SEYYED MAHDI SADATI NOOSHABADI; Mehdi Sabzevari; Narjes Banou Sabouri; Mazdak Anoushe
Volume 12, Issue 1 , January 2021, , Pages 1-29
Abstract
In this paper the parasitic gap in Persian language is explained by using the explanations provided by two proposed approaches in the Minimalist Programme namely as “Sideward Movement” and “Symmetric Merge”. In “Sideward Movement” the parasitic gap is considered as ...
Read More
In this paper the parasitic gap in Persian language is explained by using the explanations provided by two proposed approaches in the Minimalist Programme namely as “Sideward Movement” and “Symmetric Merge”. In “Sideward Movement” the parasitic gap is considered as a NP which after valuing its uninterpretable feature in the adjunct clause, moves to the main clause to value its uninterpretable feature again and then moves to the specifier of the CP. This explanation is problematic since the uninterpretable features are checked and deleted after being valued. In the “Symmetric Merge” approach the parasitic gap is considered as a shared NP between the adjunct and main clauses by having the same case feature in two clauses. This approach cannot explain the parasitic gap in Persian language since in some example the moved NP has two different case features. After reviewing other examples from the old, middle, and new Persian languages and finding that the parasitic gap has particular characteristics such a grammaticality of the sentence even when we have pronoun in the situation of the real gap, it is concluded that the Persian language is a language without parasitic gap.
