In:Minimalism and Beyond: Radicalizing the interfaces
Edited by Peter Kosta, Steven L. Franks, Teodora Radeva-Bork and Lilia Schürcks
[Language Faculty and Beyond 11] 2014
► pp. 130–166
The Merge Condition
A syntactic approach to selection
Published online: 24 September 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.11.06wur
https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.11.06wur
This paper proposes that morphological selection and subcategorization are derived from conditions on Merge, specifically the claim that Merge is only possible when it leads to feature valuation, which I argue takes place under Reverse Agree. The Merge Condition, together with a Reverse Agree mechanism, allows us to unify different types of selection and provides a strictly local and derivational mechanism for structure building which does not require recourse to special selector features or separate notions of (lexical) selection. I provide an explicit feature system encoding the selectional properties of verbs and a detailed account of clausal complementation structures in English and German. The system offers a new way of deriving verb second configurations, doubly filled Comp effects, the distribution of T–to–C movement, as well as the syntactically restricted behavior of embedded root clauses.
References (99)
Abels, Klaus. 2003. “Successive Cyclicity, Anti-locality, and Adposition Stranding.” Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Alexiadou, Artemis and Anagnostopoulou, Elena. 2001. “The subject-in-situ generalization and the role of case in driving computations.” Linguistic Inquiry 32(2): 193–231.
Baker, Mark. 1997. “Thematic roles and syntactic structure.” In Elements of Grammar, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 73–137. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Bjorkman, Bronwyn Alma Moore. 2011. “BE-ing Default: The Morphosyntax of Auxiliaries.” Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Bloemhoff, Henk. 1979. “Heranalyse van een Stellingwerver oppervlaktestructuur”. Us Wurk: Tydskrift foar Frisistyk 28: 31–38.
Bobaljik, Jonathan D. 1994. “What does adjacency do?” In The Morphology-syntax Connection, Heidi Harley and Colin Phillips (eds), 1–32. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 22. Cambridge, MA: MIT, Department of Linguistics and Philosophy.
. 1995. “In terms of merge: Copy and head-movement.” In Papers in Minimalist Syntax, ed. by Rob Pensalfini and Hiroyuki Ura, 41–64. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 27. Cambridge, MA: MIT, Department of Linguistics and Philosophy.
. 2002. “A-chains at the PF-interface: Copies and ‘covert’ movement.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20(2): 197–267.
. 2008. “Where’s phi? Agreement as a post-syntactic operation.” In Phi-Theory: Phi Features Across Interfaces and Modules, Daniel Harbour, David Adger and Susana Béjar (eds), 295–328. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bobaljik, Jonathan D. and Harley, Heidi. 2012. “Suppletion is local: Evidence from Hiaki.” Ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs and University of Arizona, Tucson.
Bošković, Željko. 1997. The Syntax of Nonfinite Complementation: An Economy Approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
. 2007. “On the locality and motivation of move and agree: An even more minimal theory.” Linguistic Inquiry 38(4): 589–644.
. 2009. “Unifying first and last conjunct agreement.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 27(3): 455–496.
. 2012. “Now I’m a phase, now I’m not a phase: On the variability of phases with extraction and ellipsis.” Ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Bošković, Željko and Lasnik, Howard. 2003. “On the distribution of null complementizers.”Linguistic Inquiry 34(4): 527–546.
Bresnan, Joan. 1991. “Locative case vs. locative gender.” In Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, ed. by Laurel A. Sutton, Christopher Johnson and Ruth Shields, 53–66. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley Linguistic Society.
Chomsky, Noam. 2000. “Minimalist inquiries: The framework.” In Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik, ed. by Roger Martin, David Michaels and Juan Uriagereka, 89–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
. 2001. “Derivation by phase.” In Ken Hale: A Life in Language, ed. by Michael Kenstowicz, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
. 2002. “Eliminating labels.” In Derivation and Explanation in the Minimalist Program, Samuel David Epstein and Daniel Seely (eds), 42–64. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Doherty, Cathal. 1993. “Clauses without that: The case for bare sentential complementation in English.” Doctoral dissertation, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz.
