Moving to the Edge: The Case of Adjunct Control in Portuguese

Transcription

1 1 Lingüística y Ciencia Cognitiva (LyCC) ILLA-CCHS, 28/1/2014 Moving to the Edge: The Case of Adjunct Control in Portuguese Jairo Nunes (jmnunes@usp.br) Universidade de São Paulo 1. The empirical puzzle: Adjunct Control in English vs. Portuguese. English: (1) a. Johni greeted Maryk after [eci/*k entering the room] b. [Which man]i greeted [which moman]k after [eci/*k entering the room]? c. [Which woman]k did Johni greeted tk after [eci/*k entering the room]?. European and Brazilian Portuguese:. Infinitival adjuncts: (2) a. O Joãoi cumprimentou a Mariak depois de eci/*k entrar na sala the João greeted the Maria after of enter in-the room João greeted Maria after entering the room. b. O Joãoi cumprimentou quemk depois de eci/*k entrar na sala? the João greeted who after of enter in-the room c. Quemk é que o Joãoi cumprimentou tk depois de eci/k entrar na sala? who is that the João greeted after of enter in-the room Who did João greet after entering the room?. Finite adjuncts: (3) a. O Joãoi sempre cumprimenta a Mariak quando ec entra na sala the João always greets the Maria when enters in-the room João always greets Maria when he/she enters the room EP: ec = i/k/w BP: ec = i/*k/*w b. O Joãoi sempre cumprimenta quemi quando ec entra na sala? the João always greets who when enters in-the room EP: ec = i/k/w BP: ec = i/*k/*w c. Quemk (é que) o Joãoi sempre cumprimenta tk quando ec entra na sala? who is that the João always greets when enters in-the room EP: ec = i/k/w BP: ec = i/k/*w Who does João always greet when he/she enters the room?. Summary: CONTROL INTO ADJUNCT CLAUSES without wh-movement with wh-movement infinitives finite clauses infinitives finite clauses English subject control subject control European subject control subject or object Portuguese control Brazilian Portuguese subject control subject control subject or object control subject or object control

2 2 2. Previous Approaches 2.1. Adjunct control in English (4) Johni greeted Maryk after [eci/*k entering the room]. Hornstein s (2001) Merge-over-Move: (5) N = {Mary1, } K = [John entering the room] L= greeted (6) N = {Mary0, } K = [John entering the room] M = [greeted Mary] (7) Sideward Movement (Nunes 1995, 2001, 2004, Hornstein 2001) K = [John entering the room] P = [John greeted Mary] (8) [TP John [vp [vp John greeted Mary] [PP after John entering the room]]]. Problem: Without further specifications, a Merge-over-Move approach predicts that object control into adjuncts should never be possible, but it is allowed in EP and BP infinitivals and BP finite clauses when wh-movement takes place (cf. (2c) and (3c)) Subject control with object control verbs in Brazilian Portuguese (9) [O Pedro]1 convenceu [a Maria]2 [ec2/*1 a sair] the Pedro convinced the Maria to leave Pedro convinced Maria to leave.. Modesto (2000): (10) a. O Pedro2 convenceu quem1 que pro2/*1 tinha que ir embora the Pedro convinced who that had that go away Who did Pedroi convince that hei had to leave? b. Quem1 que o Pedro2 convenceu t1 que pro1/??2 tinha que ir embora who that the Pedro convinced that had that go away Whoi did Pedro convince that hei had to leave? (Modestos s judgements). null subjects in BP finite clauses must be A -licensed. (10) constitutes evidence against analyzing null subjects in BP as A-traces. However:. The matrix object in (10) does not c-command the embedded subject (Ferreira 2000, 2009): (11) O João convenceu a Maria i [que [a idiota] i deveria assaltar um banco] the João convinced the Maria that the idiot should rob a bank João convinced Mariai that [the idiot]i should rob a bank. The embedded clause in (10) behaves like an adjunct (Rodrigues 2004, Nunes 2009): (12) a.??quemi o João convenceu a Maria [que ti vem amanhã]? who the J. convinced the M. that comes tomorrow Who did João convince Maria [will come tomorrow]?

