Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The complementizer is often held to be the syntactic head of a full clause, which is therefore often represented by the abbreviation CP (for complementizer phrase).Evidence of the complementizer functioning as the head of its clause includes that it is commonly the last element in a clause in head-final languages like Korean or Japanese in which other heads follow their complements, but it ...
A snippet of Python code with keywords highlighted in bold yellow font. The syntax of the Python programming language is the set of rules that defines how a Python program will be written and interpreted (by both the runtime system and by human readers). The Python language has many similarities to Perl, C, and Java. However, there are some ...
DPs were proposed under generative syntax; [4] not all theories of syntax agree that they exist. [5] Complementizer Phrase: the head of a complementizer phrase (CP) is a complementizer, like that in English. In some cases the C head is covert (not overtly present). The complement of C is generally agreed to be a tense phrase (TP).
Cross-linguistically, complementizer-less environments (phrases which lack an overt C element) are often attested. In many cases, the complementizer is optional. In the following example, in (a), the complement clause "the cat is cute" is introduced by the overt complementizer "that". In (b), C is null; this is represented by the null symbol "Ø".
The +q feature of the complementizer (+q= question feature) results in an EPP:XP +q feature: This forces an XP to the specifier position of CP. The +q feature also attracts the bound morpheme in the tense position to move to the head complementizer position; leading to do-support. [1]: 260–262
If the trace is in Spec-IP and we have an overt complementizer (such as that), the sentence is ungrammatical because the ECP is violated. The closest potential governor would be the complementizer, which cannot antecedent-govern the trace because it is not coindexed with it (and theta-government is impossible since trace is in Spec-IP).
Although other theories of syntax do not use the mechanism of movement in the transformative sense, the term wh-movement (or equivalent terms, such as wh-fronting, wh-extraction, or wh-raising) is widely used to denote the phenomenon, even in theories that do not model long-distance dependencies as a movement.
An explanation for this is the fact that syntactic features delimit the C-system in layers. As such the Force feature represented by the complementizer “que” would belong to the upper part of the C-system, the Int element “se” to the middle part and the “di” complementizer to the lower part.