후순환 규칙과 격

Before it was introduced as a syntactic rule by Saito (1985), scrambling had been treated as a stylistic rule that applied in the PF component. Traditionally, stylistic rules have been called post cyclic rules in that they are operative after the application of cyclic rules. As the theory of generative grammar developed, stylistic rules were redefined as syntactic rules or were eliminated from grammar. However, Holmberg (1999) recently has claimed that Object Shift (OS) is a stylistic rule applying in the PF component. This seems to redeem a type of rule that does apply outside narrow syntax. Scrambling, on the other hand, is not subject to this kind of redefinition because its properties strongly suggest that it should be operative at narrow syntax. However, there has been consensus that OS and scrambling have some properties in common, which seem to be worth trying to investigate. In this paper, I try to set a hypothesis for the similarities and differences between OS and scrambling. My main idea is that both OS and scrambling are post-cyclic in some sense; they are post-cyclic to the effect that they move elements that have undergone operations triggered by features for cyclic movements. I assume that the differences between OS and scrambling are due to the parametric differences among relevant language