3 3 b. *Comoi o João convenceu a Maria [que o Pedro tinha how the João convinced the Maria that the Pedro had que se vestir para a festa ti]? that REFL dress for the party Howi did João convince Mary [that Pedro had to dress for the party ti]?. Sentences like (10b) are actually ambiguous (Rodrigues 2004): (13) Quem1 que o Pedro2 convenceu t1 que ec1/2 tinha que ir embora who that the Pedro convinced that had that go away Whoi did Pedro convince that hei had to leave?. (10) mimics what is found in finite adjunct clauses in BP (Rodrigues 2004) (14) a. O Joãoi repreendeu quemk quando eci/*k entrou na sala? the João reprehended who when entered in-the room Who did Joãoi reprehend when hei entered the room? b. Quemk o Joãoi repreendeu tk quando eci/k entrou na sala? who the João reprehended when entered in-the room Whok did Joãoi reprehend when hei/k entered the room? 2.3. Adjunct control in Brazilian Portuguese and parasitic gaps Rodrigues (2004) (following a suggestion by N. Hornstein): (14) should be derived along the lines of Hornstein s (2001) derivation of parasitic gaps (15) a. O Joãoi repreendeu quemk quando eci/*k entrou na sala? the João reprehended who when entered in-the room Who did Joãoi reprehend when hei entered the room? b. *Who filed [which paper]k without reading PGk? (16) a. Quemk o Joãoi repreendeu tk quando eci/k entrou na sala? who the João reprehended when entered in-the room Whok did Joãoi reprehend when hei/k entered the room? b. [Which paper]k did you file tk after reading PGk?. Problems: (i) In a derivation of parasitic gap constructions based on sideward movement, a violation of Merge over Move is allowed only if it is the only convergent option. Given that (17a), which complies with Merge over Move, converges, it should block (17b): (17) a. Quem repreendeu o João quando quem entrou na sala? who reprehended the João when who entered in-the room Whoi reprehended João when hei entered the room? b. Quem o João repreendeu quem quando quem entrou na sala? who the João reprehended who when who entered in-the room Whok did João reprehend when hek entered the room? (ii) If (16a) is to be derived along the lines of (16b), why doesn t wh-movement license object control in English? (18) *Whoi did John greet ti after eci entering the room?

4 4 (iii) the unavailable reading in (18) is OK in both BP and EP: (19) Quemi é que o Joãok cumprimentou ti depois de eci/k entrar na sala? (BP/EP) who is that the João greeted after of enter in-the room Whoi did Johnk greet after hei/k entered the room? 3. Towards an analysis of adjunct control in Portuguese 3.1. Assumptions a) Hornstein s (2001) movement theory of control (see also Boeckx, Hornstein and Nunes 2010) b) Null subjects in finite clauses in EP are regular pros, whereas ( referential ) null subjects in BP finite clauses are A-traces (see Ferreira 2000, 2009, Rodrigues 2002, 2004, Nunes 2008, 2010) (20) Brazilian Portuguese a. *Ø comprou um carro novo. bought.3sg a car new She/he bought a new car. b. *O pai d[a Maria]i acha [que Øi está grávida] the father of-the Maria thinks [that is pregnant-fem] Maria s father thinks she is pregnant. c. *[A Maria]i disse [que o João acha [que Øi está grávida]] the Maria said that the João thinks that is pregnant-fem Mariai said that the doctor thinks shei is pregnant. d. *Eui encontrei o livro [que Øi perdi] I found the book that lost.1sg I found the book that I had lost. Finite Ts in Brazilian Portuguese are optionally associated with a complete φ-set (Ferreira 2000, 2009, Nunes 2008, 2010): (21) a. [O João]i disse [que Øi comprou um carro novo] the João said that bought.3sg a car new Joãoi said that hei/*j bought a new car. b. [[o João] T+Case disse [que [o João] T-Case comprou um carro novo] c) Bošković s (2007) deduction of the Generalized EPP :. Chomsky (2001): the head of a strong phase is optionally assigned an EPP-type of feature, which drives successively cyclic movement (22) What did John say that Mary bought? (23) a. [vp Mary v+bought what] EPP assignment to v b. [vp whati [v Mary vepp+bought ti]] c. [CP that [TP Maryk [vp whati [v tk vepp+bought ti]]]] EPP assignment to C d. [CP whati [C thatepp [TP Mary [vp ti [v Mary vepp+bought ti]]]]] e. [vp John v+say [CP whati [C thatepp [TP...]]]] EPP assignment to v f. [vp whati [v John vepp+say [CP ti [C thatepp [TP...]]]]] g. [CP did [TP Johnm [vp whati [v tm vepp+say [CP ti [C...]]]]]] EPP assignment to C h. [CP whati [C didepp [TP Johnm [vp ti [v...]]]]]]. Problem: (24) *John thinks what Mary bought?

