1.2.2. Move
According to Chomsky (2000), move is a complex operation which
combines merge and agree. Since it is costly, Chomsky claims that it is a
«last resort» chosen when nothing else
21
is possible. Movement is seen as copying and deletion
operation. In other words, when a constituent moves, it leaves behind a null
copy of itself. This copy has a null spell-out, that is, its phonetic features
are unpronounced, hence deleted. The edge feature is the mechanism that drives
A-bar movement whereas phi-features are the ones which drive A-movement. Move
has as purpose to check and value uninterpretable features in the course of the
derivation. Given the Full Interpretation principle which bars the presence of
uninterpretable features at the interfaces, the Phonetic Form of an expression
must contain only features that contribute to its phonetic interpretation, and
its Logical Form must contain only features that enable the semantic
interpretation of this one; otherwise the derivation crashes and hence is
illegible. So, operation move displaces constituents from their pure merged
position to a position wherein their uninterpretable features can be checked,
valued and deleted. This feature checking is done within the Probe-Goal
configuration. More precisely, feature checking and valuation is realized
through another operation in syntax called Agree.
1.2.3. Feature checking within the Probe-Goal
framework
The generative component assembles structures, by Merge and
Move, to a point where the conceptual-intentional and the
articulatory-perceptual processes diverge. This point is Spell out. During
Merge, there will be features inserted in the structure which must be `checked'
before Spell out. Following Chomsky (2000), feature checking and valuation are
done under Agree.
Agree is one of the operations which take place in the
syntactic component. It deals with matching of uninterpretable features against
their interpretable counterparts to check, value and delete the uninterpretable
features for the structure to converge at the interfaces. According to Chomsky
(2000), Agree establishes a relation (agreement, Case checking) between a
lexical item á and feature F in some restricted search space (its
domain). Matching is a relation that holds of a probe (P) and a goal (G). For a
matching pair to induce Agree, G must be in the domain of P D (P) and satisfy
locality conditions. The conditions for Agree to hold are formulated as
follows:
? Matching is feature identity: that is, it is the same
features which are involved in the matching operation. It is asymmetric, an
uninterpretable feature matches with its interpretable counterparts
? Domain of P is the sister of P.
? Locality reduces to «closest c-command»
The domain of P is the c-command domain of P, and a matching
feature G is closest to P if there is no y (gamma) in the domain of P matching
P such that G is in D (y). There must be minimal search within a probe-goal
framework.
To these conditions, we can add the activeness cpndition.
Chomsky claims that probe and goal must be both active that is they should have
one or more uninterpretable feature. Let us consider the following example:
(3) a. John has stolen a book
b. TP
DP T'
T° tiP
+PRS
+(p
EPP
-(p
Ucase
NOM
+(p
DP ti'
ti° VP
DP V'
V° DP
D N
22
John has John ø + stolen John stolen a book
The tree diagram in (3b) shows how the derivation of sentence
(3a) proceeds. In the above diagram, the noun book merges with the
determiner a to form the DP [ a book]. This latter merges
with the verb stolen to derive the V-bar level [stolen a
book]. Given the VP Internal Subject Hypothesis, the DP [John],
the external argument of the verb, merges with the V-bar level to make up the
VP [John stolen a book]. This in turn merges with ti°, the head
of the tiP which is a phase, to form ti-bar level. This latter merges with the
empty specifier to derive the tiP. At this level, The ti°, which is
designed to host verbal affix such as causative, attracts the lexical verb
stolen. The raising of the verb stolen from V° to
ti° leads to the fronting of the subject John from Spec-VP to
Spec-vP. The auxiliary has merges with the tiP to make up the T-bar
level. This is turn merges with the empty specifier to build the TP. At this
level, T (has)
23
will probe and search for a goal. Since John is in
its closest c-command domain, there is a minimal search between the probe (T)
and the goal (John), and both are active, the phi-features of the goal
match with their uninterpretable counterparts on T. These ones are checked,
valued and deleted. Subsequently, the finiteness nature of T checks and values
the uninterpretable case feature of the goal and assigns a nominative case.
Then, the EPP on T will subsequently trigger the movement of John from
Spec-?P to Spec-TP. At this level of the derivation, all the uninterpretable
features of the probe and the goal have been valued through the operation
Agree. The derivation can be handed over to the interfaces. Within MP,
derivation proceeds by phases and once a phase is completed what is actually
transferred to the conceptual intentional and the sensorimotor systems is the
complement of the phase.
| 
