Universal #1378
Legacy number: 1378
| Number | 1374 |
| Original | Clause embedding hierarchy: S[...VP’[ ... Oi ...] ...] > S[...S’[... Oi ...] ...] > S[ ...NP[Det N S’[ ... Oi ...] ...]. If a language allows gaps on a certain point in the hierarchy, it will also allow gaps on all the points higher up. |
| Standardized | Clause embedding hierarchy: IF a gap in a complex NP is grammatical, THEN gaps in finite subordinate clauses and infinitival phrases will also be grammatical. IF a gap in a finite subordinate clause is grammatical, THEN a gap in an infinitival phrase will also be grammatical. |
| Formula | gap in complex NP ⇒ gap in finite subordinate clause ⇒ gap in infinitival phrase |
| Keywords | gap, embedding, hierarchy |
| Domain | syntax |
| Type | implicational hierarchy |
| Status | achronic |
| Quality | absolute |
| Basis | Swedish, English (both Germanic), French (Italic), Russian (Slavic), Japanese (Japanese-Ryukyuan) |
| Source | Hawkins 1999: 263 |
Discussion
Notes
This hierarchy says that infinitival phrases are most hospitable to gaps, finite subordinate clauses are more resistant, while complex NP environments are most resistant at all. This is exemplified in (i) for relative clause constructions.(i) Permitted Filler-Gap Domains for relative clause heads: a. S[... VP’ ...] : Swedish, Japanese, English, French, Russian, German; b. S[... S’ ...] : Swedish, Japanese, English, French; c. S[... NP[Det N S’] ...] : Swedish, Japanese.
Log in to join the discussion.
(i) Permitted Filler-Gap Domains for relative clause heads:
<table class = "textTable">
<tr>
<td> </td>
<td> a.</td>
<td> S[... VP' ...]</td>
<td> :</td>
<td> Swedish, Japanese, English, French, Russian, German;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td> </td>
<td> b.</td>
<td> S[... S' ...] </td>
<td>:</td>
<td> Swedish, Japanese, English, French;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td> </td>
<td> c.</td>
<td> S[... NP[Det N S'] ...]</td>
<td> :</td>
<td> Swedish, Japanese.</td>
</tr>
</table>