subject. It must be clefted with the object and the verb. Observe the sentences in (8): (8a) John-ga -Nom ‘What John (8b) *John-ga -Nom ‘What John
shita-no-wa kaisha-ni tegami-o okuru-koto-da. did-N-Top company-Dat letter-Act send-N-Cop did was send a letter to the company.’ shita-no-wa tegami-o okuru-koto-da. kaisha-ni company-Dat did-N-Top letter-Act send-N-Cop did to the company was send a letter.’
In sentence (8a), the indirect object appears in the ‘focus’ position with the direct object and the verb whereas in (8b), the indirect object occurs with suru ‘do’ in the ‘presupposition’ position. Ill-formed sentence (8b) indicates that the indirect object forms a constituent with the direct object and the verb, and it is an unbreakable unit. Assuming that ‘breakable’ units are not single but rather maximal projections (cf. bar or intermediate projections, Chomsky 1986) this suggests that there is a maximal projection above the indirect object, but not between the indirect object and the direct object. Incidentally, VP-adjuncts like an instrumental phrase may, but need not be clefted along with the other VP-internal elements, as shown below. (9a) Gakusei-ga [vp kono naihu-de [vp niku-o this knife-with students-Nom meat-Act ‘Three students cut the meat with this knife.’
kitta]]. cut
308
M. Nakapmu,
(9b) Gakusei-ga students-Nom ‘What students (SC) Gakusei-ga students-Nom ‘What students
M. Koizumi
/ Remarks
on
Japanese subjects
shita-no-wa kono naihu-de niku-o kiru-koto-da. did-N-Top this knife-with meat-Act cut-N-Cop did was cut the meat with this knife.’ kono naihu-de shita-no-wa niku-o kiru-koto-da. this knife-with did-N-Top meat-Act cut-N-Cop did with this knife was cut the meat.’
In (9b), the upper VP is clefted while in (SC), the lower VP is clefted. The NQ associated with the subject may not be clefted along with VP. (1 Oa) Gakusei-ga 3-nin shita-no-wa kono naihu-de niku-o students-Nom 3-CL did-N-Top this knife-with meat-Act kiru-koto-da. cut-N-Cop ‘What three students did was cut the meat with this knife.’ (lob) * Gakusei-ga shita-no-wa 3-nin kono naihu-de niku-o students-Nom did-N-Top 3-CL this knife-with meat-Ace kiru-koto-da. cut-N-Cop If VP contains the empty category that is coindexed with the NQ, sentence (lob) should be well-formed. The ungrammaticality indicates that there is no empty category that holds the mutual c-command relationship with the NQ. Therefore, this construction also suggests that the subject is generated above VP. 2.3. Temporal phrases Temporal phrases such as 2-j-ni ‘at 2 o’clock’ may optionally undergo clefting along with the object and the verb (Koizumi 1990b). This is shown in (11). shita-no-wa did-N-Top
terebi-o TV-Act
( 11a) John-ga -Nom
2-ji-ni 2-o’clock-at
‘What John (1 I b) John-ga -Nom ‘What John
did at 2 o’clock was watch TV.’ shita-no-wa 2-ji-ni terebi-o did-N-Top 2-o’clock-at TV-Act did was watch TV at 2 o’clock.’
miru-koto-da. watch-N-Cop miru-koto-da. watch-N-Cop
In (1 la), the temporal phrase 2-ji-ni ‘at 2 o’clock’ remains with the subject, being a part of ‘presupposition’, while in (1 lb) it is pseudo-clefted along with the object and the verb, being a part of ‘focus’.
M, Nakayama,
M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japanese subjects
309
The quantificational scope interactions of the temporal phrase and subject/object suggest that the temporal phrase is base-generated above object, but under the subject. This is shown in (12).
the the
(12a)
John-ga [2-ji ka 3-ji]-ni [subete-no shoruil-o -Nom 2-o’clock or 3-o’clock -at all-Gen documents-Ace teeshutsushita. handed in ‘John handed in all the documents at two or three o’clock.’ (12b) Daremo-ga [2-ji ka 3-ji] -ni shorui-o everyone-Nom 2-o’clock or 3-o’clock-at documents-Act teeshutsusita. handed in ‘Everyone handed in the document at two or three o’clock.’
In sentence (12a), the temporal phrase takes wide scope over all documents and the object does not take wide scope over the temporal phrase. In sentence (12b), the subject daremo’s ‘everyone’ takes wide scope over the temporal phrase and the temporal phrase cannot take wide scope over the subject. These indicate that the subject NP asymmetrically c-commands the temporal phrase and the temporal phrase c-commands the object. The internal subject hypothesis, under which there is a trace of the subject in the VP, cannot naturally account for unambiguous sentences like (l2b). This is because the scrambled sentence like (13) that contains the trace has ambiguous readings. [2-ji ka 3-ji]-ni (13) John-ga [subete-no shoruil-o, -Nom all-Gen documents-Act 2-o’clock or 3-o’clock-at ti teeshutsushita. handed in ‘John handed in all the documents at two or three o’clock.’ Therefore, these examples illustrate that there is no subject that is c-commanded by the temporal phrase.
trace under
VP
2.4. Depictive predicates There is a de-phrase which describes the state of the referent of an NP at the time when the action denoted by the verb occurs. A couple of examples are given below.
310
M. Nakayama. M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japanese suhjecrs
(14a)
John-ga katuo-o nama-de -Nom bonito-Act raw ‘John ate the bonito raw.’ (14b) John-ga hadaka-de hon-o -Nom naked book-Act ‘John read the book naked.’
tabeta. ate yonda. read
In (14a), de-phrase nama-de ‘raw’ is associated with the object NP, while in (14b), de-phrase haduka-de ‘naked’ is construed with the subject NP. Following Koizumi (1990a), we will refer to the de-phrases in (14a) and (14b) as the object-oriented depictive predicate (ODP) and the subject-oriented depictive predicate (SDP), respectively. Koizumi (1990a) shows that, at D-structure, the ODP is sister to the object, while the SDP is base-generated above the maximal projection which the object and the verb form. The difference between the two kinds of depictive predicates can be observed, for instance, in the following cleft sentences. (15a)
John-ga -Nom ‘What John (15b) *John-ga -Nom ‘What John
shita-no-wa nama-de katsuo-o taberu-koto-da. bonito-ACC eat-N-Cop did-N-Top raw did was eat the bonito raw.’ nama-de shita-no-wa katsuo-o taberu-koto-da. did-N-Top bonito-Acceat-N-Cop raw did raw was eat the bonito.’
(16a)
shita-no-wa hadaka-de biiru-o beer-Act did-N-Top naked did was drink beer naked.’ hadaka-de shita-no-wa biiru-o did-N-Top beer-Act naked did naked was drink beer.’
John-ga -Nom ‘What John (16b) John-ga -Nom ‘What John
nomu-koto-da. drink-N-Cop nomu-koto-da. drink-N-Cop
In (Isa), the ODP has been pseudo-clefted along with the object and the verb whereas in (15b), the ODP did not undergo pseudo-clefting, yielding the illformed sentence. This is explained if we consider that there is a trace of namude between the object and the verb (LF reconstruction). On the other hand, the sentences in (16) are both grammatical, because the SDP is dominated by a node high enough to be associated with the subject. Now, consider the examples in (17).
M. Nukayama,
(17a)
M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japanesr subjects
311
John-wa
[miso -aji ka shooyu-aji]-de subete-no -Top soy bean paste-taste or soy sauce-taste all-Gen sakana-o tabeta. fish-Act ate ‘John ate every fish seasoned with soy bean paste or seasoned with soy sauce.’ (17b) John-wa subete-no sakana-o [miso-aji ka shooyu-aji]-de tabeta. -Top all-Gen fish-Act miso-taste or shooyu-taste ate ‘John ate every fish seasoned with soy bean paste or seasoned with soy sauce.’ These sentences are both two-ways ambiguous with respect to quantifier scope: either the quantified depictive predicate or the quantified object NP may take wide scope. This is because the ODP and the object NP c-command each other (cf. Koizumi 1990). On the other hand, the sentences in (18) are not ambiguous: only the quantified subject can take wide scope. (18) Daremo-ga [hadaka ka kimono-sugatal-de everyone-Nom naked or in kimono ‘Everyone read a book naked or in kimono.’
hon-o book-Act
yonda. read
This sentence is unambiguous because the subject NP asymmetrically ccommands the SDP. If we adopt the VP-internal subject hypothesis where there is a trace of the subject in VP, it would wrongly predict that the SDP may take wide scope in the sentence in (18) similar to the ODP. In sum, the above four pieces of evidence collectively suggest that the subject of the transitive sentence is base-generated above VP.