. 1997. “Clauses without complementizers: Finite IP-complementation in English.” The Linguistic Review 14: 197–220.
. 2000. Clauses Without “That”: The Case for Bare Sentential Complementation in English. New York: Garland Press.
Fanselow, Gisbert. 2004. “Cyclic phonology-syntax interaction: Movement to first position in German.” In Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure, ed. by Shinichiro Ishihara and Michaela Schmitz, 1–42. Working papers of the SFB 632 1. Potsdam: Universitätsverlag.
Fanselow, Gisbert and Lenertová, Denisa. 2011. “Left peripheral focus: mismatches between syntax and information structure.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 29, 169–209.
Fox, Danny and Nissenbaum, Jon. 1999. “Extraposition and Scope: A case for overt QR.” In Proceedings of the 18th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, Sonya Bird, Andrew Carnie, Jason D. Haugen and Peter Norquest (eds), 132–144. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Franks, Steven. 2005. “What is that?” In Indiana University Working Papers in Linguistics 5, Y. Kitagawa and Dorian Roehrs (eds), 33–62. Indiana.
Frey, Werner. 2005. “Zur Syntax der linken Peripherie im Deutschen.” In Deutsche Syntax: Empirie und Theorie, ed. by Franz Josef d’Avis, 147–171. Göteborg.
Gallego, Ángel. 2005. “Phase sliding.” Ms., University of Barcelona. [URL].
. 2010. Phase Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gärtner, Hans-Martin. 2001. “Are there V2 relative clauses in German.” Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 3(2): 97–141.
Grønn, Atle and von Stechow, Arnim. 2011. “The temporal organisation of indicative conditionals.” Ms. Tübingen. [URL].
Haegeman, Liliane and Lohndal, Terje. 2010. “Negative concord and (multiple) agree: A case study of West Flemish.” Linguistic Inquiry 41(2): 181–211.
Hale, Kenneth and Keyser, Samuel Jay. 1993. “On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations.” In The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honour of Sylvain Bromberger, ed. by Ken Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser, 53–109. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hegarty, Michael. 1991. “Adjunct extraction and chain configurations.” Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Heycock, Caroline. 2006. “Embedded root phenomena.” In The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Martin Everaert and Henk van Riemsdijk (eds), Volume II, Chapter 23, vol. 2, 174–209. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hicks, Glyn. 2009. The Derivation of Anaphoric Relations. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hooper, Joan B. and Thompson, Sandra A. 1973. “On the applicability of root transformations.” Linguistic Inquiry 4: 465–497.
Hornstein, Norbert and Nunes, Jairo. 2008. “Adjunction, Labeling, and Bare Phrase Structure.” Biolinguistics 2(1): 57–86.
Huddleston, Rodney and Pullum, Geoffrey K. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kratzer, Angelika. 1994. “On external arguments.” In Functional Projections, ed. by Elena Benedicto and Jeffrey T. Runner, 103–130. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Department of Linguistics.
Lasnik, Howard. 1995. “Verbal morphology: Syntactic structures meets the minimalist program.” In Evolution and Revolution in Linguistic Theory: Essays in Honor of Carlos Otero, Héctor Campos and Paula Kempchinsky (eds), 251–275. Washington, D. C.: Gerorgetown University Press.
Lebeaux, David. 1991. “Relative clauses, licensing, and the nature of derivation.” In Perspectives on Phrase Structure: Heads and Licensing, Susan D. Rothstein (eds), 209–240. San Diego, Calif: Academic Press.
. 1995. “Where does binding theory apply?” In Papers in Syntax, Syntax-Semantics Interface and Phonology, Ricardo Echepare and Viola Miglio (eds), 63–88. College Park: University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics.
Legate, Julie Anne. 2010. “The structure of agents in implicit passives.” Talk given at the 41st Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistics Society, Philadelphia.
Meinunger, André. 2004. “Verb position, verbal mood and the anchoring (potential) of sentences.” In The Syntax and Semantics of the Left Periphery, Horst Lohnstein and Susanne Trissler, 313–341. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Merchant, Jason. 2007. “Voice and ellipsis.” Ms., University of Chicago. Chicago. [URL].
