0% found this document useful (0 votes)
8 views4 pages

Treedrawingpractice Key

The document presents tree diagrams for various sentences analyzed in the context of syntax, specifically focusing on the structure of noun phrases and the placement of prepositional phrases. It emphasizes the importance of treating certain phrases as complements rather than adjuncts and discusses potential ambiguities in sentence interpretation. The analysis follows guidelines from Carnie 2013, suggesting consistent structures in X' theory.

Uploaded by

Ceci Vittori
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
8 views4 pages

Treedrawingpractice Key

The document presents tree diagrams for various sentences analyzed in the context of syntax, specifically focusing on the structure of noun phrases and the placement of prepositional phrases. It emphasizes the importance of treating certain phrases as complements rather than adjuncts and discusses potential ambiguities in sentence interpretation. The analysis follows guidelines from Carnie 2013, suggesting consistent structures in X' theory.

Uploaded by

Ceci Vittori
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Tree Drawing Practice

LING 253/553: Syntax I


Yale University
Jason Zentz, Teaching Fellow
October 11, 2013

(1) Unexpected flurries distracted the students of syntax during their seminar.
. ..
TP
. . .
NP T′
. . . .
N′ .T VP
. . . .
AdjP N′ V′
. . . . .
Adj′ N V′ PP
. flurries . . . . .
Adj V NP P′
.
Unexpected . distracted . . . . . .
D N′ P NP
. the . . .
during . .
N PP D N′
. students . . . their .
P′ N
. . seminar
P NP
. of .
N′
.
N
syntax
.
Make sure [PP of syntax] is treated as the complement rather than an adjunct of [N students].
One piece of evidence for this is that other adjuncts cannot intervene between [N students] and
[PP of syntax]: *students from Yale of syntax vs. students of syntax from Yale.
What is shown above follows Carnie 2013: ch. 6, but you could also use [DP [D′ [D the]]] for the
determiner structure. This is more consistent with the uniform structure of X′ theory (specifiers
should be phrases).

1
(2) The older boy played outside in the freshly fallen snow.
. ..
TP
. . . .
NP T′
. . . . .
D N′ .T VP
. The . . . .
AdjP N′ V′
. . . . .
Adj′ N V′ PP
. boy . . . .
Adj V′ AdvP P′
. . older . . . . .
V Adv′ P NP
played . . in . . .
.
Adv D N′
. outside . the . .
AdjP N′
. . .
Adj′ N
. . snow
AdvP Adj′
. .
Adv′ Adj
. fallen
Adv
freshly
.
You could analyze outside as a preposition that optionally takes an NP complement. Either
[PP [P′ [P outside]]] or [AdvP [Adv′ [Adv outside]]] is fine.
What is shown above follows Carnie 2013: ch. 6, but you could also use [DP [D′ [D the]]] for the
determiner structure. This is more consistent with the uniform structure of X′ theory (specifiers
should be phrases).

2
(3) The entranced twins watched the storm through the window.
. ..
TP
. . . .
NP T′
. . . . .
D N′ .T VP
. The . . . .
AdjP N′ V′
. . . . .
Adj′ N V′ PP
. twins . . . . .
Adj V NP P′
. . entranced . watched . . . . .
D N′ P NP
. the . . through . .
N D N′
. storm . the .
N
window

What is shown above follows Carnie 2013: ch. 6, but you could also use [DP [D′ [D the]]] for the
determiner structure. This is more consistent with the uniform structure of X′ theory (specifiers
should be phrases).
(4) A layer of snow from the nor’easter covered the pumpkin on my porch.
. ..
TP
. . . .
NP T′
. . . . .
D N′ .T VP
.A . . . . .
N′ PP V′
. . . . . . .
N PP P′ V NP
layer . . . . . . covered . . .
.
P′ P NP D N′
. . . from . . . the . .
P NP D N′ N′ PP
. of . . the . . . .
N′ N N P′
. nor’easter pumpkin . . .
.
N P NP
. . snow . on . .
D N′
my .
.
N
porch

Make sure [PP of snow] is treated as the complement rather than an adjunct of [N layer].
One piece of evidence for this is that other adjuncts cannot intervene between [N layer] and

3
[PP of snow]: *layer from the nor’easter of snow vs. layer of snow from the nor’easter.
This sentence could possibly be ambigous, with [PP on my porch] indicating the location of
the covering event rather than the location of the pumpkin. In that case, the PP would attach to
V′ rather than N′ .
What is shown above follows Carnie 2013: ch. 6, but you could also use [DP [D′ [D the]]] for the
determiner structure. This is more consistent with the uniform structure of X′ theory (specifiers
should be phrases).
(5) The temperature in New Haven will likely reach sixty degrees on Sunday.
. ..
TP
. . . .
NP T′
. . . . .
D N′ T VP
. The . . . will . .
N′ PP V′
. . . . . .
N P′ AdvP V′
temperature . . . . . .
.
P NP Adv′ V′ PP
. in . . . . . . .
N′ Adv V NP P′
. likely . reach . . . .
.
N D N′ P NP
. New Haven sixty . . on .
.
N N′
degrees .
.
N
Sunday

There is subtle difference in meaning depending on how high you attach [AdvP likely] relative
to [PP on Sunday]. We could paraphrase the tree above as ‘It’s likely (as opposed to improbable)
that the temperature in New Haven will reach sixty degrees on Sunday.’ If you attach [PP on
Sunday] higher than [AdvP likely], we could paraphrase that as ‘It’s on Sunday (as opposed to
Saturday) that the temperature in New Haven will likely reach sixty degrees.’
What is shown above follows Carnie 2013: ch. 6, but you could also use [DP [D′ [D the]]] for the
determiner structure. This is more consistent with the uniform structure of X′ theory (specifiers
should be phrases).

You might also like