Íslenskt mál og almenn málfræði - 01.01.1981, Blaðsíða 176

174
Ritdómar
clause boundaries in ACI constructions. The experiment confirmed unequivocally
that the clause boundaries are located as claimed by (6)b, with the postverbal
NP serving as matrix object rather than complement subject.
A puzzle which T notes, but does not attempt to solve, is why his results for
ACI in Icelandic contradict those obtained for English by Bever, Lackner and
Kirk (1969), and Fodor, Fodor, Garrett and Lackner (1974), which seemed to
support structures like (11). One would want to know the reason for this dis-
crepancy before being completely satisfied with the results.
T’s conclusions provide potential trouble for recent work by Chomsky and
his associates. Chomsky’s most recent theoretical framework, the ‘Government
and Binding’ framework of Chomsky (1981), claims that an SOR rule of the sort
argued for by T is impossible. Under this theory, Icelandic ACI would have to
have the surface constituent structure (11). This claim seems to me to be fairly
deeply worked into the system, so that if Ts’ arguments for (6)b go through, the
theory will require substantial reworking.
I have mentioned only sorne of the more prominent theorical issues that
T’s analysis impinges on. There are many more. For example, the behavior of
non-nominative subjects provides additional puzzles for the ‘Government and
Binding’ framework. Accomodating (or trying to refute) T’s results should keep
theorists of many persuasions busy for some time to come.
Like the other volumes in the ‘Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics’ series,
the book is photo-offset of a typescript, but is durable bound and printed on
long-lasting paper, and is correspondingly high-priced. There is a partial (but
adequate) index of rules and constructions, and very few typographical errors.
REFERENCES
Andrews, A.D. 198 la. The Representation of Case in Modern Icelandic. In J. W.
Bresnan (ed.).
—. 198lb. Long Distance Agreement in Modern Icelandic. In G. K. Pullum and
P. Jacobson (eds.).
Bever, T. G„ J. R. Lackner, and R. Kirk. 1969. The Underlying Structures of
Sentences are the Primary Units of Immediate Speech Processing. Perception
and Psychophysics 5:225-234.
Bresnan, J. W. 1973. Theory of Complementation in English Syntax. MIT Doctoral
Dissertation. [Published by Garland Publishing, 1979.]
—. 1976. Nonarguments for Raising. Linguistic Inquiry 7:485-502.
—. 1978. A. Realistic Transformational Grammar. M. Halle, J. W. Bresnan,
and G. A. Miller (eds.): Linguistic Theory and Psychological Reality. MIT
Press, Cambridge, Mass.
—. (ed.). 1981. The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations. MIT
Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Chomsky, N. A. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT Press, Cambridge,
Mass.