3. Subjects of unergatives, unaccusatives, Next, let us consider unergatives, sentences do not contain accusative sentences. (19a)
John-ga geragera waratta. -Nom loudly laughed ‘John laughed loudly.’
and direct passives
unaccusatives, Case-marked
and direct passives. These NPs. Observe the following
312
M. Nakayuma. M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japanrsr subjuts
(19b)
John-ga attoiumani shinda. -Nom momently died ‘John died suddenly.’ (19~) John-ga Mary-no kawari-ni shikarareta. scolded was -Nom -Gen behalf ‘John was scolded on behalf of Mary.’ Sentence (19a) is unergative while (19b) is unaccusative. Sentence (19~) is a direct passive sentence. First, let us consider the VP-cleft counterparts of unergative (19a), unaccusative (19b), and passive (19~) as in (20) (21) and (22) respectively. (20a)
(20b)
(21a)
(21b)
(22a)
(22b)
John-ga shitta-no-wa geragera -Nom did-N-Top loudly ‘What John did was laugh loudly.’ * John-ga geragera shita-no-wa -Nom loudly did-N-Top ‘What John did was laugh loudly.’
warau-koto-da. laugh-N-Cop warau-koto-da. laugh-N-Cop
* John-ga shita-no-wa attoiumani -Nom did-N-Top momentarily ‘What John did was die suddenly.’ * John-ga attoiumani shita-no-wa -Nom momentarily did-N-Top ‘What John momentarily did was die.’
shinu-koto-da. die-N-Cop shinu-koto-da. die-N-Cop
shita-no-wa Mary -no kawari-ni shikarareru-koto-da. John-ga -Gen behalf scolded be-N-Cop -Nom did-N-Top ‘What John did was be scolded on behalf of Mary.’ John-ga Mary-no kawari-ni shita-no-wa shikarareru-koto-da. did-N-Top scolded be-N-Cop -Nom -Gen behalf ‘What John did on behalf of Mary was be scolded.’
In sentence (20a), the onomatopoeic phrase geragera ‘loudly’ appears with the verb ‘laugh’ while it is with ‘did’ in (20b). The ill-formed sentence (20b) suggests that the onomatopoeic phrase and the verb form a single constituent. The sentences in (21) are both ill-formed. This may be due to the incompatibility of the verbs ‘do’ and ‘die’. In other words, the verb ‘do’ in Japanese seems to require an animate subject and some intentionality in the focused verb. Since the unaccusative verb ‘die’ does not have intentionality, the
M. Nakavama, hf. Koizumi i Remarks on Japanese subjects
pseudo-cleft
sentences
are ill-formed.
The sentences
in (22) are both
313
well-
formed. If the sentences do not have ‘on behalf of Mary’, the grammaticality is degraded because of a lack of intention. We observed some aspects of pseudo-cleftability of the three types of sentences above. However, those sentences do not clearly show us where the subjects are, i.e., under VP or above VP. The following NQ sentences indicate some structural differences among the three sentences (cf. Miyagawa 1989a,b). geragera 3-nin waratta. * Gakusei-ga 3-CL laughed -Nom loudly ‘Three students laughed loudly.’ (23b) Gakusei-ga attoiumani 3-nin shinda. -Nom momently 3-CL died ‘Three students died suddenly.’ (23~) Gakusei-ga Mary-no kawari-ni 3-nin shikarareta. 3-CL scolded was -Nom -Gen behalf ‘Three students were scolded on behalf of Mary.’ (23a)
The three sentences in (23) contain a numeral quantifier that is associated with the subject. The ill-formedness of (23a) suggests that the subject and the NQ do not hold a mutual c-command relationship. The ill-formed (20b) also suggests that the onomatopoeic phrase and the verb form a single constituent. Therefore, the unergative sentence seems to have the subject base-generated above VP, similarly to the transitive sentences. On the other hand, both the unaccusative (23b) and passive (23~) are well-formed. According to Miyagawa (1989 a, b), unaccusatives and direct passives have traces at the object position that c-command the numeral quantifiers. In other words, the surface subjects in those sentences are actually the objects at D-structure. Since their traces and the numeral quantifiers c-command each other, the sentences are well-formed. The above NQ sentences indicate that nominative Case marked NPs (i.e., subject) are base-generated above the onomatopoeic phrase in unergative sentence (19a), but under attoyuumani in unaccusative sentence (19b) and Mar~l-no kawarini in direct passive sentence (19~). This is further supported by the following sentences with quantifiers (cf. Hoji et al. 1989, Nakayama 1990). (24a)
2-ji ka 3-ji-ni waratta. Daremo-ga everyone-Nom 2 or 3 o’clock-at laughed ‘Everyone laughed at 2 or 3’oclock’
314
M. Nakayama, M. Koizumi 1 Remarks on Japanese subjects
shinda. Daremo-ga 2-ji-ka 3-ji-ni everyone-Nom 2 or 3 o’clock at died ‘Everyone died at 2 or 3 o’clock.’ shookaisareta. (24~) Daremo-ga John- ka Mary-ni everyone-Nom or -Dat introduced was (24b)
‘Everyone
was introduced
to John or Mary.’
Unergative sentence (24a) allows only one interpretation where duremo takes wide scope over the temporal phrase. Therefore, this suggests (24a) has the base word order. Since the temporal phrase appears at VP as discussed above, the subject appears above VP in the unergatives. In unaccusative (24b), two readings are possible where the universal quantifier takes either wide or narrow scope over the temporal phrase. Similarly to (24b), passive (24~) has two readings where the universal quantifier takes either wide or narrow scope over the indirect object (cf. Oka 1988, Hoji et al. 1989). Therefore, both unaccusatives and direct passives contain traces under the temporal phrase and the indirect object, respectively. This suggests that the subjects in those sentences are base-generated under VP. Furthermore, consider the following sentences: waratta. 2-ji ka 3-ji-ni Daremo-ga 2 or 3 o’clock-at everyone-Nom laughed ‘Everyone laughed at 2 or 3 o’clock.’ shinda. (25b) 2-ji-ka 3-ji-ni Daremo-ga 2 or 3 o’clock at everyone-Nom died ‘Everyone died at 2 or 3 o’clock.’ shookaisareta. (25~) John-ka Mary -ni Daremo-ga or -Dat everyone-Nom introduced was ‘Everyone was introduced to John or Mary.’ John-ni shookaisareta. 2-ji-ka 3-ji-ni (25d) Daremo-ga -Dat introduced was everyone-Nom 2 or 3 o’clock at ‘Everyone was introduced to John at 2 or 3 o’clock.’ John-ni shookaisareta. (25e) 2-ji-ka 3-ji-ni Daremo-ga -Dat introduced was 2 or 3 o’clock at everyone-Nom ‘Everyone was introduced to John at 2 or 3 o’clock.’ (25a)
In unergative (25a), there are two possible readings: the temporal phrase takes either wide or narrow scope over the universal quantifier. This suggests that the temporal phrase is base-generated under the universal quantifier as a
M. Nakayama, M. Koizumi i Remarks on Japanese subjects
315
VP-adjunct and then it is scrambled. Since there is a trace, the sentence has ambiguity. On the other hand, sentence (25b) has only one interpretation where the temporal phrase takes wide scope over daremo.4 Since the temporal phrase appears at VP, (25b) suggests that daremo appears under VP. This means that the subject in unaccusatives can appear in situ in Japanese. Moreover, it means that nominative Case is assigned to the NP in situ without NP-movement. The ambiguity of the sentences (25-e) however, suggests that all passive sentences (25c-e) contain traces and they are ccommanded by other quantificational phrases. This means that unlike the unaccusatives, the surface subject is above VP in direct passives. It cannot stay at the base position (the object position). Our question here is why passives require movement while the unaccusatives do not. According to Miyagawa (1989 a, b), both unaccusatives and direct passives undergo NP-movement. However, as we saw, only passives seem to require NP-movement. NP-movement occurs for a Case reason. In other words, the verb loses its accusative Case assigning ability in passives. Therefore, the internal argument moves to the surface subject position (presumably the SPEC of Tense Phrase) to receive Case so that it does not violate the Case Filter (Chomsky 1981). A similar explanation should apply to the unaccusatives since unaccusative verbs do not have Case assigning ability. However, as we saw, NP can receive nominative Case under VP in unaccusatives. Why is this possible for the unaccusatives and not for the passives? We propose the following account: Suppose that for the verb to assign Case, it must be licensed by INFL (e.g., Tense) (cf. Miyagawa 1990). Then, since the passive morpheme appears between the verb and Tense, Tense cannot license the verb directly. That is, the category of the passive morpheme becomes a sort of blocking category for INFL (Tense) to assign Case to the internal argument (cf. Nakayama 1990 and Nakayama and Tawa 1991). Therefore, the Caseless NP is raised to the position where it can receive Case, i.e., outside of VP. On the other hand, the unaccusative verbs do not have Case assigning ability from the beginning. Yet, nothing intervenes between tense and the verb. 4 Perhaps. the following are clearer examples of unaccusative (i)
Subete-no all-Gen
gakusei-ga students-Nom
‘All students (ii) Tokyo-ka
‘All students other.
