5:37 - how would the movement and tree work for the sentence “Doesn’t he dance?” or “Does not he dance?” You used “does he not dance” to justify this movement but don’t these other (more common) variations break your argument?
Hi, quick question. What about a question like “Don’t you dance?” In this case, dummy do moved up with the negation but left the verb behind. And that confuses me because in the tree you drew for the sentence “You do not dance,” the verb phrase is the complement of the negation which can’t be separated. How does “Don’t you dance?” work?
Thank you for your lecture, It helped me a lot. Can I ask you a question? It’s about negation, but not about the very topic you deal with in this video. In a sentence like “John seems not to be that smart.” To what node ‘not’ belongs? According to what I learned, it should be attached to a specifier position of VP. However, it results in “*John seems to not be that smart.”, which is totally ungrammatical. ‘To’ belongs to T node. How ‘not’ can precede T node?
How does it work with a sentence like "Doesn't he dance?" Furthermore, where is the inflection of "do"+"es" -> "does" represented? By an IP you left out?
so is "do" its own "auxiliary phrase"? because in a sentence like "did you dance", T lowering to V leaving an empty T which then has a "do" in it will result in something like "do you danced" which is not grammatical?
Thank you for your helpful video lectures, Can we disambiguate the following ambiguous sentence by using a tree ? "You do not dance" It can be a declarative sentence or an imperative sentence having an overt subject.
Thank you for the lecture. A question: I don't know whether the sentence like "Does not he dance" or "Doesn't he dance" is grammatically correct since I'm not a native English speaker. But if it is, does it mean we moved the tense mark (does) and negation mark (not) together to the position of C? Components should not be moved together into one place, right?
C can only have one head, so we can only move one thing, and according to the previous video, we move the closest word which is next T, up to C, which in this case, is DOES
So, what is the syntactically correct form? DOESN´T HE DANCE ? or DOES HE NOT DANCE ? In questions , the DO moves from T head to C head , but the problem is the negation adverb NOT ; does it move along with the auxiliary DO or does it stay put ? I see it in a tree that only DO moves up to C and NOT stays put . Question is : CAN THE AUXILIARY "NOT" MOVE ALONG WITH "DO" OR NOT ? How would the correct tree be then ?
I currently use Andrew Carnie's "Syntax" textbook. Can you recommend me some other good books for studying syntax? Also: if you have any book recommendations for linguistics in general I'd like to know too.
"Core Syntax: A Minimalist Approach" by David Adger is pretty comprehensive for current minimalist syntax. Of course, there are many other frameworks of syntax, but I do not have a good book list. I recommend looking at LING courses at different universities in the topics you're interested in and looking at a syllabus or two. You'll get a better idea of what universities use as far as texts.
So for the sentence "does he not dance?" "do" gets a present tense under T, so there is a [-past] under T, then "do" in agreement with "he" changes into "does" and moves up to C. Have I understood correctly?
can you teach me how to draw the tree diagram of the sentence "Don't let him leave" in an IP one. I really don't know how to construct this kind of imperative sentence. Thanks.
So if in the sentence "He does not dance", 'do' inflects to 'does' under the present tense in T, why doesn't it also inflect to 'does' in the sentence "I do not dance"??????
![[Syntax] VP Internal Subject Hypothesis](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/y49jynm23pQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![[Syntax] VP Internal Subject Hypothesis](/img/tr.png)
![[Syntax] X-Bar Theory - Specifiers, Adjuncts, and Complements](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n8TYuq173N0/mqdefault.jpg)
![[Syntax] Theta Roles and Theta Grids](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/06MpE22sIPI/mqdefault.jpg)
![[Syntax] Constituents](/img/n.gif)
The way I’ve learned more here than from my actual LSCI class 😭 these videos are such a blessing
5:37 - how would the movement and tree work for the sentence “Doesn’t he dance?” or “Does not he dance?”
You used “does he not dance” to justify this movement but don’t these other (more common) variations break your argument?
Hi, quick question.