5 5. Bošković s (2007) deduction of the Generalized EPP : (i) the uninterpretable edge feature that triggers successive cyclic movement (uf) is hosted by the moving element; (ii) an interpretable feature must function as a probe in order to be checked; (iii) parametric variation: (25) a. Bulgarian wh-phrases: uf b. Korean wh-phrases: if c. English wh-phrases: (uf) (26) a. [what F did John [ t say [t that Mary [t bought t]]]] b. *John thinks whatuf Mary bought t 4. Sideward movement and the locus of edge features 4.1. Proposal:. Amendment to Bošković s (2007) system: (27) a. Portuguese wh-phrases: uf is lexically optional b. English wh-phrases: uf is optionally assigned during the computation 4.2. Analysis Portuguese Nonfinite adjuncts: BP and EP (28) Quemi cumprimentou o Joãok depois de eci/*k entrar na sala? who greeted the João after of enter in-the room Who greeted John after entering the room? (29) a. O Joãoi cumprimentou quemk depois de eci/*k entrar na sala? the João greeted who after of enter in-the room b. Quemk é que o Joãoi cumprimentou tk depois de eci/k entrar na sala? who is that the João greeted after of enter in-the room Who did João greet after entering the room? Take the derivational step in (30). If wh is not lexically encoded with an edge feature, then Merge over Move applies subject control (30) N = {João1,...} K = [vp quem entrar na sala] who enterinf in-the room L = cumprimenta greets (31) N = {João0,...} K = [vp quem entrar na sala] who enterinf in-the room M = [cumprimenta João] greets (32) Sideward movement: N = {João0,...} K = [vp t entrar na sala] enterinf in-the room M = [quem cumprimenta João] who greets João

6 6 (33) [TP Quemi [[ti cumprimentou o João] [depois de ti entrar na sala]] (cf. (28)) who greeted the João after of enter in-the room Who greeted John after entering the room?.take the derivational step in (34). If wh is lexically encoded with an edge feature Merge-over-Move is inapplicable object control but no wh-in situ (34) N = {João1,...} K = [vp quemuf entrar na sala] who enterinf in-the room L = cumprimenta greets (35) Sideward movement: N = {João1,...} K = [vp t entrar na sala] enterinf in-the room M = [cumprimenta quemuf] greets who (36) a. *O João [[cumprimentou quemuf] [depois de t entrar na sala] the João greeted who after of enterinf in-the room Whoi did João greet after hei entered the room? b. Quem F é que o João [t [[cumprimentou t ] [depois de t entrar na sala] who is that the João greeted after of enterinf in-the room Whoi did João greet after hei entered the room?. Subject control reading of (29): (37) N = {o1, João0, T[p, n]1, cumprimentou0, quem1, depois1, de1, T[n]0, entrar0, em0, a0, sala0,...} K = [[o João] entrar na sala] the João enter in-the room L = [cumprimentou] greeted. Merge-over-Move applies and the final position of quem depends on whether or not it is associated with uf. If it isn t, it stays put (cf. (38a) = (29a)). If it is, it must end up in the Spec of an interrogative C (cf. (38b)). (38) a. O Joãoi [[cumprimentou quem] [depois de ti entrar na sala] (=(29a)) the João greeted who after of enterinf in-the room Who did Joãoi greet after hei entered the room? b. Quem F é que o Joãoi [cumprimentou t ] [depois de ti entrar na sala] (=(29b)) who is that the João greeted after of enterinf in-the room Who did Joãoi greet after hei entered the room? Finite adjuncts: BP vs. EP. EP: the null subject of the adjunct clause is a pro (finite Ts in EP always assign Case) European Portuguese: (39) a. O Joãoi sempre cumprimenta quemk quando proi/k/w entra na sala? the João always greets who when enters in-the room Who does João always greet when he/she enters the room?