arrived
Kanda-ni
-0r
(i) is scopally
Tokyo-ka -OF
at Tokyo subeteno
-at all-Gen arrived at Tokyo
ambiguous:
On the other hand,
sentences
(cf. Nakayama
1990).
Kanda-nitsuita. -atarrived or Kanda.’ gakusei-ga
tsuita.
students-Nom or Kanda.’
arrived
either the subject (ii) is unambiguous:
QP or the Goal
QP may take wide scope over the
only the Goal phrase
may take wide scope.
316
M. Nakuyama, M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japanese subject.\
Therefore, Tense can license the verb directly. Thus, tive Case marked without movement. (See Nakayama structure of passives.)
the NP can be nominaand Tawa 1991 for the
Our next question is, then, why other languages like Italian have to have NP-movement in unacussatives (unlike Japanese). We answer this question by saying that these languages require subject-verb agreement, which is a licensing condition of the subject. Therefore, the subject must move to the position where it can have the agreement (the SPEC of AgrP (cf. Chomsky 1989)). On the other hand, since Japanese does not require agreement, the subject does not have to move out of VP. As long as it satisfies the Case requirement and predication, it can remain in situ. Therefore, the word order in (24b) is possible as a base order.
4. Concluding remarks We have looked at the subjects of transitive, unergative, unaccusative, and direct passive sentences in Japanese. Unlike a VP internal subject hypothesis, the subjects are base-generated above VP in the transitives and unergatives while they are base-generated at the object position in both unaccusative and direct passive sentences. The unaccusatives and the direct passives are different in that the subjects of the direct passives must be above VP at Sstructure. The subject of the unaccusative can be at the object position at S-structure because it can receive an internal theta-role from the verb and can have Case in situ. On the other hand, the subject is base-generated at the object position in the direct passives, but it must move out of VP in order to receive Case. This NP-movement occurs because the passive morpheme absorbs Case. That is, although Case assignment requires the direct licensing of the verb by Tense, the verb cannot be licensed in the direct passives because the passive morpheme intervenes between Tense and the verb. Finally, our question is where exactly is the base-position of the subject in transitives and unergatives. We suggest that it is the SPEC of the closest maximal projection (XP) to VP (cf. Ahn 1991).
(26) LxpSubjectivpVI Xl This strict locality between the subject and VP is in part imposed by the theory of predication (e.g., Williams 1980, Rothstein 1983, McNulty 1988,
317
M. Nukayama. M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japanese subjects
Koizumi 1990a). 5 The category XP may differ from language to language: it is Tense Phrase in Japanese while it is Agreement Phrase in English if we adopt Pollock’s (1989) phrase structure (cf. Chomsky 1989, Ouhalla 1990). Since the SPEC of TP is a Case position, subject in Japanese remains in situ. On the other hand, the SPEC of AgrP is not a Case position, thus subject in a language like English moves up to the SPEC of TP in order to satisfy the Case Filter (Chomsky 1981).6 Among others, the two principal motivations for the VP Internal Subject Hypothesis are; (i) simplification of theta-role assignment, and (ii) long distance dependency between subject and subject-oriented phrases such as numeral quantifier and VP. As for (i), Fukui (1986) argues that VP internal subject makes it possible for theta-marking to take place within the projection of a lexical head, which is conceptually attractive (see also Kitagawa 1986). However, this claim has some empirical difficulties. For example, it cannot naturally account for the subject/object asymmetries observed in Marantz (1984). In this paper, we have challenged this claim by showing that there exists a maximal projection between subject and object at Dstructure. As for (ii), Sportiche (1988) observes that in a language like French a subject-oriented numeral quantifier is separated from the subject by a verb or an auxiliary verb in INFL at S-structure, from which he concludes that subject is generated at VP and is moved to the SPEC of IP (see also Koopman and Sportiche 1988). This derived subject hypothesis in Sportiche (1988) and Koopman and Sportiche (1988) is also preferable considering that the surface subject position and VP (a primary predicate of the subject) are separated ‘too far’ in recent theories of phrase structure such as Pollock’s (1988) and Chomsky’s (1989). However, as Sportiche and Koopman themselves seem to be aware of, (ii) does not necessarily require the subject NP to be base-generated within VP: the subject could be generated near (but outside) VP and raised to the surface subject position. Our analysis in this paper readily accommodates (ii) while maintaining that the subjects of the transitive and the unergative sentences are base-generated outside of VP.
5
Although
each theory
respect to the subject over the other here.
of predication
position
is different,
we posit. Therefore,
all of them bring the same consequence we will not commit
ourselves
with
to one theory
6 If there is Aspect Phrase between Tense Phrase and Verb Phrase in Japanese, subject is generated under Aspect Phrase. Since this position is not a Case position, it moves to the SPEC of TP in order to receive Case.
M. Nakayama. M. Koizumi
318
I Remarks on Japanese suhjecis
References
Ahn,
H..
1991. Light
dissertation.
verbs.
University
negation,
and
Chomsky,
N.. 1981. Lectures
on government
Chomsky,
N., 1986. Barriers.
Cambridge,
Chomsky,
N., 1989. Some notes on economy
Mahajan Fukui,
(eds.), MIT Working
N.,
1986. A theory
Massachusetts Hasegawa,
Institute
Nagoya:
Papers
of category
Daigaku
Hoji. H.. 1989. VP preposing
projection
H.. S. Miyagawa,
Southern
California,
Kitdgawa.
Y..
English.
Doctoral
Foris.
and representation.
In: I. Laka,
A.
10. 43374.
and its applications.
Doctoral
dissertation,
subject
hypothesis.
In: T. Sakamoto,
Sooritsu
Kinen
Nihongo
Y. Abe (eds.).
Kyooiku
Kokusai
University.
in Japanese
on VP, held in conjunction Hoji.
Dordrecht:
of derivation
Nihongo-gakka
Nanzan
of California
and binding
in Linguistics
Hoji, H., 1985. Logical form constraints dissertation, University of Washington.
University
and
of Technology.
of Nanzan
Shinpojiumu.
in Korean
MA: MIT Press.
N., 1989. On the VP internal
Proceedings
VP-movement
of Wisconsin.
and configurational (and Korean).
with Southern
structure
in Japanese.
Paper presented
California
Doctoral
at the Syntax Workshop
Korean/Japanese
Linguistic
Conference.
at Los Angeles. and
H. Tada,
1989. NP-movement
The Ohio State University,
1986. Subject
in Japanese
in Japanese.
and Massachusetts
and
English.
Doctoral
Ms..
University
of
Institute
of Technology.
dissertation,
University
of
Massachusetts. Koizumi,
M.. 1990a, Secondary
Koizumi,
M.,
1990b.
depictive
Distribution
predicates
of temporal
in Japanese.
