Samuel David Epstein

Second language acquisition: Theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research

To what extent, if any, does Universal Grammar (UG) constrain second language (L2) acquisition? This is not only an empirical question, but one which is currently investigable. In this context, L2 acquisition is emerging as an important new domain of psycholinguistic research. Three logical possibilities have been articulated regarding the role of UG in L2 acquisition: The first is the “no access” hypothesis that claims that no aspect of UG is available to the L2 learner. The second is the “partial access” hypothesis that claims that only LI instantiated principles and LI instantiated parameter-values of UG are available to the learner. The third, called the “full access” hypothesis, asserts that UG in its entirety constrains L2 acquisition. In this paper we argue that there is no compelling evidence to support either of the first two hypotheses. Moreover, we provide evidence concerning functional categories in L2 acquisition consistent with the claim that UG is fully available to the L2 learner (see also Flynn 1987; Li 1993; Martohardjono 1992; Schwartz & Sprouse 1991; Thomas 1991; White 1989). In addition, we will attempt to clarify some of currently unclear theoretical issues that arise with respect to positing UG as an explanatory theory of L2 acquisition. We will also investigate in some detail certain crucial methodological questions involved in experimentally testing the role of UG in L2 acquisition and finally, we will present a set of experimental results of our own supporting the “Full Access” hypothesis.

Derivation and explanation in the Minimalist Program

1. Introduction: Derivation and explanation: Samuel David Epstein & T. Daniel Seely.2. On the status of representations and derivations: Michael Brody.3. Eliminating Labels: Chris Collins.4. Rule applications as cycles in a level-free syntax: Samuel David Epstein & T. Daniel Seely.5. Crash-proof syntax: John Frampton & Samuel Gutmann.6. Reprojections: Norbert Hornstein & Juan Uriagereka.7. Pronouns and their antecedents: Richard Kayne.8. Scrambling, Case, and Interpretability: Hisatsugu Kitahara.9. Resumption, successive cyclicity, and the locality of operations: James McCloskey.10. Movement in a top-down derivation: Norvin Richards.11. Arguments for a Derivational approach to syntactic relations based on clitics: Esther Torrego.12. Issues relating to a derivational theory of binding: Jan-Wouter Zwart.

Studies in comparative Germanic syntax

0. Introduction H. Haider, S. Olsen, S. Vikner. 1. On the Origin of Sentential Arguments in German and Bengali J. Bayer. 2. A Unified Structural Representation of (Abstract) Case and Article. Evidence from Germanic G. Giusti. 3. Preposition Stranding and Resumptivity in West Germanic J. Hoekstra. 4. To Have to be Dative T. Hoekstra. 5. Case and Scrambling: D-Structure versus S-Structure H. de Hoop, W. Kosmeijer. 6. Agreement and Verb Morphology in Three Varieties of English R. Kayne. 7. Structural Case, Specifier-Head Relations, and the Case of Predicate NPs J. Maling, R. Sprouse. 8. Crossover Effects, Chain Formation, and Unambiguous Binding G. Muller. 9. Complex Predicates in Dutch and English A. Neeleman. 10. Pronouns, Anaphors and Case E. Reuland, T. Reinhart. 11. Object Movement and Verb Movement in Early Modern English I. Roberts. 12. Cross-Dialectal Variation in Swiss German: Doubling Verbs, Verb Projection Raising, Barrierhood, and LF Movement M. Schonenberger, Z. Penner. 13. On Agreement and Nominative Objects in Icelandic T. Taraldsen. Index.

Differentiation and reduction in syntactic theory: A case study

This article presents a case study of the reduction of the Case Filter to a Visibility Principle governing theta role assignment (see Chomsky 1981, 1985). The reduced, undifferentiated system, lacking the Case Filter, is shown to be unable to predict certain contrasts in degrees of (un)grammaticality. A differentiated model incorporating the Case Filter encounters no such difficulty. Following Chomsky (1965), I conclude that the differentiated system, capable of accounting for degrees of (un)grammaticality, is preferable in that it attains a higher degree of empirical adequacy than does its reduced counterpart.The type of evidence and argumentation employed here, as well as the proposed grammaticality metric, are completely generalizable and thereby provide a diagnostic for determining the precise nature of differentiation and reduction throughout the syntactic component.

Overt scope marking and covert verb-second

In this article I investigate certain phenomena relating to superiority, the Empty Category Principle (ECP), and scope. I propose a chain-based scope-marking convention and a new analysis of adjunction, and hypothesize that English is a covert verb-second grammar. The analysis is couched within checking theory and ultimately within the bare theory of phrase structure. I propose category-neutral(-ized) LF representations, displaying VP-recursion but lacking functional heads and their projections, and I suggest that this, in turn, allows significant simplification of index-sensitive head government conditions appearing in many contemporary formulations of the ECP.