7 7 b. Quemk é que o Joãoi cumprimenta tk quando proi/k/w entra na sala? the João always greets who when enters in-the room Who does João greet when he/she enters the room?. BP: the adjunct null subject is a (Caseless) trace;. Take the derivational step in (40). If wh is not lexically encoded with an edge feature, then Merge over Move applies subject control (40) N = {João1,...} K = [vp quem entra na sala] who enters in-the room L = cumprimenta greets (41) N = {João0,...} K = [vp quem entra na sala] who enters in-the room M = [cumprimenta João] greets (42) Sideward movement: K = [vp t entra na sala] enters in-the room P = [vp quem cumprimenta João] who greets João (43) [TP Quemi [ [ti cumprimenta o João] [quando ti entra na sala]] who greets the João when enters in-the room Whoi greets João when hei enters the room?. Take the derivational step in (44). If wh is lexically encoded with an edge feature, then Move must apply object control but no wh-in situ (44) N = {João1,...} K = [vp quemuf entra na sala] who enters in-the room L = cumprimenta greets (45) Sideward movement: N = {João1,...} K = [vp t entra na sala] enters in-the room M = [cumprimenta quemuf] greets who (46) a. *O João sempre [[cumprimenta quemuf] [quando t entra na sala] the João always greets who when enters in-the room Whoi does João always greet when hei enters the room? b. Quem F o João sempre [t [[cumprimenta t ] [quando t entra na sala] who the João always greets when enters in-the room Whoi does João always greet when hei enters the room?

8 8. Subject control reading of (47): (47) a. O Joãoi [[cumprimentou quem] [quando ti entrou na sala] the João greeted who when entered in-the room Who did Joãoi greet when hei entered the room? b. Quem F é que o Joãoi [cumprimentou t ] [quando ti entrou na sala] who is that the João greeted when entered in-the room Who did Joãoi greet when hei entered the room? (48) N = {o1, João0, T[p, n]1, cumprimentou0, quem1, quando1, T[n]0, entrou0, em0, a0, sala0,...} K = [[o João] entrou na sala] the João entered in-the room L = [cumprimentou] greeted. Merge-over-Move applies and the final position of quem depends on whether it is associated with uf (cf. (47b)) or not (cf. (47a)) English (49) a. Portuguese wh-phrases: uf is lexically optional b. English wh-phrases: uf is optionally assigned during the computation. If the edge feature is to be optionally assigned during the computation, its assignment should be subject to Last Resort. In particular, assignment of uf to an element that is already in an edge position should be blocked by Last Resort Successive cyclic movement (50) What did John say that Mary bought? (51) a. [vp Mary v+bought what] uf assignment b. [vp Mary v+bought whatuf] c. [vp whatuf [v Mary v+bought t]] d. [CP that [TP Maryk [vp whatuf [v tk v+bought t]]]] e. [CP whatuf [C that [TP Mary [vp t [v tk v+bought t]]]]] f. [vp John v+say [CP whatuf [C that [TP Mary [vp t [v tk v+bought t]]]]]] g. [vp whatuf [v John v+say [CP t [C that [TP Mary [vp t [v tk v+bought t]]]]]]] h. [CP did [TP Johnm [vp whatuf [v tm v+say [CP t [C that [TP Mary [vp t [v tk v+bought t]]]]]]]]] i. [CP what uf [C did [TP Johnm [vp t [v tm v+say [CP t [C that [TP Mary [vp t [v tk v+bought t]]]]]]]]]] (52) Who did John say greeted Mary? (53) a. [vp who v+greeted Mary] (NO uf assignment) b. [TP who [vp t v+greeted Mary]] c. [CP C [TP who [vp t v+greeted Mary]]] uf assignment d. [CP C [TP whouf [vp t v+greeted Mary]]] e. [CP whouf [C C [TP t [vp t v+greeted Mary]]]] f. [vp John v+say [CP whouf [C C [TP t [vp t v+greeted Mary]]]]] g. [vp whouf [v John v+say [CP t [C C [TP t [vp t v+greeted Mary]]]]]]