NI-phrases
Ms., The Ohio State University.
in Japanese.
Ms.. The Ohio
State
University. Koizumi. N., 1991. Syntax University. Koopman, Kuroda,
H. and D. Sportiche, S.-Y., 1970. Remarks
only’. Illustrating linguistic
and phrase
1988. Subjects. on the notion
manners
structures
Ms., University
Bulletin
Ms., The Ohio State
of California
of subject with reference
in which formal
Part 2. Annual
of Japanese.
at Los Angeles.
to words like crl.so, eren, or
systems are employed
4, 127~ 152. (Reprinted
as auxiliary in Papers
devices in in Japanese
11 (1986), 121-156.)
S.-Y..
1988, Whether
In: W. Poser CSLI. Marantz.
certain
descriptions:
Linguistics Kuroda.
of adjuncts
A.,
(ed.), Papers 1984. On
the
we agree or not: A comparative
syntax
from
Workshop
the Second
nature
International
of grammatical
relations.
of English
and Japanese.
on Japanese
Cambridge.
MA:
Syntax. The
MIT
Press. McNulty, E.. 1988. Syntax of adjunct predicates. Doctoral dissertation. University of Connecticut. Miyagawa, S.. 1989a. Structure and Case marking in Japanese. New York: Academic Press. Miyagawa, Miyagawa.
S., 1989b. Light verbs and the ergative hypothesis. Linguistic Inquiry 20. 647-65X. S., 1990. Case realization and scrambling. Ms.. The Ohio State University.
Nakayama.
M., 1990. Accessibility
The Ohio State University. Nakayama, M. and K. Tajima, State University
to the antecedents
in Japanese
1991. Four types of purposive
and University
of Wisconsin.
sentence
comprehension.
clauses in Japanese.
Ms.,
Ms., The Ohio
M. Nakayama, M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japanese subjects
Nakayama,
M. and W. Tawa,
Ohio State University Nakayama,
M., M. Koizumi
Paper presented
1991. Implicit
and Amherst and
J.-Y., 1988. Verb movement,
Reinhart,
T., 1976. The syntactic of Technology. S., 1983. The syntactic
Saito,
M.,
1985. Some
Sportiche,
Inquiry
a VP internal
subject
hypothesis.
minimality Tsukuba
domain forms
and
English
the
aspectual
status
of
Studies 7, 187-227.
of IP. Linguistic
Inquiry
20, 365424.
of anaphora.
Doctoral
dissertation,
Massachusetts
of predication.
Doctoral
dissertation,
Massachusetts
and
their
theoretical
implications.
Doctoral
for constituent
structure.
of Technology.
of floating
quantifiers
of adverbs.
J., 1987. Configurationality
Linguistics,
in Japanese
Institute
and its corollaries
19, 425449.
L.. 1989. The syntax
Williams,
1991. Against
UC and the structure
asymmetries
Massachusetts
D., 1988. Theory
Linguistic Travis,
ms. The
of Technology.
dissertation,
Whitman,
in Japanese.
Chicago.
Case and empty pronouns.
Pollock,
Institute
M. Ogino,
at the LSA meeting,
Oka. T., 1988. Abstract
in direct passives
College.
relativized 1990. Sentential negation, Linguistic Review 7, 183-23 1.
Ouhalla. J., auxiliaries.
Institute Rothstein,
arguments
319
351-371.
Dordrecht:
E.. 1980. Predication.
Ms., McGill parameter.
University.
In: T. Imai, M. Saito (eds.), Issues in Japanese
Foris.
Linguistic
Inquiry
15, 131-153.
85 (1991) 3033319.
North-Holland
303
Remarks on Japanese subjects Mineharu
Nakayama
and
Masatoshi
Depcrrimenr of East ASKWI Lunguages
Koizumi*
and Lireratures,
The Ohio Stnie University.
are base-generated
under VP (VP internal
Columbus.
OH
43210. USA
Received
May 1991
It has been proposed sis). In this paper, base-generated pieces temporal
phrases;
and direct unaccusatives
subject
hypothesis
under VP and move above VP at S-structure
of evidence
of unergative
that subjects
we argue that the VP internal are
discussed:
and secondary
and transitive passives
floating
depictive
numeral
predicates.
verbs are base-generated
are base-generated
under
be above VP at S-structure
is not warranted
quantifiers;
in Japanese.
pseudo-cleft
These collectively
indicate
Four
constructions; that the subjects
above VP while the subjects of unaccusatives
VP (i.e., the object
and the direct passives are different
subject hypothe-
that allows the subject to be
in that the subjects
while the subject of the unaccusative
position)
in Japanese.
The
of the direct passives
must
can be at the object position.
1. Introduction In recent syntactic theories, it has been proposed that subjects are basegenerated under VP (e.g., Fukui 1986, Kitagawa 1986, Kuroda 1988, Koopman and Sportiche 1988, Sportiche 1988). In this paper, we argue that the VP internal subject hypothesis that allows the subject to be base-generated under VP (i.e., the SPEC of VP) and move above VP (i.e., SPEC of IP) at Sstructure is not warranted in Japanese. We will discuss floating numeral quantifiers, pseudo-clefts, temporal phrases, and secondary depictive predicates. We conclude that the subjects of unergative and transitive verbs are base-generated above VP while the subjects of unaccusatives are base* Different versions Wisconsin, University
of the content of this paper have been presented of Rochester, and the LSA annual meeting. We thank
at University the participants
those talks and in particular, Heedon Ahn, Hiroko Y. Butler, Kyle Johnson, Yuki Kuroda. Anoop Mahajan, Shigeru Miyagawa, and Kazuhiko Tajima
Yoshi Kitagawa, for their helpful
comments and discussions. Any shortcomings are, or course, ours. The second author the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA.
0024-3841/91,‘$03.50
cm 1991 -
Elsevier Science Publishers
B.V. (North-Holland)
of of
is now at
304
M. Nukayama. M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japunese
SUBJECTS
generated under VP in Japanese. The unaccusatives and the direct passives are different in that the subjects of the direct passives must be above VP at S-structure while the subject of the unaccusative can be at the object position. The organization of the paper is the following: in section 2, we provide four pieces of evidence that suggest that the subjects in the transitives are base-generated above VP. In section 3, we discuss the subjects of unergatives, unaccusatives, and direct passives. Section 4 provides our concluding remarks including some theoretical implications of our hypothesis. Throughout the paper, we assume the theoretical framework of Government and Binding (e.g. Chomsky 198 1).
2. Subjects of transitive verbs In this section, we discuss the subjects of transitive verbs. First, we provide a theoretical assumption, and then we present four pieces of evidence that suggest that subjects are base-generated above VP.l It is well known that quantifiers in Japanese take scope according to their linear order. A quantifier takes wide scope over its c-commanding quantificational elements and it does not take narrow scope (Hoji 1985, cf. Kuroda 1970).” For instance, sentence (1) is not ambiguous: daremo ‘everyone’ takes wide scope over dareka ‘someone’, but it cannot have narrow scope. (1) Daremo-ga dareka-o everyone-Nom someone-Act ‘Everyone loves someone.’
aishiteiru. loves
Observing this phenomenon, Hoji (1985) claims the rigidity of the structure of Japanese. The subject in Japanese appears higher than the indirect and direct objects at base and the indirect object is higher than the direct object. The relevant
sentences
are in (2).
1 Nakayama et al. (1991) used VP-preposing constructions by Hoji (1989) as one piece of evidence to support our claim here. However, it has been pointed out that the construction could be compatible with the VP internal hypothesis. See Hasegawa (1989). * The definition of c-command we are assuming here is essentially that of Reinhart’s (1976). (i) a c-commands nor p dominate
p iff the first branching
the other.
node dominating
a also dominates
p. and neither a
M. Nakayama. M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japanese subjects
305
shookaishita. dareka-ni John-o -Act introduced everyone-Nom someone-Dat ‘Everyone introduced John to someone.’ shookaishita. daremo-ni dareka-o (2b) John-ga
(24 Daremo-ga
-Nom
(W
everyone-Dat
someone-Act
introduced
‘John introduced someone to everyone.’ shookaishita. John-ni dareka-o Daremo-ga -Dat someone-Ace introduced everyone-Nom ‘Everyone introduced someone to John.’