. 2008. “An asymmetry in voice mismatches in VP-ellipsis and pseudogapping.” Linguistic Inquiry 39(1): 169–179.
. 2009/11. “Ellipsis.” Ms., University of Chicago. Article for Handbook of Contemporary Syntax, 2nd edition, Artemis Alexiadou, Tibor Kiss and Miriam Butt (eds). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. [URL].
. 2011. “Aleut case matters.” In Pragmatics and Autolexical Grammar: In honor of Jerry Sadock, Etsuyo Yuasa Yuasa, Tista Bagchi and Katharine P. Beals (eds), 382–411. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Neeleman, Ad. and van de Koot, Hans. 2002. “The configurational matrix.” Linguistic Inquiry 33(4): 529–574.
Nunes, Jairo. 1995. “The copy theory of movement and linearization of chains in the minimalist program.” Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.
. 1999. “Linearization of chains and phonetic realization of chain links.” In Working Minimalism, ed. by Samuel David Epstein and Norbert Hornstein, 217–249. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
. 2011. “The copy theory.”InThe Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Minimalism, Cedric Boeckx (eds), Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nunes, Jairo and Zocca, Cynthia. 2005. “Morphological identity in ellipsis.” In Leiden Papers in Linguistics, Noureddine Elouazizi, Frank Landsbergen, Mika Poss and Martin Salzmann (eds), 29–42. Leiden: Leiden University.
. 2009. “Lack of morphological identity and ellipsis resolution in Brazilian Portuguese.” In Minimalist Essays on Brazilian Portuguese Syntax, ed. by Jairo Nunes, 215–236. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Pesetsky, David. 1998. “Some optimality principles of sentence pronunciation.” In Is the Best Good Enough? Optimality and Competition in Syntax, Pilar Barbosa, Danny Fox, Paul Hagstrom, Martha McGinnis and David Pesetsky (eds), 337–383. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press and MITWPL.
Pesetsky, David and Torrego, Esther. 2001. “T-to-C movement: Causes and consequences.” In Ken Hale: A Life in Language, Michael Kenstowicz (eds), 355–426. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
. 2004. “Tense, case, and the nature of syntactic categories.” In The syntax of time, Jacqueline Guéron and Jacqueline Lecarme (eds), 495–537. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
. 2006. “Probes, goals and syntactic categories.” In Proceedings of the 7th Annual Tokyo Conference on Psycholinguistics. Keio University, Japan.
. 2007. “The Syntax of Valuation and the Interpretability of Features.” In Phrasal and clausal architecture, Simin Karimi, Samiian Vida and Wendy Wilkins (eds), 262–294. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Potsdam, Eric. 1997. “English verbal morphology and VP ellipsis.” In Proceedings of the North Eastern Linguistics Society Annual Meeting 27, Kiyomi Kusumoto (eds), 353–368. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, GLSA.
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney, Greenbaum, Leech, Geoffrey and Svartvik, Jan. 1972. A Grammar of Contemporary English. New York: Seminar.
Reis, Marga. 1995a. “Extractions from verb-second clauses in German?” In On Extraction and Extraposition in German, Uli Lutz and Jürgen Pafel (eds), 45–88. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. 1995b. “Wer glaubst du hat recht? On so-called extractions from verb second clauses and verb first parenthetical constructions in German.” Sprache und Pragmatik 36: 27–83.
. 1997. “Zum syntaktischen Status unselbständiger Verbzweit-Sätze.” In Sprache im Fokus. Festschrift für Heinz Vater zum 65. Geburtstag, Christa Dürscheid, Karl Heinz Rahmers and Monika Schwarz (eds), 121–144. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
. 2006. “Is German V-to-C movement really semantically motivated? Some empirical problems.” Theoretical Linguistics 32(3): 369–380.
