On the Locality of Left Branch Extraction and the Structure of Np*

The paper considers several accounts of crosslinguistic variation regarding left branch extraction (LBE), focusing on adjectival LBE, and explores consequences of a proper analysis of LBE for the internal structure of NP. Two lines of research are pursued, both of which are based on the claim that languages that allow adjectival LBE do not have DP. One is based on the phase-based locality system, extending the phase system from clauses to NPs, and the other one is based on the existence of crosslinguistic variation regarding the position of adjectives in the traditional NP, with some languages having the traditional NP-over-AP structure, others having Abney’s AP-over-NP structure. Which structure a language has is argued to depend on the presence/absence of DP in the language, the lack of DP leading to the NP-over-AP structure. Under this analysis, the ban on AP LBE in English-type languages follows from the ban on movement of non-constituents, a problem that does not arise in languages that allow AP LBE. The impossibility of LBE of AP in the presence of another AP in languages that in principle allow such extraction is argued to provide evidence that adjectives are located in multiple specifiers of the same head. This paper examines the phenomenon of left branch extraction (LBE), focusing on adjectival LBE, and explores consequences of a proper analysis ofLBE for the internal structure ofNP, in particular, the structural position of AP. I pursue two lines of research, both of which are based on the claim that languages that allow LBE of adjectives do not have DP. One is based on the phase-based locality system, extending the phase-based locality system from clauses to NPs, and the other one is based on the existence of crosslinguistic variation regarding the position of adjectives in the traditional NP, with some languages having the traditional NP-over-AP structure, others having Abney’s (1987) AP-over-NP structure. Although there are reasons to favor the latter analysis, ultimately I will not be able to provide a completely conclusive way of teasing apart the alternative analyses. In this respect, the paper reflects our present understanding of the phenomenon of LBE, which is currently too rudimentary to put us in a *This material was presented at the 2001 European Conference on Formal Description of Slavic Languages (University of Potsdam), Nanzan Workshop on Scrambling (Nanzan University), 6th Seoul International Conference on Generative Grammar (Hansung University), Université de Paris, University of Maryland, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, University of the Basque Country at Vitoria-Gasteiz, University of Leipzig, and University of Connecticut. I thank all of these audiences and anonymous reviewers, Wayles Browne, Kleanthes Grohmann, Ljiljana Progovac, Sandra Stjepanović, and especially Klaus Abels for helpful comments and suggestions. For help with judgments, I am especially grateful to Michèle Bacholle, Giuliana Giusti, Alexandra Goreska, Lydia Grebenyova, Edit Jakab, Iliyana Krapova, Mariana Lambova, Roumyana Pancheva, Natalia Rakhlin, Roumyana Slabakova, Penka Stateva, Arthur Stepanov, and Sandra Stjepanović. Studia Linguistica 59(1) 2005, pp. 1–45. The Editorial Board of Studia Linguistica 2005. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK, and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA position to conclusively argue for one analysis of the phenomenon. Rather, the goal of this paper is more modest: My hope is that the explorationof the alternative analyses of left branch extraction in this paper will bring us closer to understanding the nature of this rather mysterious phenomenon and shed some light on several important issues concerning the theory of locality and the internal structure of NP.