Keine (2019): Selective Opacity #
This file formalizes the horizons account of selective opacity of [Kei19]: a syntactic
domain may be opaque to some operations and transparent to others (their (1)), and the constraint
is on the searches of probes, each terminated by a category of its own, its horizon ((38)),
rather than on domains or on the moving element. With category inheritance within an extended
projection ((43)) a clause's label collects the categories it projects, so a clause is opaque to a
probe exactly when its label contains the horizon, and Upward Entailment ((40)), that larger
clauses are at least as opaque, is the Horizon Inheritance Theorem ((45), (46)), transparency
antitone in the extension order of clause sizes (sizes_le). The Hindi probes of (48) and (57),
φ-agreement and A-movement on T⁰ with
horizon T, wh-licensing on C⁰ with horizon C and Ā-movement on C⁰ without one, derive the
transparency table (58) with its three locality types (transparency_table) and with it the
generalizations (21) and (23) on long-distance agreement; English hyperraising is A-movement
with horizon C (Section 4.2.3), and its availability elsewhere is the absence of that horizon
(hyperraising_iff).
The Height-Locality Connection ((33), (62)), that higher probes search into more kinds of structure, is derived rather than stipulated: a probe whose horizon lies below its position finds it in its sister and is vacuous ((63)), so for a nonvacuous probe the position bounds the horizon and the horizon bounds the position, the Height-Locality Theorem ((65)) instantiated for Hindi in (66) and (67).
Implementation notes #
Labels are the bilateral labels of the substrate's ClauseSpines and transparency is
Probe.Profile.TransparentTo; the article's probes are defined here, and vacuity is
Probe.Profile.IsVacuous, which takes the sister of a probe on C⁰ to be TP and of one on T⁰ to
be vP.
References #
The label of a finite clause, the categories inherited up its extended projection ((44)).
Equations
Instances For
The label of a large nonfinite clause.
Equations
Instances For
The label of a small nonfinite clause.
Equations
Instances For
Horizons and Upward Entailment (Section 4.1) #
(45), (46): Upward Entailment follows from category inheritance. The three clause sizes
stand in the extension order, TP extending vP and CP extending TP, and transparency is antitone
in that order for every probe (Probe.Profile.transparentTo_label_antitone), so a probe blocked
by a clause is blocked by every larger one.
The Hindi probes (Section 4.2) #
The φ-agreement probe [∗φ∗] of (48b), on T⁰ with horizon T.
Equations
- Keine2019.phiProbe = { probeHead := Minimalist.Cat.T, horizon := some Minimalist.Cat.T }
Instances For
The A-movement probe [•A•] of (48a), on T⁰ with horizon T.
Equations
- Keine2019.aProbe = { probeHead := Minimalist.Cat.T, horizon := some Minimalist.Cat.T }
Instances For
The wh-licensing probe [∗wh∗] of (57), on C⁰ with horizon C.
Equations
- Keine2019.whLicensing = { probeHead := Minimalist.Cat.C, horizon := some Minimalist.Cat.C }
Instances For
The Ā-movement probe [•Ā•] of (48c), on C⁰ without horizon.
Equations
- Keine2019.ābarProbe = { probeHead := Minimalist.Cat.C, horizon := none }
Instances For
A probe's row of the transparency table over the finite, large nonfinite and small nonfinite clauses.
Equations
- Keine2019.row p = List.map (fun (L : Finset Minimalist.Cat) => decide (p.TransparentTo L)) [Keine2019.cpLabel, Keine2019.tpLabel, Keine2019.vpLabel]
Instances For
(58): φ-agreement and A-movement search only into vP clauses, wh-licensing into TP and vP clauses, Ā-movement into all three.
Selective opacity is not binary, since the table has three locality types.
Finite clauses, edge included, are opaque to A-movement and φ-agreement but not to Ā-movement, (23) for the finite clause embedding (49).
The two probes on T⁰ share their horizon, so a nonfinite clause small enough for A-extraction is the vP structure and is transparent to φ-agreement, which makes long-distance agreement obligatory, while Ā-movement enters the TP structure too and has no such effect, (21) for the nonfinite embeddings (50) and (51).
Hyperraising (Section 4.2.3) #
The English A-probe, on T⁰ with horizon C.
Equations
- Keine2019.englishAProbe = { probeHead := Minimalist.Cat.T, horizon := some Minimalist.Cat.C }
Instances For
The English extraposition probe, on T⁰ with horizon T.
Equations
- Keine2019.extrapositionProbe = { probeHead := Minimalist.Cat.T, horizon := some Minimalist.Cat.T }
Instances For
No A-probe search enters a finite clause in English, while Ā-extraction is unaffected, and extraposition, with horizon T, cannot leave even a nonfinite clause (59).
Hyperraising is a horizon parameter. An A-probe on T⁰ enters finite clauses exactly when its horizon is none of the categories a finite clause inherits, as in the languages that allow it.
The Height-Locality Connection (Section 5) #
A probe on C⁰ with horizon T finds its horizon in its sister and has no search space (63).
Height to locality (65a). A nonvacuous probe on C⁰ has no horizon among the categories of its sister TP, and one on T⁰ none among those of vP, so those clauses are necessarily transparent to it.
Locality to height (65b). A probe with horizon T is vacuous on C⁰, and one with horizon v on T⁰ and C⁰, so a nonvacuous probe's horizon bounds its position from below.
A nonvacuous probe on C⁰ searches into TP and vP clauses, and one on T⁰ into vP clauses, whatever their horizons, which is the Height-Locality Connection for the two positions.
The four Hindi probes are nonvacuous, so the two on C⁰ search into TP and vP clauses and the two on T⁰ into vP clauses, which is why nonfinite clauses are no islands for Ā-movement or wh-licensing and why only these interact with long-distance agreement as (21) says; and the A-probe's horizon T would make it vacuous on C⁰, so A-movement lands inside nonfinite clauses, (66) and (67).