대한언어학회 전자저널

Park, Se-Young. (2016). English Negative Inversion and Split Projection. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal, 24(4), 179-195. This paper is research on English negative Inversion through the analyses based on Split Projection. Here, we have tried to solve two questions: One is "What triggers preposed negative movement and SAI movement?" and the other is "Where is the landing site of the movements? According to Park(1996, 2013)'s theory, these movements are caused by SHA and OSHA in functional categories (CP, FocP, TP). Unlike previous theories, the analyses on landing site of the movements are reinforced through OSHA in CP, FocP, and TP. The auxiliary in SAI moves to [Spec2, TP2], not to [Foc, FocP]. In the embedded clause, interrogative wh-phrase moves to [Spec2, FocP2], not to [Spec, CP]. Park(1996, 2013)'s OSHAs make it unnecessary to set up new topic phrases in Rizzi(1997)'s structure. If we assume Park(1996, 2013)'s OSHA as the available theory, we have better explanatory power to analyze intricate negative constructions with another focus phrase or topic phrases consistently.

# Key Words: negative inversion # SAI # interrogative wh-phrase focus phrase # topic phrase # OSHA # split projection

• Chomsky, N. (1993). A minimalist program for linguistic theory. K. Hale and S.J. Keyser (Eds.), The View From Building 20. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
• Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
• Chomsky, N. (1998). Minimalist Inquiries: the framework. Cambridge, MA: MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics.
• Edmonds, J. (1976). A Transformational Approach to English Syntax: Root, Structure-Preserving, and Local Transformations. New York: Academic Press.
• Haegeman, L. (1991). Introduction to Government & Binding Theory. Oxford, UK & Cambridge, MA, USA: Blackwell Press.
• Haegeman, L. (1995). The Syntax of negation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Haegeman, L. & Zanuttini, R. (1991). Negative Heads and the Neg Criterion. The Linguistic Review 8, 233-251.
• Haegeman, L. & Guéron (1999). English Grammar. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publisher.
• Klima, E. (1964). Negation in English. The Structure of Language (pp.246-323). New Jersy: Prentice-Hall.
• Koizumi, M. (1995). Phrase Structure in Minimalist Syntax. Unpublished doctorial dissertation, MIT.
• Lightfoot, D. (1989). How to Set Parameters. A New Account of Word Order Change, Paper presented at the interdepartmental research seminar in Linguistics. University of Geneva, 11 April.
• Park, S-Y. (1996). Functional Categories in English and Korean. Unpublished doctorial dissertation. Jeonbuk University.
• Park, S-Y. (2013). English Subject-Auxiliary Inversion and Split Projection. The 21st Century English Language and Literature 26(4), 355-370.
• Pesetsky, D. & Torrego, E. (2001). T-to-C Movement: Causes and Consequences. Kenstowicz, M. (Ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language (pp355-426). Mass, MA: MIT Press.
• Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech and J. Svartvik. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman Press.
• Quirk, R. & Greenbaum, S. (1990). A Student\'s Grammar of The English Language: Longman Press.
• Radford, A. (2009). Analyzing English Sentences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Rizzi, L. (1997). The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery. Haegeman, L. (Ed.), Elements of Grammar: Handbook of Generative Syntax (pp. 281-337) Dogrecht: Kluwer.
• Rundanko, J. (1980). Toward Description of Negativity Conditioned Subject Operator Inversion in English. English Studies 68, 348-359.
• Suh, J-H. (2007). A minimalist Analysis of Subject-Auxiliary Inversion in English. English Language and Linguistics. 23, 113-132.