"Non UBC"@en . "DSpace"@en . "West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (38th : 2020 : Vancouver, B.C.)"@en . "University of British Columbia. Department of Linguistics"@en . "Lee, Tommy Tsz-Ming"@en . "Yip, Ka-Fai"@en . "2020-04-17T13:11:53Z"@en . "2020-03-06"@en . "https://circle.library.ubc.ca/rest/handle/2429/74053?expand=metadata"@en . "2. Hyper-raisingEmbedded clauses as CP\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Complementizers (waa for Cantonese, l\u00C3\u00A0/r\u00E1\u00BA\u00B1ng for Vietnamese)\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Topic constructions(3)Movement, not base generation \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Idioms preservation(4)\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Non-idioms with synonyms:(5)A-movement, instead of A\u00E2\u0080\u0099-movement\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Landing site: subject (A-position), not topic (A\u00E2\u0080\u0099-position)(6)\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Subject-object asymmetry (vs. object-topicalization is possible)(7) (subject)(*object)\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 A-movement creates binding possibilities(8) Raising, phase unlockedTommy Tsz-Ming Lee1, Ka-Fai Yip21University of Southern California, 2The Chinese University of Hong Kong\u00EF\u0080\u00AA 1tszmingl@usc.edu, 2kafaiyip@cuhk.edu.hkThe 38th meeting of the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL38)March 6-8, 2020 at The University of British Columbia1. IntroductionCross-linguistic variation of raising-to-subject constructions \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 English: bans subjects raising from finite clauses/ CPs(1)\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Cantonese & Vietnamese:(2)Research Questions:\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Is the apparent raising pattern a genuine one (i.e. hyper-raising, HR)? (\u00C2\u00A72)\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 What differentiates the two classes of attitude verbs? (\u00C2\u00A73)\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Why is hyper-raising possible and how is it derived syntactically? (\u00C2\u00A74)(i) Raising Attitude Verbs (RAVs)gamgok [C], c\u00E1\u00BA\u00A3m gi\u00C3\u00A1c [V] \u00E2\u0080\u0098feel like\u00E2\u0080\u0099 tengman [C], nghe n\u00C3\u00B3i [V] \u00E2\u0080\u0098hear\u00E2\u0080\u0099soengseon [C], tin l\u00C3\u00A0 [V] \u00E2\u0080\u0098believe\u00E2\u0080\u0099waaiji [C], nghi l\u00C3\u00A0 [V] \u00E2\u0080\u0098suspect\u00E2\u0080\u0099gugai [C], \u00C4\u0091o\u00C3\u00A1n l\u00C3\u00A0 [V] \u00E2\u0080\u0098guess\u00E2\u0080\u0099gong-gan [C] \u00E2\u0080\u0098talk-PROG\u00E2\u0080\u0099 waa-zo [C] \u00E2\u0080\u0098say-PERF\u00E2\u0080\u0099(ii) Non-raising Attitude Verbs (NRAVs)zidou [C], bi\u00E1\u00BA\u00BFt [V] \u00E2\u0080\u0098know\u00E2\u0080\u0099,geidak [C], nh\u00E1\u00BB\u009B [V] \u00E2\u0080\u0098remember\u00E2\u0080\u0099,jingwai/gokdak [C], ngh\u00C4\u00A9/cho [V] \u00E2\u0080\u0098think\u00E2\u0080\u0099gamgok-dou [C], c\u00E1\u00BA\u00A3m-th\u00E1\u00BA\u00A5y [V] \u00E2\u0080\u0098feel-RESULT\u00E2\u0080\u0099,teng-dou [C], nghe-\u00C4\u0091\u00C6\u00B0\u00E1\u00BB\u00A3c [V] \u00E2\u0080\u0098hear-RESULT\u00E2\u0080\u0099gu-dou [C], \u00C4\u0091o\u00C3\u00A1n-\u00C4\u0091\u00C6\u00B0\u00E1\u00BB\u00A3c [V] \u00E2\u0080\u0098guess-RESULT\u00E2\u0080\u0099 8. Selected references: \u00E2\u0097\u008F von Fintel, K., & Gillies, A. S. 2010. Must... stay... strong! NLS, 18(4), 351-383. \u00E2\u0097\u008F Halpert, C. 2019. Raising, unphased. NLLT, 37(1), 123-165. \u00E2\u0097\u008F Rackowski, A., & Richards, N. 2005. \u00E2\u0080\u0098Phase edge and extraction: A Tagalog case study\u00E2\u0080\u0099. LI, 36(4), 565-599. 3. An evidential componentEvidentiality in attitude reports\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Compatibility with direct evidence: *RAVs vs. OKNRAVs(9)\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 (i) RAVs: specified for indirect evidencee.g. inferential gamgok; hearsay tengman (cf. hearsay evidential marker wo5, Tang 2015)\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 (ii) NRAVs: not a unified classe.g. gamgok-dou with direct evidence; unspecified gokdak; factive zidouRAVs are similar to epistemic modals\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Epistemic must involves indirect inference/ deduction instead of direct observation (von Fintel & Gillies 2010) \u00E2\u0086\u0092 also similar to evidence markers of indirect evidence4. Phase unlockingTheoretical challenges imposed by hyper-raising\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 (I) Phase theory/ PIC: Embedded subjects on Spec,TP are inaccessibleto the higher phase\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 (II) Improper Movement: Embedded subjects cannot move to matrixSpec,TP (A-poisiton) through Spec,CP (A\u00E2\u0080\u0099-position)Phase unlocking (Rackowski & Richards 2005, Halpert 2019)\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Relax (I) by agreeing with the phase\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Featural setup:a. Two (null) C heads: C[iEV] vs. CCP[iEV] denotes evidence-based proposition b. RAVs have [uEV], but not NRAVs\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Step 1:An RAV c-selects and agrees with a CP phasewith [iEV], unlocking the phase\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Step 2:The embedded subject is accessible to matrix TP now, and raises to its Spec to satisfy T\u00E2\u0080\u0099s [EPP]6. ConclusionThe role of lexical semantics in raising \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 HR as syntactic reflex of indirect evidence in C&V\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Raising possibilities among verbs are not entirely idiosyncratic (contra. Polinsky 2013)Phase unlocking by an Agree relation\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Explains the selectivity of PIC7. Acknowledgments: We thank Sheila Chan for Cantonese data and Nguyen Thi Hong Quy for Vietnamese data. 5. Alternative analysesRelax (I) by Exfoliation (Pesetsky 2019)\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 PIC is voided by removing phase head C \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Problem: Hyper-raising with overt C heads in (2)Relax (II) by assuming C[A] (Fong 2019)\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 C carries A-features, rendering Proper Movement\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Problem: Subjects do not stop at embedded Spec,CP* [ \u00E2\u0080\u00A6 RAV [Subj [C \u00E2\u0080\u00A6 ]]] in Cantonese & Vietnamese\u00E2\u009C\u0097(II) (I) \u00E2\u009C\u0097"@en . "Poster"@en . "10.14288/1.0389863"@en . "eng"@en . "Other"@en . "Unreviewed"@en . "Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library"@en . "Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International"@* . "http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/"@* . "Faculty"@en . "Graduate"@en . "Raising, phase unlocked"@en . "Text"@en . "http://hdl.handle.net/2429/74053"@en .