In sentence (2a), the subject daremo takes wide scope over the indirect object and in (2b), the indirect object daremo has wide scope over the direct object dareka. In sentence (2~) the subject takes wide scope over the direct object. Therefore, the subject c-commands the indirect object and the indirect object c-commands the direct object (see also Saito 1985 and Whitman 1987).3
dareka,
2.1. Floating numeral quantifiers A phenomenon called floating quantifiers suggests that there is no subject trace under VP in active transitives. Miyagawa (1989a) argues that for an NP to be construed with a numeral floating quantifier (NQ), they must ccommand each other. VP-internal elements such as an instrumental phrase, the indirect and direct objects cannot appear between the subject and the NQ with which it is construed. This is shown in (4).
3
(44 Gakusei-ga
3-nin kono naihu-de
students-Nom ‘Three students (4b) *Gakusei-ga students-Nom ‘Three students (4c) *Gakusei-ga students-Nom ‘Three students (4d) *Gakusei-ga students-Nom ‘Three students
3-CL this knife-with meat-Act cut cut the meat with this knife.’ kitta. kono naihu-de 3-nin niku-o this knife-with 3-CL meat-Act cut cut the meat with this knife.’ niku-o 3-nin kitta. meat-Act 3-CL cut cut the meat.’ John-ni 3-nin tegami-o kaita. -Dat 3-CL letter-Act wrote wrote letters to John.’
Hoji (1985) also uses weak crossover
phenomenon
niku-o
to support
kitta.
the rigidity
claim.
306
M. Nakayama, M. Koizumi 1 Remarks on Japanese subjects
Sentence (4a) contains the NQ that is associated with the subject. No elements intervene between the subject and the NQ and the sentence is wellformed. In sentence (4b), the instrumental phrase appears between the subject and the NQ while the direct object intervenes between the subject and the NQ in (4~). Both sentences are ill-formed. In sentence (4d), the indirect object is between the subject and the NQ. The ill-formed sentences (4bd) indicate that no element can intervene between the subject and the NQ that it is construed with. On the other hand, time adverbials such as kinoo ‘yesterday’ and kyoo ‘today’ may occur between the subjects and the NQ. This is because a time adverbial can be generated outside the VP as well (cf. Miyagawa 1989a: 30, Koizumi 1990b, McNulty 1988: 9, and Travis 1989, among others). 3-nin kinoo students-Nom 3-CL yesterday ‘Three students bought a book 3-nin Gakusei-ga kinoo students-Nom yesterday 3-CL
(54 Gakusei-ga
(5b)
hon-o book-Act yesterday.’ hon-o book-Act
katta. bought katta. bought
Suppose that the subject NP originates in the SPEC of VP, and is moved into the SPEC of IP for some reason (e.g., the Extended Projection Principle (Chomsky 1981), and/or the Case Filter (Chomsky 1981)) at S-structure. Then, (4b) and (4~) could have structures such as (6a) and (6b), respectively, assuming that the maximal projections are allowed to adjoin only to the maximal projections (e.g., scrambling (see Saito 1985)). (6a) [ip Gakusei,-ga (6b) [ir Gakusei,-ga
[VP kono naihu-de [vr ti 3-nin niku-o [vr niku,-o [vr ti 3-nin tj kitta]]
kitta]]
In these structures, the trace of the subject NP in the VP and the NQ ccommand each other. Therefore, the sentences should be well-formed. These are different from direct passive sentences such as (7) where the numeral quantifier appears after the instrumental phrase. basu-de 30-nin hakobareta. (7) Shuujin-ga prisoner-Nom bus by 30-CL carried were ‘Thirty prisoners were transported by bus.’ Since sentence
(4b) is ill-formed
whereas
(7) is well-formed,
the subjects
of the
M. Nakayama, M. Koizumi i Remarks on Japanese subjects
307
active transitives and the direct passives must be in different positions. The passive (7) is well-formed because there is a trace of the surface subject in the object position which is under VP and c-commands the numeral quantifier (see Miyagawa 1989a, b and section 3). However, the ill-formed sentences in (4) suggest that the subject is not base-generated under VP as in (6), but rather base-generated above VP in the transitives. 2.2.
VP-cleft construction
There is a construction in Japanese similar to the English pseudo-cleft sentence. We are particularly interested in pseudo-clefting of VP, i.e. the one involving the verb suru ‘do’ at the presupposed position as in @a). Let us call it the VP-cleft construction. In VP-cleft constructions, the indirect object cannot remain with the subject. It must be clefted with the object and the verb. Observe the sentences in (8): (8a) John-ga -Nom ‘What John (8b) *John-ga -Nom ‘What John
shita-no-wa kaisha-ni tegami-o okuru-koto-da. did-N-Top company-Dat letter-Act send-N-Cop did was send a letter to the company.’ shita-no-wa tegami-o okuru-koto-da. kaisha-ni company-Dat did-N-Top letter-Act send-N-Cop did to the company was send a letter.’
In sentence (8a), the indirect object appears in the ‘focus’ position with the direct object and the verb whereas in (8b), the indirect object occurs with suru ‘do’ in the ‘presupposition’ position. Ill-formed sentence (8b) indicates that the indirect object forms a constituent with the direct object and the verb, and it is an unbreakable unit. Assuming that ‘breakable’ units are not single but rather maximal projections (cf. bar or intermediate projections, Chomsky 1986) this suggests that there is a maximal projection above the indirect object, but not between the indirect object and the direct object. Incidentally, VP-adjuncts like an instrumental phrase may, but need not be clefted along with the other VP-internal elements, as shown below. (9a) Gakusei-ga [vp kono naihu-de [vp niku-o this knife-with students-Nom meat-Act ‘Three students cut the meat with this knife.’
kitta]]. cut
308
M. Nakapmu,
(9b) Gakusei-ga students-Nom ‘What students (SC) Gakusei-ga students-Nom ‘What students
M. Koizumi
/ Remarks
on
Japanese subjects
shita-no-wa kono naihu-de niku-o kiru-koto-da. did-N-Top this knife-with meat-Act cut-N-Cop did was cut the meat with this knife.’ kono naihu-de shita-no-wa niku-o kiru-koto-da. this knife-with did-N-Top meat-Act cut-N-Cop did with this knife was cut the meat.’
In (9b), the upper VP is clefted while in (SC), the lower VP is clefted. The NQ associated with the subject may not be clefted along with VP. (1 Oa) Gakusei-ga 3-nin shita-no-wa kono naihu-de niku-o students-Nom 3-CL did-N-Top this knife-with meat-Act kiru-koto-da. cut-N-Cop ‘What three students did was cut the meat with this knife.’ (lob) * Gakusei-ga shita-no-wa 3-nin kono naihu-de niku-o students-Nom did-N-Top 3-CL this knife-with meat-Ace kiru-koto-da. cut-N-Cop If VP contains the empty category that is coindexed with the NQ, sentence (lob) should be well-formed. The ungrammaticality indicates that there is no empty category that holds the mutual c-command relationship with the NQ. Therefore, this construction also suggests that the subject is generated above VP. 2.3. Temporal phrases Temporal phrases such as 2-j-ni ‘at 2 o’clock’ may optionally undergo clefting along with the object and the verb (Koizumi 1990b). This is shown in (11). shita-no-wa did-N-Top
terebi-o TV-Act
( 11a) John-ga -Nom
2-ji-ni 2-o’clock-at
‘What John (1 I b) John-ga -Nom ‘What John
did at 2 o’clock was watch TV.’ shita-no-wa 2-ji-ni terebi-o did-N-Top 2-o’clock-at TV-Act did was watch TV at 2 o’clock.’
miru-koto-da. watch-N-Cop miru-koto-da. watch-N-Cop
In (1 la), the temporal phrase 2-ji-ni ‘at 2 o’clock’ remains with the subject, being a part of ‘presupposition’, while in (1 lb) it is pseudo-clefted along with the object and the verb, being a part of ‘focus’.
