In this paper, I discuss the adequacy and the problems of the TH/EX (Thematization/Extraction) rule analysis proposed in Chomsky (1999), which adopts the following assumption: TH/EX is an operation of the phonological component. Chomsky argues that expletive passive/unaccusative constructions in English involve obligatory leftward or rightward displacement of the direct object(DO). While examining the counter-evidence against the TH/EX operation, I make a comparison between the analysis of Chomsky (1999) and that of Radford (2000). During the discussion, I suggest that the English specific rule TH/EX be reconsidered with regard to not only the difference between spec-VP and VP-complement analysis of DO, but also the difference of acceptability depending on native speakers’ intuitions.
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Background of TH/EX
3. TH/EX analysis of Chomsky (1999)
4. Counter-TH/EX analysis in Radford (2000)
5. Comparison and Problems
6. Summary and Conclusion
References
(0)
(0)