On Merging Into Pro-XP In The English Language

Merge, as a virtual conceptual necessity, is an operation responsible for phrase structure building in the Minimalist Program of generative grammar. This dissertation builds on the concept and proposes that natural grammar allows for what I call INTO-Merge as a subspecies of Merge, which combines a pro-element with a feature-matching element. The operation is called INTO-Merge in the sense that the pro-element provides a box-like internal structure with feature-designated slots in need of proper bearers and the feature-matching element performs the function of feature-bearers, hence being metaphorically merged into the box the pro-element provides. The structure thus formed is dubbed Box Structure with the pro-element as Box-bearer and the feature-matching element as Box-contents. The existence of INTO-Merge as a subtype of Merge, together with the Box Structure it forms, is proposed and defended with a series of constructions in the English language, such as the pronoun-determiner structure, the there-expletive construction, the it-expletive construction, the sentential subject structure, outside verbals and the locative inversion construction.Chapter1introduces the goals of the dissertation, reviews related literature to Merge, builds up the basis on which the proposal is made and defended, and lays out the organization of the dissertation.Chapter2proposes INTO-Merge and Box Structure on the basis of the pronoun-determiner structure in the English language. The two elements involved in the structure under concern are argued to undergo INTO-Merge and form Box Structure, which captures the distribution of the structure in English. As far as the data of the pronoun-determiner structure go, INTO-Merge is defined as applying solely to the category D, which is subject to extension in the following chapters at last to a category-neutral version.Chapter3instantiates INTO-Merge and Box Structure with the there-expletive construction, in which the expletive pro-DP there and the associate DP are argued to form a pro-DP Box Structure. The proposed Box Structure analysis capitalizes on the feature-matching requirement between Box-bearer and Box-contents, providing an adequate account for the major properties of the construction under concern. For the conspicuous difference in pro-DP Box Structure formation between the pronoun-determiner structure and the^ere-expletive construction, I argue that the former involves late INTO-Merge, which requires independent motivation, while the latter involves early INTO-Merge, which applies as early as possible. Chapter4extends INTO-Merge to cover the category C as well as D on the basis of the well-documented parallelism between categories D and C. The extension is empirically motivated by the it-expletive construction, in which the internal structure of the expletive it is argued to contain a pro-CP0, which takes the associate CP as Box-contents.Chapter5provides a pro-CP Box Structure analysis of English sentential subject structure. A null referential it is argued to exist in the structure under concern, which moves to specTP and takes the subject CP as Box-contents. As for the so-called Topic behaviors of subject CPs,1propose that they follow from the special licensing condition on the null referent it, which requires a Factive Case. With the C-T-Nominative system, the Topic behaviors of subject CPs receive an account independently of Topic analysis. The lack of CFac, which is responsible for Factive Case assignment, and the incompatibility of CFac in relevant environments largely account for the Topic behaviors of subject CPs.Chapter6represents a great leap in generalization with INTO-Merge extended first to cover the category P and then to cover all syntactic categories. The move is conceptually motivated and receives empirical support from outside verbals and the locative inversion construction in the English language, which instantiate pro-PP Box Structure. For outside verbals, I argue that the expletive there, as a species different from that in the construction addressed in Chapter3, contains a pro-PP0in its internal structure, which takes a locative PP as Box-contents, forming a pro-PP Box Structure. A similar pro-PP Box Structure is argued to exist in the locative inversion construction, in which a null there take a locative PP in subject position.Chapter7summarizes the main points of the dissertation with the conclusion that natural grammar or UG allows for INTO-Merge as a subspecies of Merge, and discusses some issues for further research.