M, Nakayama,
M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japanese subjects
309
The quantificational scope interactions of the temporal phrase and subject/object suggest that the temporal phrase is base-generated above object, but under the subject. This is shown in (12).
the the
(12a)
John-ga [2-ji ka 3-ji]-ni [subete-no shoruil-o -Nom 2-o’clock or 3-o’clock -at all-Gen documents-Ace teeshutsushita. handed in ‘John handed in all the documents at two or three o’clock.’ (12b) Daremo-ga [2-ji ka 3-ji] -ni shorui-o everyone-Nom 2-o’clock or 3-o’clock-at documents-Act teeshutsusita. handed in ‘Everyone handed in the document at two or three o’clock.’
In sentence (12a), the temporal phrase takes wide scope over all documents and the object does not take wide scope over the temporal phrase. In sentence (12b), the subject daremo’s ‘everyone’ takes wide scope over the temporal phrase and the temporal phrase cannot take wide scope over the subject. These indicate that the subject NP asymmetrically c-commands the temporal phrase and the temporal phrase c-commands the object. The internal subject hypothesis, under which there is a trace of the subject in the VP, cannot naturally account for unambiguous sentences like (l2b). This is because the scrambled sentence like (13) that contains the trace has ambiguous readings. [2-ji ka 3-ji]-ni (13) John-ga [subete-no shoruil-o, -Nom all-Gen documents-Act 2-o’clock or 3-o’clock-at ti teeshutsushita. handed in ‘John handed in all the documents at two or three o’clock.’ Therefore, these examples illustrate that there is no subject that is c-commanded by the temporal phrase.
trace under
VP
2.4. Depictive predicates There is a de-phrase which describes the state of the referent of an NP at the time when the action denoted by the verb occurs. A couple of examples are given below.
310
M. Nakayama. M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japanese suhjecrs
(14a)
John-ga katuo-o nama-de -Nom bonito-Act raw ‘John ate the bonito raw.’ (14b) John-ga hadaka-de hon-o -Nom naked book-Act ‘John read the book naked.’
tabeta. ate yonda. read
In (14a), de-phrase nama-de ‘raw’ is associated with the object NP, while in (14b), de-phrase haduka-de ‘naked’ is construed with the subject NP. Following Koizumi (1990a), we will refer to the de-phrases in (14a) and (14b) as the object-oriented depictive predicate (ODP) and the subject-oriented depictive predicate (SDP), respectively. Koizumi (1990a) shows that, at D-structure, the ODP is sister to the object, while the SDP is base-generated above the maximal projection which the object and the verb form. The difference between the two kinds of depictive predicates can be observed, for instance, in the following cleft sentences. (15a)
John-ga -Nom ‘What John (15b) *John-ga -Nom ‘What John
shita-no-wa nama-de katsuo-o taberu-koto-da. bonito-ACC eat-N-Cop did-N-Top raw did was eat the bonito raw.’ nama-de shita-no-wa katsuo-o taberu-koto-da. did-N-Top bonito-Acceat-N-Cop raw did raw was eat the bonito.’
(16a)
shita-no-wa hadaka-de biiru-o beer-Act did-N-Top naked did was drink beer naked.’ hadaka-de shita-no-wa biiru-o did-N-Top beer-Act naked did naked was drink beer.’
John-ga -Nom ‘What John (16b) John-ga -Nom ‘What John
nomu-koto-da. drink-N-Cop nomu-koto-da. drink-N-Cop
In (Isa), the ODP has been pseudo-clefted along with the object and the verb whereas in (15b), the ODP did not undergo pseudo-clefting, yielding the illformed sentence. This is explained if we consider that there is a trace of namude between the object and the verb (LF reconstruction). On the other hand, the sentences in (16) are both grammatical, because the SDP is dominated by a node high enough to be associated with the subject. Now, consider the examples in (17).
M. Nukayama,
(17a)
M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japanesr subjects
311
John-wa
[miso -aji ka shooyu-aji]-de subete-no -Top soy bean paste-taste or soy sauce-taste all-Gen sakana-o tabeta. fish-Act ate ‘John ate every fish seasoned with soy bean paste or seasoned with soy sauce.’ (17b) John-wa subete-no sakana-o [miso-aji ka shooyu-aji]-de tabeta. -Top all-Gen fish-Act miso-taste or shooyu-taste ate ‘John ate every fish seasoned with soy bean paste or seasoned with soy sauce.’ These sentences are both two-ways ambiguous with respect to quantifier scope: either the quantified depictive predicate or the quantified object NP may take wide scope. This is because the ODP and the object NP c-command each other (cf. Koizumi 1990). On the other hand, the sentences in (18) are not ambiguous: only the quantified subject can take wide scope. (18) Daremo-ga [hadaka ka kimono-sugatal-de everyone-Nom naked or in kimono ‘Everyone read a book naked or in kimono.’
hon-o book-Act
yonda. read
This sentence is unambiguous because the subject NP asymmetrically ccommands the SDP. If we adopt the VP-internal subject hypothesis where there is a trace of the subject in VP, it would wrongly predict that the SDP may take wide scope in the sentence in (18) similar to the ODP. In sum, the above four pieces of evidence collectively suggest that the subject of the transitive sentence is base-generated above VP.
3. Subjects of unergatives, unaccusatives, Next, let us consider unergatives, sentences do not contain accusative sentences. (19a)
John-ga geragera waratta. -Nom loudly laughed ‘John laughed loudly.’
and direct passives
unaccusatives, Case-marked
and direct passives. These NPs. Observe the following
312
M. Nakayuma. M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japanrsr subjuts
(19b)
John-ga attoiumani shinda. -Nom momently died ‘John died suddenly.’ (19~) John-ga Mary-no kawari-ni shikarareta. scolded was -Nom -Gen behalf ‘John was scolded on behalf of Mary.’ Sentence (19a) is unergative while (19b) is unaccusative. Sentence (19~) is a direct passive sentence. First, let us consider the VP-cleft counterparts of unergative (19a), unaccusative (19b), and passive (19~) as in (20) (21) and (22) respectively. (20a)
(20b)
(21a)
(21b)
(22a)
(22b)
John-ga shitta-no-wa geragera -Nom did-N-Top loudly ‘What John did was laugh loudly.’ * John-ga geragera shita-no-wa -Nom loudly did-N-Top ‘What John did was laugh loudly.’
warau-koto-da. laugh-N-Cop warau-koto-da. laugh-N-Cop
* John-ga shita-no-wa attoiumani -Nom did-N-Top momentarily ‘What John did was die suddenly.’ * John-ga attoiumani shita-no-wa -Nom momentarily did-N-Top ‘What John momentarily did was die.’
shinu-koto-da. die-N-Cop shinu-koto-da. die-N-Cop
shita-no-wa Mary -no kawari-ni shikarareru-koto-da. John-ga -Gen behalf scolded be-N-Cop -Nom did-N-Top ‘What John did was be scolded on behalf of Mary.’ John-ga Mary-no kawari-ni shita-no-wa shikarareru-koto-da. did-N-Top scolded be-N-Cop -Nom -Gen behalf ‘What John did on behalf of Mary was be scolded.’
In sentence (20a), the onomatopoeic phrase geragera ‘loudly’ appears with the verb ‘laugh’ while it is with ‘did’ in (20b). The ill-formed sentence (20b) suggests that the onomatopoeic phrase and the verb form a single constituent. The sentences in (21) are both ill-formed. This may be due to the incompatibility of the verbs ‘do’ and ‘die’. In other words, the verb ‘do’ in Japanese seems to require an animate subject and some intentionality in the focused verb. Since the unaccusative verb ‘die’ does not have intentionality, the
M. Nakavama, hf. Koizumi i Remarks on Japanese subjects
pseudo-cleft
sentences
are ill-formed.
