Epp

Can’t live with it, can’t raise without it

Bibliographic Data

ID20259240
AuthorsDiego Gabriel Krivochen (0000-0001-6145-1057, University of Reading, corresponding author), Diego Krivochen (University of Reading)
Year2025
Volume70
Issue1
Pages52-79
Publication date2025-03-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistique (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0008-4131 • E-ISSN: 1710-1115
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/cnj.2025.5
OpenAlexW4417308780
LanguageEN
References cited41

The E(xtended) P(rojection) P(rinciple) (specifically, in its guise as a movement-triggering feature in designated syntactic heads), has been a thorn in the Minimalist side since the mid-1990s. Recently, in the context of attempts to reduce syntactic mechanisms to their minimal expression, the generative operation Merge has been defined as unordered set formation (“Simplest Merge”), and the EPP has been pronounced dead in favour of conditions over labelling which force phrasal movement in order to dissolve ‘symmetry points’. This article compares several theoretical analyses and shows that very simple cases of {XP, YP} copular constructions in Spanish satisfy all requirements for labelling without the need to resort to Internal Merge (IM). Therefore, if there is IM of a DP it must be motivated by reasons other than labelling. Once such a reason exists, the elimination of EPP on labelling grounds becomes dubious

Context (archaeology) · Generative grammar · Labelling · Merge (version control) · Set (abstract data type) · Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies · Phonetics and Phonology Research · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation