User:Racheeeeeelll/sandbox

Dislocation Copying
Dislocation Copy Movement describes a phenomenon of some syntactic material in a canonical sentence repeated after the sentence particle. Dislocation Copy Movement often seen in Cantonese where such movement involves parallel A¯ chains that aims to yield repetition happened in sentences. There is a huge difference between a canonical sentence and a Dislocation Copying sentence where there is an additional functional projection Given Phrase, which is namely as GP, located between TP and CP. The difference can be clearly seen in both tree a and b. In the trees, the SP is a C-element where it bears the structure-building feature [TP]. Since they follow the notational system according to Heck and Muller (2007), the edge features do not have to be "neutral with respect to the properties of the items they attract"; therefore, it can attract any XP, but in the case, it attracts to TP only. As in tree b, the functional head G bears the general structure-building feature [XP] where it can attract any XP to its specifier.

(1) ngo5 sik6-zo2 faan6 laa3 ngo5

1.SG eat-PFV rice SP 1.SG

‘I have eaten.’

The upper tree has clearly shown the mechanism of dislocation copying where not the whole TP can be copied after the sentence particle, which in this tree would be the SP [laa3]. Since there is a internal merge happened where DC-specific deletion operation applied to the TP-copy in Spec-GP (from the tree), the VP [sik6 zo2 faan6] will not be included in the repetition of TP, only [ngo5] will be repeated after SP [laa3] in the sentence that the tail of each of the two A¯ -chains deletes under the chain linearization. There are three properties in Cantonese Dislocation Copying (DC) according to Jackie Lai's article in 2019, Parallel copying in dislocation copying: evidence from Cantonese.

The first property of a Cantonese DC sentence is the cauda may not contain any overt subordinate phrase (SP). That in the sentence, [keoi5 zau2-zo2] acts as a host clause and [keoi5] acts as a cauda (the tail of the sentence). The two parallel chains formed while the pre-SP clause and post-SP clause constitutes links of separate chains that share the same foot. Example in Cantonese: (1) keoi5  zau2-zo2      laa3    keoi5 3.SG   leave-PFV     SP      3.SG     "She left." (from Lai, J.YK., 2019) However, it will be ungrammatical if there intonational break appeared in the between of SP and cauda. The reason of it is because the two sentences will juxtaposed one after another where the irrelevant parse happened. In the example below, because of the overt SP in the cauda, the DC parse is unavailable and the whole sentence is ungrammatical.
 * First Property of a Cantonese DC

Examples in Cantonese: (2) *nei5 dou3dai2 heoi3-zo2 bin1dou6 aa3 (||) nei5 dou3dai2 aa3 2.SG DOUDAI   go-PFV    where   Q        2.SG DOUDAI    Q     ‘Where the hell did you go?’ (from Lai, J.YK., 2019)

The second property of a Cantonese DC sentence is that the cauda prohibits itself from correlating with an object phrase in the host clause; however, not any syntactic material in the host clause may serve as the cauda. In the example below, because of the inhibition of cauda correlating the object phrase, [keoi5] should not be repeated after the SP [aa3], instead, [ngo5] can be repeated as it acts as a subject phrase in the host clause. Examples in Cantonese: (3) ngo5 zung1ji3 keoi5 aa3 {ngo5/*keoi5} 1.SG like 3.SG SP 1.SG 3.SG    ‘I like him.’ (from Lai, J.YK., 2019) Moreover, such restriction is not only limited to the pronominals, but lexical DPs share the same object restriction according to Cheung's article. That it can be seen from the example below where it will be ungrammatical if the DP [nguk1kei5] is repeated after the SP [laa1].
 * Second Property of a Cantonese DC

Examples in Cantonese: (4) Aa3ming4 dou1 faan2-zo2  nguk1kei5 laa1 {Aa3ming4/ *nguk1kei5} Ming  also return-PFV   home      SP     Ming      home ‘Ming also returned home.’


 * Third Property of a Cantonese DC

The third property would be the necessity of having SP being phonologically overt in a DC sentence but it can also alternate with the phonologically null SP and still make sense to the sentence. From the examples below, it can be seen that even though the two sentences are delivering the same message, sentence (5) does not grammatically correct with having the null SP placed before the repeated subject phrase. However, the null SP is allowed to exist if it is the phrase to end the sentence.

Examples in Cantonese: (5) keoi5 zung1ji3 nei5 {aa3/*∅} keoi5 3.SG  like    2.SG   SP       3.SG     ‘He likes you.’ (6) keoi5 zung1ji3 nei5 {aa3/∅} 3.SG  like    2.SG   SP            ‘He likes you.’