9 9 h. [CP did [TP Johnm [vp whouf [v tm v+say [CP t [C C [TP t [vp t v+greeted Mary]]]]]]]] i. [CP who uf [C did [TP Johnm [vp t [v tm v+say [CP t [C C [TP t [vp t v+greeted Mary]]]]]]]]] Adjunct control (54) Whok did Johni greet tk after eci/*k entering the room? (55) [vp who [ v [ entering the room]]] (NO uf assignment). Merge-over-Move applies and only subject control is allowed: (56) N = {John1, } K = [vp who [ v [ entering the room]]] L = greeted (57) N = {John0, } K = [vp who [ v [ entering the room]]] M = [greeted John] (58) a. Whoi greeted John after ti entering the room? b. *Whoi did John greet ti after ti entering the room? Parasitic gap constructions (59) a. [Which paper]i did you file ti without my reading ti first? b. *Who filed [which paper]i without my reading ti first?. Derivation of (59a): (60) a. [vp my v [reading [which paper] first] assignment of uf b. [vp my v [reading [which paper]uf first] c. [vp [which paper]uf [v my v [reading t first]] d. [vp [which paper]uf [v my v [reading t first]] file e. Merge-over-Move is inapplicable sideward movement: [vp t [v my v [reading t first]] [file [which paper]uf] f. [vp you v [file [which paper]uf] g. [vp [which paper]uf [v you v [file t]]] h. PP adjunction: [vp [vp [which paper]uf [v you file t]] [PP without my [vp t [v reading t first]]]] i. [CP did [TP you [vp [vp [which paper]uf [v you file t]] [PP without my [vp t [v reading t first]]]]]] j. [CP [which paper] F [CP did [TP you [vp [vp t [v you file t]] [PP without my [vp t [v reading t first]]]]]]]. Derivation of (59b): (61) *[CP whoi [TP ti T [vp [vp ti v [filed [which paper]uf]] [PP without my [vp tk [v reading tk first]]]]

10 10 5. Extensions 5.1. English vs. Romance infinitivals (Kayne 1984) (62) John believes Mary to be smart (63) a. *O João acredita a Maria ser inteligente the João believes the Maria be intelligent b. Quem o João acredita ser inteligente? who the João believes be intelligent Who does João believe to be intelligent? (64) *O João acredita quem ser inteligente? the João believes who be intelligent Who does João believe to be intelligent?. Conceivable structures for (64): (65) a. Quem without uf: *[o João acredita [CP C [TP quem ser inteligente]]] b. Quem with uf: *[o João acredita [CP quemuf C [TP t ser inteligente]]]. Derivation of (63b): (66) [CP quem F o João [vp t acredita [CP t C [TP t ser inteligente]]]] 5.2. Null Possessors in Portuguese. Floripi (2003), Rodrigues (2004), Floripi and Nunes (2009): null possessors are an A- traces in BP (but pros in EP) (67) Joãoi conversou com o pai Øi João talked with the father João talked with his father. (68). Brazilian Portuguese: a. *[a prima Ø] chegou. the cousin arrived *'his/her cousin arrived b. #João disse que Maria vai casar com [ o pai Ø ] João said that Maria goes marry with the father Joãok said that Mariai is going to marry her father. c. [[o amigo [de Joãok ]]i telefonou para a mãe Øi/*k the friend of João called to the mother [Joãok s friend]i called hisi/*k mother. Prediction: subject/object asymetry in BP when wh-movement is involved, but no such asymmetry in EP

11 11 (69) a. A Mariai esbofeteou o Pedrok por causa do irmão ec the Maria slapped the Pedro by cause of-the brother Maria slapped Pedro because of her/his brother (EP). her/*his brother (BP). b. A Mariai esbofeteou quemk por causa do irmão ec? the Maria slapped who by cause of-the brother Who did Maria slap because of his/her brother? (EP) her/*his brother? (BP) c. Quemk é que a Mariai esbofeteou tk por causa do irmão ec? who is that the Maria slapped by cause of-the brother Who did Maria slap because of his/her brother? (EP) her/his brother? (BP). Possible continuation of the derivational step in (70) in BP, where quem does not have uf: (70) a. K = [ o irmão quem] L = esbofeteou b. K = [ o irmão quem] M = [esbofeteou [a Maria]] c. K = [ o irmão ti] M = [quemi esbofeteou [a Maria]] e. [TP Quemi [vp [vp ti esbofeteou [a Maria]] [ por causa do irmão ti]]] who slapped the Maria by cause of-the brother Whoi slapped Maria because of hisi brother?. Possible continuations of the derivational step in (71) in BP, where quem has uf: (71) a. K = [ o irmão quemuf] L = esbofeteou b. K = [ o irmão t] M = [esbofeteou quemuf] c. K = [ o irmão t] M = [[a Maria] esbofeteou quemuf] (72) *[TP [a Maria]k [vp [vp tk esbofeteou quemuf] [por causa do irmão t]]] (cf. (69b)) the Maria slapped who by cause of-the brother Whoi did Maria slap because of hisi brother? (73) [CP quem uf [TP [a Maria]k [vp [vp tk esbofeteou t] [por causa do irmão t]]]] who the Maria slapped by cause of-the brother Whoi did Maria slap because of hisi brother? (cf. (69c))

