Conference Presentation: Feature Inheritance and Object Raising in Epistemic Modal Constructions in Mandarin Chinese
Tim Chou presented his paper, “Feature Inheritance and Object Raising in Epistemic Modal Constructions in Mandarin Chinese” at the 2009 Mid-America Conference on Linguistics held at the University of Missouri, Oct. 9-11.
Excerpt from the abstract:
Epistemic modals like yinggai ‘should’ in Chinese have been assumed to be main predicates taking a TP complement as in (1a) since the subject can undergo A-movement to matrix Spec-T as in (1b) (cf. [8]). Besides, Lin (to appear) argued that the embedded object can raise to the matrix clause as illustrated by (2). What makes (2) interesting is that it appears to violate the Minimal Link Condition (MLC). Lin (to appear) suggests that the object raising in (2) is an instance of A’-movement, and the MLC violation is only apparent. However, this paper presents arguments challenging an A’-movement analysis of (2). First, given that Weak Crossover Effect (WCO) is a typical diagnosis of A’-movement (*Whoi does [hisi mother] like ti?), if object raising in (2) is an instance of A’-movement, we should expect it to be ruled out by WCO. However, this prediction is not borne out as shown in (3). Second, if object raising in (2) is actually A-movement, it should be able to feed binding condition A (Johni seems to himselfi [ti to like Mary]). This prediction is borne out as evidenced by (4). (3) and (4) jointly indicate that the object in (2) is an A-movement targeting the matrix Spec-T, rather than an instance of A’-movement. However, we need to explain why object raising in (2), as A-movement, is not excluded by MLC in Chinese.
Following Chomsky’s idea of feature inheritance ([3] and [4]), the unvalued φ-features on T are inherited from the phase head C. I assume that the embedded T in (2) does not contain any unvalued φ-features due to the lack of the CP-layer. It only has the inherent EPP feature, which needs to have only its edge filled. Crucially, in the absence of unvalued φ-features, the EPP does not impose any restriction on minimality. It only needs to attract some active goal with unvalued features to Spec-T, regardless of minimality. What determines the minimality effect in the derivation is the probe-goal relation between unvalued features, not the EPP. For this reason, the embedded object wancan ‘dinner’ may raise to embedded Spec-T for EPP requirements, producing (5a). Next, the matrix T with the unvalued φ-features inherited from C probes for the closest goal wancan ‘dinner’ at the embedded Spec-T and attracts it to its specifier for EPP as in (5b) (= (2)). In sum, the EPP alone does not force the applicability of the MLC, and the apparent MLC violation of object raising in (2) results from the lack of unvalued φ-features on the embedded T. Note that the effect of the MLC in Chinese is still evidenced elsewhere, as in (5c). The probe-goal relation between the matrix T and Zhangsan at Spec-v* cannot be established since the head of the A-chain (wancani, ti) at embedded Spec-T intervenes. As a result, Zhangsan at Spec-v* cannot move to matrix Spec-T.
The analysis shown in this paper contributes to the long-standing debate on the motivation for A-movement in linguistic theory. Specifically, it presents evidence against the universality of a checking-based theory of A-movement (cf. [1], [5], and [6]) because even though the embedded T does not contain any unvalued features except for its inherent EPP structural requirement, argument raising still occurs. Moreover, the fact that the embedded object can raise to matrix Spec-T via embedded Spec-T in (2) indicates that Mandarin Chinese employs the delayed version of the Phase Impenetrability Condition in [2] as in (6) so that the object within the domain of v* is accessible to EPP on the embedded T. We argue that the employment of delayed PIC is related to the lack of Case-valuation by v* in Chinese (in contrast to English) as implied by the analysis of Icelandic in [7].