The sentences
in (22) are both
313
well-
formed. If the sentences do not have ‘on behalf of Mary’, the grammaticality is degraded because of a lack of intention. We observed some aspects of pseudo-cleftability of the three types of sentences above. However, those sentences do not clearly show us where the subjects are, i.e., under VP or above VP. The following NQ sentences indicate some structural differences among the three sentences (cf. Miyagawa 1989a,b). geragera 3-nin waratta. * Gakusei-ga 3-CL laughed -Nom loudly ‘Three students laughed loudly.’ (23b) Gakusei-ga attoiumani 3-nin shinda. -Nom momently 3-CL died ‘Three students died suddenly.’ (23~) Gakusei-ga Mary-no kawari-ni 3-nin shikarareta. 3-CL scolded was -Nom -Gen behalf ‘Three students were scolded on behalf of Mary.’ (23a)
The three sentences in (23) contain a numeral quantifier that is associated with the subject. The ill-formedness of (23a) suggests that the subject and the NQ do not hold a mutual c-command relationship. The ill-formed (20b) also suggests that the onomatopoeic phrase and the verb form a single constituent. Therefore, the unergative sentence seems to have the subject base-generated above VP, similarly to the transitive sentences. On the other hand, both the unaccusative (23b) and passive (23~) are well-formed. According to Miyagawa (1989 a, b), unaccusatives and direct passives have traces at the object position that c-command the numeral quantifiers. In other words, the surface subjects in those sentences are actually the objects at D-structure. Since their traces and the numeral quantifiers c-command each other, the sentences are well-formed. The above NQ sentences indicate that nominative Case marked NPs (i.e., subject) are base-generated above the onomatopoeic phrase in unergative sentence (19a), but under attoyuumani in unaccusative sentence (19b) and Mar~l-no kawarini in direct passive sentence (19~). This is further supported by the following sentences with quantifiers (cf. Hoji et al. 1989, Nakayama 1990). (24a)
2-ji ka 3-ji-ni waratta. Daremo-ga everyone-Nom 2 or 3 o’clock-at laughed ‘Everyone laughed at 2 or 3’oclock’
314
M. Nakayama, M. Koizumi 1 Remarks on Japanese subjects
shinda. Daremo-ga 2-ji-ka 3-ji-ni everyone-Nom 2 or 3 o’clock at died ‘Everyone died at 2 or 3 o’clock.’ shookaisareta. (24~) Daremo-ga John- ka Mary-ni everyone-Nom or -Dat introduced was (24b)
‘Everyone
was introduced
to John or Mary.’
Unergative sentence (24a) allows only one interpretation where duremo takes wide scope over the temporal phrase. Therefore, this suggests (24a) has the base word order. Since the temporal phrase appears at VP as discussed above, the subject appears above VP in the unergatives. In unaccusative (24b), two readings are possible where the universal quantifier takes either wide or narrow scope over the temporal phrase. Similarly to (24b), passive (24~) has two readings where the universal quantifier takes either wide or narrow scope over the indirect object (cf. Oka 1988, Hoji et al. 1989). Therefore, both unaccusatives and direct passives contain traces under the temporal phrase and the indirect object, respectively. This suggests that the subjects in those sentences are base-generated under VP. Furthermore, consider the following sentences: waratta. 2-ji ka 3-ji-ni Daremo-ga 2 or 3 o’clock-at everyone-Nom laughed ‘Everyone laughed at 2 or 3 o’clock.’ shinda. (25b) 2-ji-ka 3-ji-ni Daremo-ga 2 or 3 o’clock at everyone-Nom died ‘Everyone died at 2 or 3 o’clock.’ shookaisareta. (25~) John-ka Mary -ni Daremo-ga or -Dat everyone-Nom introduced was ‘Everyone was introduced to John or Mary.’ John-ni shookaisareta. 2-ji-ka 3-ji-ni (25d) Daremo-ga -Dat introduced was everyone-Nom 2 or 3 o’clock at ‘Everyone was introduced to John at 2 or 3 o’clock.’ John-ni shookaisareta. (25e) 2-ji-ka 3-ji-ni Daremo-ga -Dat introduced was 2 or 3 o’clock at everyone-Nom ‘Everyone was introduced to John at 2 or 3 o’clock.’ (25a)
In unergative (25a), there are two possible readings: the temporal phrase takes either wide or narrow scope over the universal quantifier. This suggests that the temporal phrase is base-generated under the universal quantifier as a
M. Nakayama, M. Koizumi i Remarks on Japanese subjects
315
VP-adjunct and then it is scrambled. Since there is a trace, the sentence has ambiguity. On the other hand, sentence (25b) has only one interpretation where the temporal phrase takes wide scope over daremo.4 Since the temporal phrase appears at VP, (25b) suggests that daremo appears under VP. This means that the subject in unaccusatives can appear in situ in Japanese. Moreover, it means that nominative Case is assigned to the NP in situ without NP-movement. The ambiguity of the sentences (25-e) however, suggests that all passive sentences (25c-e) contain traces and they are ccommanded by other quantificational phrases. This means that unlike the unaccusatives, the surface subject is above VP in direct passives. It cannot stay at the base position (the object position). Our question here is why passives require movement while the unaccusatives do not. According to Miyagawa (1989 a, b), both unaccusatives and direct passives undergo NP-movement. However, as we saw, only passives seem to require NP-movement. NP-movement occurs for a Case reason. In other words, the verb loses its accusative Case assigning ability in passives. Therefore, the internal argument moves to the surface subject position (presumably the SPEC of Tense Phrase) to receive Case so that it does not violate the Case Filter (Chomsky 1981). A similar explanation should apply to the unaccusatives since unaccusative verbs do not have Case assigning ability. However, as we saw, NP can receive nominative Case under VP in unaccusatives. Why is this possible for the unaccusatives and not for the passives? We propose the following account: Suppose that for the verb to assign Case, it must be licensed by INFL (e.g., Tense) (cf. Miyagawa 1990). Then, since the passive morpheme appears between the verb and Tense, Tense cannot license the verb directly. That is, the category of the passive morpheme becomes a sort of blocking category for INFL (Tense) to assign Case to the internal argument (cf. Nakayama 1990 and Nakayama and Tawa 1991). Therefore, the Caseless NP is raised to the position where it can receive Case, i.e., outside of VP. On the other hand, the unaccusative verbs do not have Case assigning ability from the beginning. Yet, nothing intervenes between tense and the verb. 4 Perhaps. the following are clearer examples of unaccusative (i)
Subete-no all-Gen
gakusei-ga students-Nom
‘All students (ii) Tokyo-ka
‘All students other.
arrived
Kanda-ni
-0r
(i) is scopally
Tokyo-ka -OF
at Tokyo subeteno
-at all-Gen arrived at Tokyo
ambiguous:
On the other hand,
sentences
(cf. Nakayama
1990).
Kanda-nitsuita. -atarrived or Kanda.’ gakusei-ga
tsuita.
students-Nom or Kanda.’
arrived
either the subject (ii) is unambiguous:
QP or the Goal
QP may take wide scope over the
only the Goal phrase
may take wide scope.
316
M. Nakuyama, M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japanese subject.\
Therefore, Tense can license the verb directly. Thus, tive Case marked without movement. (See Nakayama structure of passives.)
the NP can be nominaand Tawa 1991 for the
Our next question is, then, why other languages like Italian have to have NP-movement in unacussatives (unlike Japanese). We answer this question by saying that these languages require subject-verb agreement, which is a licensing condition of the subject. Therefore, the subject must move to the position where it can have the agreement (the SPEC of AgrP (cf. Chomsky 1989)). On the other hand, since Japanese does not require agreement, the subject does not have to move out of VP. As long as it satisfies the Case requirement and predication, it can remain in situ. Therefore, the word order in (24b) is possible as a base order.
4. Concluding remarks We have looked at the subjects of transitive, unergative, unaccusative, and direct passive sentences in Japanese. Unlike a VP internal subject hypothesis, the subjects are base-generated above VP in the transitives and unergatives while they are base-generated at the object position in both unaccusative and direct passive sentences. The unaccusatives and the direct passives are different in that the subjects of the direct passives must be above VP at Sstructure. The subject of the unaccusative can be at the object position at S-structure because it can receive an internal theta-role from the verb and can have Case in situ. On the other hand, the subject is base-generated at the object position in the direct passives, but it must move out of VP in order to receive Case. This NP-movement occurs because the passive morpheme absorbs Case. That is, although Case assignment requires the direct licensing of the verb by Tense, the verb cannot be licensed in the direct passives because the passive morpheme intervenes between Tense and the verb. Finally, our question is where exactly is the base-position of the subject in transitives and unergatives. We suggest that it is the SPEC of the closest maximal projection (XP) to VP (cf. Ahn 1991).
