---
layout: linguistics
title: linguistics/syntax
---

# morphology and syntax

Morphology is the study of word formation. Syntax is the study of sentence formation.<br>
Specifically, both morphology and syntax focus on **structure**.

The distinction between syntax and morphology varies cross-linguistically.<br>
They can be considered to form an overarching **morphosyntactic** theory.

## summary

> Be warned! These notes are incomplete and almost certainly somewhat inaccurate. Proceed at your own risk.

- History of Syntax
  - A wrong approach: Phrase Structure Rules
- Morphology [SKS 2]
  - Syntactic Categories [SKS 2.1]
  - Compositionality [SKS 2.3]
  - Headedness [SKS 2.4]
  - Features
- Basic Ideas
  - Constituency [SKS 3]
  - Heads, Specifiers and Complements
  - Minimalism [n/a]
- Notation
  - X'-theory [SKS 6]
  - Bare Phrase Structure [n/a]
  - Lexical Entries [SKS 6.8]
- Merge
  - Projection [SKS 5]
  - Selection
    - Small Clauses
  - Silent Heads
- Move [SKS 8]
  - Head Movement (affix hopping) [SKS 8.3]
  - Questions
  - vP Shells [SKS 12.4]
- Agree
  - Theta Roles (assigned by verbs)
  - Locality (c-command)
  - Binding (Principles A, B, C) [SKS 7]
    - Small Clauses [SKS 7.4]
  - Raising & Control [SKS 9]
- References

## history

### a wrong approach: phrase structure rules

## morphology

### syntactic categories

### compositionality

### headedness

## basic ideas

## notation

So far, we've been discussing syntax and giving examples using somewhat informal notation. We now formalize this notation.

It cannot be emphasized enough that notational conventions are *just that*: notational conventions. There's nothing stopping us from exclusively using X'-notation or exclusively using bare phrase structure, and syntactic concepts are *not* tied to any specific notation. I will pretty much exclusively bare phrase structure going forth as I like it a whole lot more.

### X'-theory

**X'-theory** (x-bar theory) is a notation originally put forth by Chomsky...

```forest
[XP
  [X (head)]
  [Y (complement)]]
```

```forest
[XP
  [Y (complement)]
  [X (head)]]
```

```forest
[X
  [Y_X (left adjunct)]
  [X (head)]]
```

```forest
[X
  [X (head)]
  [Y_X (right adjunct)]]
```

...

### Bare Phrase Structure

**Bare Phrase Structure** (BPS) is a more modern notation that does away with much of the notational cruft of X'-theory. Instead of bar levels and distinctions between bar levels and "phrases", we simply put the *formal features* of our lexicon in the chart itself and only indicate the *types* of phrases. Whether a phrase has yet to close yet or not (previously indicated by a 'bar) is now indicated by whether there are any unsatisfied selectional requirements on the phrase label.

As such, we may represent  phrases with the

**Head-Initial Phrases**

![`[X [X_Y (head)] [Y (complement)]]`](head-initial.png)
<details markdown="block">
<summary>LaTeX</summary>

```forest
\begin{forest}
[$X$
  [$X_Y$ [(head)]]
  [$Y$ [(complement)]]]
\end{forest}
```

</details>

**Head-Final Phrases**

![`[X [Y (complement)] [X_Y (head)]]`](head-final.png)
<details markdown="block">
<summary>LaTeX</summary>

```forest
\begin{forest}
[$X$
  [$Y$ [(complement)]]
  [$X_Y$ [(head)]]]
\end{forest}
```

</details>

Recall that adjuncts are able to appear on either side of their head. Also recall that adjuncts *select* for their head. We indicate this in our labeling: adjuncts, like heads, have their selectional requirements marked, but do not propagate their type. While certain constructions may lead to notational ambiguity - an adjunct and a head of the same type, specifically - this is rare enough (only really occurring with adverbs) that we take the convenience of BPS notation regardless.

**Left Adjuncts**

![`[X [Y_X (left adjunct)] [X (head)]]`](left-adjunct.png)
<details markdown="block">
<summary>LaTeX</summary>

```forest
\begin{forest}
[$X$
  [$Y_X$ [(left adjunct)]]
  [$X$ [(head)]]]
\end{forest}
```

</details>

**Right Adjuncts**

![`[X [X (head)] [Y_X (right adjunct)]]`](right-adjunct.png)
<details markdown="block">
<summary>LaTeX</summary>

```forest
\begin{forest}
[$X$
  [$X$ [(head)]]
  [$Y_X$ [(right adjunct)]]]
\end{forest}
```

</details>

As a reminder, English is not consistently head-initial. Subjects ("specifiers") in English appear before the verb, breaking this convention. This common structure is represented as the following:

![`[X [Y (specifier)] [X_Y [X_{Y,Z} (head)] [Z (complement)]]]`](english-specifier.png)
<details markdown="block">
<summary>LaTeX</summary>

```forest
\begin{forest}
[$X$
  [$Y$ [(specifier)]]
  [$X_Y$
    [$X_{Y,Z}$ [(head)]]
    [$Z$ [(complement)]]]]
\end{forest}
```

</details>

The lexicon and structure are blended in bare phrase structure. This is useful, and allows us to indicate more specific selectional requirements on the tree itself.

...

### Lexical Entries

...

## Merge

### projection

### selection

### silent heads

## Move

### head movement

### wh-movement

### vP shells

## Agree

### theta roles

### locality

### binding

### raising and control

## References

- ✨ [An Introduction to Syntactic Analysis and Theory](https://annas-archive.org/md5/11bbf70ff9259025bc6985ba3fa4083b)
- MIT 24.902: [2017](https://web.mit.edu/norvin/www/24.902/24902.html), [2015](https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/24-902-language-and-its-structure-ii-syntax-fall-2015/), [2003](https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/24-902-language-and-its-structure-ii-syntax-fall-2003/)