Şener, Serkan. 2008. Non-Canonical Case Licensing is Canonical: Accusative subjects of CPs in Turkish. Ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Smith, Peter. To appear. “Collective (dis)agreement: On a 3/4 pattern of British English collective NPs.” In Proceedings of ConSOLE XX. [URL].
Svenonius, Peter. 1994. “Dependent nexus: Subordinate predication structures in English and the Scandinavian languages.” Doctoral dissertation, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz.
Truckenbrodt, Hubert. 2006. “On the semantic motivation of syntactic verb movement to C in German.” Theoretical Linguistics 32(3): 257–306.
Warner, Anthony. 1986. “Ellipsis conditions and the status of the English copula.” York Papers in Linguistics 12: 153–172.
Webelhuth, Gert. 1992. Principles and Parameters of Syntactic Saturation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wechsler, Stephen. 1991. “Verb second and illocutionary force.” In Views on Phrase Structure, Katherine Leffel and Denis Bouchard (eds), 177–191. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Wegener, Heide. 1993. “Weil—das hat schon seinen Grund. Zur Verbstellung in Kausalsaätzen mit weil im gegenwaärtigen Deutsch.” Deutsche Sprache 21: 289–305.
Wiklund, Anna-Lena. 2001. “Dressing up for vocabulary insertion: The parasitic supine.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19(1): 199–228.
. 2012a. Agreement: Looking Up or Looking Down? Lecture Given in Agreement Seminar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Handout available: [URL].
. 2012b. Parasitic participles in Germanic: Evidence for the theory of verb clusters. Taal en Tongval.
. 2012c. “The syntax of valuation in auxiliary–participle constructions.” In Coyote Working Papers: Proceedings of the 29th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL 29), Jaehoon Choi et al. (eds), University of Arizona: Tucson. [URL].
. 2012d. “The timing of merge: Deriving certain clause-linking mismatches.” Talk given at the workshop (Mis)matches in Clause Linkage, ZAS, Berlin. Handout available: [URL].
. 2013. “QR and selection: Covert evidence for phasehood.” In Proceedings of the North Eastern Linguistics Society Annual Meeting 42, ed. by Stefan Keine and Shayne Sloggett, 619–632. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, GLSA. [URL].
. To appear. “Tense and aspect in English infinitives.” Linguistic Inquiry.
Zeijlstra, Hedde. To appear. “There is only one way to agree.” The Linguistic Review.
Cited by (27)
Cited by 27 other publications
Goto, Nobu & Toru Ishii
Pinzin, Francesco & Cecilia Poletto
Meykadeh, Simin, Arsalan Golfam, Seyed Amir Hossein Batouli & Werner Sommer
Wurmbrand, Susanne
Krivochen, Diego Gabriel
Krivochen, Diego Gabriel
Neeleman, Ad, Joy Philip, Misako Tanaka & Hans van de Koot
Brodahl, Kristin Klubbo
Toquero-Pérez, Luis Miguel
2022. Revisiting extraction and subextraction patterns from arguments. Linguistic Variation 22:1 ► pp. 123 ff.
Alexiadou, Artemis & Elena Anagnostopoulou
2021. Backward control, long distance agree, nominative case and TP/CP
transparency. In Non-canonical control in a cross-linguistic perspective [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 270], ► pp. 15 ff.
Martins, Ana Maria & Jairo Nunes
2021. Brazilian and European Portuguese and Holmberg’s 2005 typology of null subject languages. In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2018 [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 357], ► pp. 171 ff.
Sanfelici, Emanuela, Caroline Féry & Petra Schulz
Bjorkman, Bronwyn M. & Hedde Zeijlstra
Bošković, Željko
Wurmbrand, Susi & Youssef A. Haddad
2016. Cyclic Spell-Out Derived Agreement in Arabic Raising Constructions. In Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XXVIII [Studies in Arabic Linguistics, 4], ► pp. 193 ff.
Nóbrega, Vitor A. & Shigeru Miyagawa
Haddad, Youssef A.
Haddad, Youssef A.
2017. The Merge Condition on Adjuncts. In Perspectives on Arabic linguistics XXIX [Studies in Arabic Linguistics, 5], ► pp. 205 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