(26) LxpSubjectivpVI Xl This strict locality between the subject and VP is in part imposed by the theory of predication (e.g., Williams 1980, Rothstein 1983, McNulty 1988,
317
M. Nukayama. M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japanese subjects
Koizumi 1990a). 5 The category XP may differ from language to language: it is Tense Phrase in Japanese while it is Agreement Phrase in English if we adopt Pollock’s (1989) phrase structure (cf. Chomsky 1989, Ouhalla 1990). Since the SPEC of TP is a Case position, subject in Japanese remains in situ. On the other hand, the SPEC of AgrP is not a Case position, thus subject in a language like English moves up to the SPEC of TP in order to satisfy the Case Filter (Chomsky 1981).6 Among others, the two principal motivations for the VP Internal Subject Hypothesis are; (i) simplification of theta-role assignment, and (ii) long distance dependency between subject and subject-oriented phrases such as numeral quantifier and VP. As for (i), Fukui (1986) argues that VP internal subject makes it possible for theta-marking to take place within the projection of a lexical head, which is conceptually attractive (see also Kitagawa 1986). However, this claim has some empirical difficulties. For example, it cannot naturally account for the subject/object asymmetries observed in Marantz (1984). In this paper, we have challenged this claim by showing that there exists a maximal projection between subject and object at Dstructure. As for (ii), Sportiche (1988) observes that in a language like French a subject-oriented numeral quantifier is separated from the subject by a verb or an auxiliary verb in INFL at S-structure, from which he concludes that subject is generated at VP and is moved to the SPEC of IP (see also Koopman and Sportiche 1988). This derived subject hypothesis in Sportiche (1988) and Koopman and Sportiche (1988) is also preferable considering that the surface subject position and VP (a primary predicate of the subject) are separated ‘too far’ in recent theories of phrase structure such as Pollock’s (1988) and Chomsky’s (1989). However, as Sportiche and Koopman themselves seem to be aware of, (ii) does not necessarily require the subject NP to be base-generated within VP: the subject could be generated near (but outside) VP and raised to the surface subject position. Our analysis in this paper readily accommodates (ii) while maintaining that the subjects of the transitive and the unergative sentences are base-generated outside of VP.
5
Although
each theory
respect to the subject over the other here.
of predication
position
is different,
we posit. Therefore,
all of them bring the same consequence we will not commit
ourselves
with
to one theory
6 If there is Aspect Phrase between Tense Phrase and Verb Phrase in Japanese, subject is generated under Aspect Phrase. Since this position is not a Case position, it moves to the SPEC of TP in order to receive Case.
M. Nakayama. M. Koizumi
318
I Remarks on Japanese suhjecis
References
Ahn,
H..
1991. Light
dissertation.
verbs.
University
negation,
and
Chomsky,
N.. 1981. Lectures
on government
Chomsky,
N., 1986. Barriers.
Cambridge,
Chomsky,
N., 1989. Some notes on economy
Mahajan Fukui,
(eds.), MIT Working
N.,
1986. A theory
Massachusetts Hasegawa,
Institute
Nagoya:
Papers
of category
Daigaku
Hoji. H.. 1989. VP preposing
projection
H.. S. Miyagawa,
Southern
California,
Kitdgawa.
Y..
English.
Doctoral
Foris.
and representation.
In: I. Laka,
A.
10. 43374.
and its applications.
Doctoral
dissertation,
subject
hypothesis.
In: T. Sakamoto,
Sooritsu
Kinen
Nihongo
Y. Abe (eds.).
Kyooiku
Kokusai
University.
in Japanese
on VP, held in conjunction Hoji.
Dordrecht:
of derivation
Nihongo-gakka
Nanzan
of California
and binding
in Linguistics
Hoji, H., 1985. Logical form constraints dissertation, University of Washington.
University
and
of Technology.
of Nanzan
Shinpojiumu.
in Korean
MA: MIT Press.
N., 1989. On the VP internal
Proceedings
VP-movement
of Wisconsin.
and configurational (and Korean).
with Southern
structure
in Japanese.
Paper presented
California
Doctoral
at the Syntax Workshop
Korean/Japanese
Linguistic
Conference.
at Los Angeles. and
H. Tada,
1989. NP-movement
The Ohio State University,
1986. Subject
in Japanese
in Japanese.
and Massachusetts
and
English.
Doctoral
Ms..
University
of
Institute
of Technology.
dissertation,
University
of
Massachusetts. Koizumi,
M.. 1990a, Secondary
Koizumi,
M.,
1990b.
depictive
Distribution
predicates
of temporal
in Japanese.
NI-phrases
Ms., The Ohio State University.
in Japanese.
Ms.. The Ohio
State
University. Koizumi. N., 1991. Syntax University. Koopman, Kuroda,
H. and D. Sportiche, S.-Y., 1970. Remarks
only’. Illustrating linguistic
and phrase
1988. Subjects. on the notion
manners
structures
Ms., University
Bulletin
Ms., The Ohio State
of California
of subject with reference
in which formal
Part 2. Annual
of Japanese.
at Los Angeles.
to words like crl.so, eren, or
systems are employed
4, 127~ 152. (Reprinted
as auxiliary in Papers
devices in in Japanese
11 (1986), 121-156.)
S.-Y..
1988, Whether
In: W. Poser CSLI. Marantz.
certain
descriptions:
Linguistics Kuroda.
of adjuncts
A.,
(ed.), Papers 1984. On
the
we agree or not: A comparative
syntax
from
Workshop
the Second
nature
International
of grammatical
relations.
of English
and Japanese.
on Japanese
Cambridge.
MA:
Syntax. The
MIT
Press. McNulty, E.. 1988. Syntax of adjunct predicates. Doctoral dissertation. University of Connecticut. Miyagawa, S.. 1989a. Structure and Case marking in Japanese. New York: Academic Press. Miyagawa, Miyagawa.
S., 1989b. Light verbs and the ergative hypothesis. Linguistic Inquiry 20. 647-65X. S., 1990. Case realization and scrambling. Ms.. The Ohio State University.
Nakayama.
M., 1990. Accessibility
The Ohio State University. Nakayama, M. and K. Tajima, State University
to the antecedents
in Japanese
1991. Four types of purposive
and University
of Wisconsin.
sentence
comprehension.
clauses in Japanese.
Ms.,
Ms., The Ohio
M. Nakayama, M. Koizumi / Remarks on Japanese subjects
Nakayama,
M. and W. Tawa,
Ohio State University Nakayama,
M., M. Koizumi
Paper presented
1991. Implicit
and Amherst and
J.-Y., 1988. Verb movement,
Reinhart,
T., 1976. The syntactic of Technology. S., 1983. The syntactic
Saito,
M.,
1985. Some
Sportiche,
Inquiry
a VP internal
subject
hypothesis.
minimality Tsukuba
domain forms
and
English
the
aspectual
status
of
Studies 7, 187-227.
of IP. Linguistic
Inquiry
20, 365424.
of anaphora.
Doctoral
dissertation,
Massachusetts
of predication.
Doctoral
dissertation,
Massachusetts
and
their
theoretical
implications.
Doctoral
for constituent
structure.
of Technology.
of floating
quantifiers
of adverbs.
J., 1987. Configurationality
Linguistics,
in Japanese
Institute
and its corollaries
19, 425449.
L.. 1989. The syntax
Williams,
1991. Against
UC and the structure
asymmetries
Massachusetts
D., 1988. Theory
Linguistic Travis,
ms. The
of Technology.
dissertation,
Whitman,
in Japanese.
Chicago.
Case and empty pronouns.
Pollock,
Institute
M. Ogino,
at the LSA meeting,
Oka. T., 1988. Abstract
in direct passives
College.
relativized 1990. Sentential negation, Linguistic Review 7, 183-23 1.
Ouhalla. J., auxiliaries.
Institute Rothstein,
arguments
319
351-371.
Dordrecht:
E.. 1980. Predication.
Ms., McGill parameter.
University.
In: T. Imai, M. Saito (eds.), Issues in Japanese
Foris.
Linguistic
Inquiry
15, 131-153.