What about a question like “Don’t you dance?” In this case, dummy do moved up with the negation but left the verb behind. And that confuses me because in the tree you drew for the sentence “You do not dance,” the verb phrase is the complement of the negation which can’t be separated. How does “Don’t you dance?” work?
do+neg combine first before movement
Thank you for your lecture, It helped me a lot. Can I ask you a question? It’s about negation, but not about the very topic you deal with in this video. In a sentence like “John seems not to be that smart.” To what node ‘not’ belongs? According to what I learned, it should be attached to a specifier position of VP. However, it results in “*John seems to not be that smart.”, which is totally ungrammatical. ‘To’ belongs to T node. How ‘not’ can precede T node?
How does it work with a sentence like "Doesn't he dance?"
Furthermore, where is the inflection of "do"+"es" -> "does" represented? By an IP you left out?
Does he not dance? -> doesn't he dance?
I'm not sure if it has to be explained by syntax.
I had the same question Dominic
That’s brilliant, thank you!
so is "do" its own "auxiliary phrase"? because in a sentence like "did you dance", T lowering to V leaving an empty T which then has a "do" in it will result in something like "do you danced" which is not grammatical?
Thank you for your helpful video lectures,
Can we disambiguate the following ambiguous sentence by using a tree
?
"You do not dance"
It can be a declarative sentence or an imperative sentence having an overt subject.
I disagree. I don’t think it is imperative.
Could u plz post something about aux raising ?? And at this point do we consider 'not' as neg or as an adv?
Thank you for the lecture. A question: I don't know whether the sentence like "Does not he dance" or "Doesn't he dance" is grammatically correct since I'm not a native English speaker. But if it is, does it mean we moved the tense mark (does) and negation mark (not) together to the position of C? Components should not be moved together into one place, right?
C can only have one head, so we can only move one thing, and according to the previous video, we move the closest word which is next T, up to C, which in this case, is DOES
So, what is the syntactically correct form? DOESN´T HE DANCE ? or DOES HE NOT DANCE ? In questions , the DO moves from T head to C head , but the problem is the negation adverb NOT ; does it move along with the auxiliary DO or does it stay put ? I see it in a tree that only DO moves up to C and NOT stays put . Question is : CAN THE AUXILIARY "NOT" MOVE ALONG WITH "DO" OR NOT ? How would the correct tree be then ?
I currently use Andrew Carnie's "Syntax" textbook. Can you recommend me some other good books for studying syntax? Also: if you have any book recommendations for linguistics in general I'd like to know too.
"Core Syntax: A Minimalist Approach" by David Adger is pretty comprehensive for current minimalist syntax. Of course, there are many other frameworks of syntax, but I do not have a good book list.
I recommend looking at LING courses at different universities in the topics you're interested in and looking at a syllabus or two. You'll get a better idea of what universities use as far as texts.
Thank you! I'll look into purchasing that :) Your videos have helped me a lot! Please keep making more of these!
What does the CP and +Q mean? In which video is it explained?
where to fit in negation if ee have aspect
Thanks a lot! Do you teach syntax at a university?
great video. do you still put [+tns] or [+finite] under T for the sentence "he does not dance"?
"do" gets present tense under T, so there would be [-past] under T.
Wouldn't it be [+EF] [+TNS] instead of just (-past)??
So for the sentence "does he not dance?" "do" gets a present tense under T, so there is a [-past] under T, then "do" in agreement with "he" changes into "does" and moves up to C. Have I understood correctly?
Yes
can you teach me how to draw the tree diagram of the sentence "Don't let him leave" in an IP one. I really don't know how to construct this kind of imperative sentence. Thanks.
What movement is in this sentence " do whatever you want" I couldn't find anything.
what happens if we have a sentence like Julia has sung the song ? what is the structure of sung ?
u have to add aspectual phrase
In this case, wouldn't [NegP] violate the binary principle?
No, there’s still no triple branch right?
@@SpencerTwiddy I mean it's single branched; it should be double branched. Thanks anyway.
@@thawraali7293 visually it looks no different than the CP, so I’m not sure what the problem is
So if in the sentence "He does not dance", 'do' inflects to 'does' under the present tense in T, why doesn't it also inflect to 'does' in the sentence "I do not dance"??????
The 1st person singular agreement for “do” is “do,” only the 3rd person singular form is “does”
そんなに重要なことか？
Hi
Tai nay samjhayi payibe