12 12 6. Summary and concluding remarks. Conditions regulating upward movement also constrain sideward movement: (74) a. What did John say that Mary bought? b. Quem o João acredita ser inteligente? who the João believes be intelligent Who does João believe to be intelligent? c. [Which paper]k did you file tk after reading PGk? d. Quemk é que o João cumprimentou tk depois de tk entrar na sala? (BP) who is that the João greeted after of enter in-the room Whoi did João greet after hei entered the room? f. Quemk a Maria esbofeteou tk por causa do irmão tk (BP) who the Maria slapped by cause of-the brother Whoi did Maria slap because of hisi brother? (75) a. *John thinks what Mary bought? b. *O João acredita quem ser inteligente? the João believes who be intelligent Who does João believe to be intelligent? c. *Who filed [which paper]k without reading PGk? d. *O João cumprimentou quemk depois de tk entrar na sala? (BP) the João greeted who after of enter in-the room Whoi did João greet after hei entered the room? e. *A Maria esbofeteou quemk por causa do irmão tk (BP) the Maria slapped who by cause of-the brother Whoi did Maria slap because of hisi brother?. Novel kind of evidence for the Movement Theory of Control: adjunct control may be affected by the movement properties of a given language

13 References Boeckx, Cedric, Norbert Hornstein, and Jairo Nunes Control as Movement. Cambidge University Press, Cambridge. Bošković, Željko On the locality and motivation of Move and Agree: An even more minimal theory. Linguistic Inquiry 38: Chomsky, Noam The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Chomsky, Noam Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A life in language, Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Ferreira, Marcelo Argumentos Nulos em Português Brasileiro. M.A. thesis, Universidade Estadual de Campinas. Ferreira, Marcelo Null Subjects and Finite Control in Brazilian Portuguese. In Jairo Nunes (ed.): Minimalist Essays on Brazilian Portuguese Syntax, John Benjamins, Amsterdam. Floripi, Simone Argumentos Nulos dentro de DPs em Português Brasileiro. M.A. thesis. Universidade Estadual de Campinas. Floripi, Simone and Jairo Nunes Movement and Resumption in Null Possessor Constructions in Brazilian Portuguese. In Jairo Nunes (ed.): Minimalist Essays on Brazilian Portuguese Syntax, John Benjamins, Amsterdam. Hornstein, Norbert Move! A minimalist theory of construal. Blackwell, Oxford. Modesto, Marcelo On the identification of null Arguments. Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California. Nunes, Jairo The Copy Theory of Movement and Linearization of Chains in the Minimalist Program. Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland. Nunes, Jairo Sideward movement. Linguistic Inquiry 31: Nunes, Jairo Linearization of Chains and Sideward Movement. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. Nunes, Jairo Inherent Case as a Licensing Condition for A-movement: The Case of Hyper-raising Constructions in Brazilian Portuguese. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics 7: Nunes, Jairo Dummy Prepositions and the Licensing of Null Subjects in Brazilian Portuguese. In E. Aboh, E. van der Linden, J. Quer, and P. Sleeman (eds.): Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory: Selected papers from Going Romance Amsterdam 2007, John Benjamins, Amsterdam. Nunes, Jairo Relativizing Minimality for A-movement: φ- and θ-relations. Probus 22:1-25 Nunes, Jairo. Forthcoming. Adjunct Control and Edge Features. In P. Kosta, S. Franks, L. Schürcks, and T. Radeva-Bork (eds.) Minimalism and Beyond: Radicalizing the Interfaces. John Benjamins Rodrigues, Cilene Morphology and Null Subjects in Brazilian Portuguese. In: Syntactic Effects of Morphological Changes (D. Lightfoot, ed.), pp Oxford University Press, Oxford. Rodrigues, Cilene Impoverished morphology and A-movement out of Case domains. Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland. 13