Labeling by minimal search: Implications for successive-cyclic A-movement and the conception of the postulate “phase”

We argue that Chomsky’s (2013) ‘‘label identification by minimal search’’ explains ‘‘obligatory exit’’ from intermediate positions, not only in the successive-cyclic Ā-movement phenomena that Chomsky analyzes, but also in (phase-internal) successive-cyclic A-movement. Moreover, it does so by employing simplest Merge and third-factor minimal search for label identification. Our extension of Chomsky’s analysis to A-movement operates without any appeal to Merge-over- Move or to lexical arrays or subarrays. This in turn renders the concept ‘‘phase’’ itself no longer necessary in analyzing the core cases of illicit A-movement, shown to reduce to labeling failure. Implications of this result and the nature of the long-standing evidence for strict cyclicity are discussed.

Essays in syntactic theory

1. A note on functional determination and strong crossover 2. Quantifier-pro and the LF Representation of PROarb 3. The local binding condition and LF chains 4. Adjunction and pronominal variable binding 5. Quantification in null operator constructions 6. Differentiation and reduction in syntactic theory: a case study 7. Derivational constraints on A-chain formation 8. Overt scope marking and covert verb-second 9. Un-principled syntax and the derivation of syntactic relations

Eliminating parameters from the narrow syntax: Rule ordering variation by thirdfactor underspecification

1. Introduction: The Biolinguistic Program: A New Beginning, Koji Fujita and Cedric Boeckx Part I: Computational Issues 2. Feature-equilibria in Syntax, Hiroki Narita and Naoki Fukui 3. On the Primitive Operations of Syntax, Takaomi Kato, Hiroki Narita, Hironobu Kasai, Mihoko Zushi and Naoki Fukui 4. Case and Predicate-Argument Relations, Mihoko Zushi Part II: Development, Processing, and Variations 5. Structure Dependence in Child English: New Evidence, Koji Sugisaki 6. Make a Good Prediction or Get Ready for a Locality Penalty: Maybe Its Coming Late, Hajime Ono, Kentaro Nakatani and Noriaki Yusa 7. Some Things to Learn from the Intersection between Language and Working Memory, Gonzalo Castillo 8. Eliminating Parameters from the Narrow Syntax: Rule Ordering Variation by Third Factor Underspecification, Miki Obata and Samuel Epstein Part III: Conceptual and Methodological Foundations 9. On Certain Fallacies in Evolutionary Linguistics and How One Can Eliminate Them, Koji Fujita 10. Biological Pluralism in Service of Biolinguistics, Pedro Tiago Martins, Evelina Leivada, Antonio Benitez-Burraco and Cedric Boeckx 11. On the Current Status of Biolinguistics as a Biological Science, Masanobu Ueda Part IV: Evolutionary Considerations 12. Proposing the Hypothesis of Earlier Emergence of Human Language Faculty, Masayuki Ike-uchi,13. Two Aspects of Syntactic Evolution, Michio Hosaka Part V: Topics in Neurobiology14. Syntax in the Brain, Noriaki Yusa 15. The Central Role of the Thalamus in Language and Cognition, Constantina Theofanopoulou and Cedric Boeckx 16. A Biolinguistic Approach to Language Disorders: Towards a Paradigm Shift in Clinical Linguistics, Antonio Benitez-Burraco

Universal Grammar and second language acquisition: The null hypothesis

The target article advanced the null, unified and widely misinterpreted generative hypothesis regarding second language (L2) acquisition. Postulating that UG (Universal Grammar) constrains L2 knowledge growth does not entail identical developmental trajectories for L2 and first language (LI) acquisition; nor does it preclude a role for the L1. In embracing this hypothesis, we maintain a distinction between competence and performance. Those who conflate the two repeat fundamental and by no means unprecedented misconstruals of the generative enterprise, and more specifically, of the empirical content of the null hypothesis regarding L2 linguistic knowledge growth. We hope to have identified certain common goals, the adoption of which might constitute a firm foundation for continued productive interdisciplinary development of contemporary theoretical and experimental L2 acquisition research.

Phase cancellation by external pair-merge of heads

Abstract As Chomsky (2004, 2005) notes, a theory with set-Merge allows this operation to apply in two different ways, externally (to two separate objects) and internally (one object contained within the other). Here we extend Chomsky’s form of argument to pair-Merge; i.e. in the absence of some stipulation preventing it, it too can apply in two ways: internally and externally. We will argue that external pair-Merge of heads overcomes a paradox concerning bridge verb constructions. In the final section we note that external pair-Merge of heads is, in effect, a “presyntactic” morphological (“word formation”) rule entailed by current syntactic theory. The extent to which the standard theory of morphological operations can be subsumed by external pair-Merge of heads, further unifying syntax and (aspects of) morphology is left for further research.