Earticle

Focusing on Free Merge and the Labeling Algorithm within a Minimalist framework, this study aims to investigate the structure of bare infinitival complements selected by perception verbs in English, with occasional reference to to-infinitival constructions for contrast. Although these two types of complement differ only superficially in the presence or absence of ‘to’, they draw contrasts in tense interpretation, auxiliary insertion, and passivization. Previous analyses have often attributed such differences to semantic or pragmatic factors without fully accounting for the underlying syntactic structure. This paper argues that these contrasts arise from the formal properties of T. In bare infinitival complements, T is defective and lacks a valued tense feature (uTdef), undergoing pair-Merge with v, which prevents auxiliary insertion and embedded subject movement. In contrast, to-infinitival complements involve an overt T (toTdef) with valued tense features, undergoing set-Merge with vP—allowing for auxiliary realization, embedded subject movement, and passivization. The properties of T determine the type of Merge operation involved. This analysis offers a unified account of perception verb complements and demonstrates the explanatory power of Merge-based derivations and the Labeling Algorithm in Minimalist syntax.

양화사 작용역의 중의성은 지배결속이론 시절부터 여러 학자들의 다양한 접근방식을 통해 꾸준히 연구되고 있지만, 작용역 중의성을 야기한다고 간주되는 특정 통사적 현상에 주로 초점을 맞추고 있을 뿐 양화사의 역(逆)작용의미를 인간 언어 본연의 관점에서 바라보고 어떤 기제를 통해 일어나는 현상인지에 관한 심도 깊은 설명이 없는 게 현실이다. 본 연구에서는 양화사의 작용역의 중의성을 최소주의의 가장 새로운 방식인 Chomsky(2013, 2014)의 표찰 알고리즘(Labeling Algorithm) 접근법에서의 자질 공유(feature sharing)와 Aoun and Li(1993)의 부가에 대한 제안을 적극 수용하여 최소주의 접근법으로 재분석하고자 한다. Chomsky(1995, 2000)와 Tang(2001)의 주장을 받아들여 양화사의 역 의미작용을 유발하는 양화자질의 존재를 가정한다. 양화자질의 해석성에 대해서는 양화자질을 비해석성 자질로 보는 Tang(2001)의 주장과 달리, 해석성 자질로 보는 Chomsky(1995, 2000)의 주장을 적극 수용한다. 그러나, 일치관계를 통한 자질 점검이 아니라 역 의미작용이 일어나는 지점인 ʋP의 지정어 외곽자리로 양화자질[QU]이 부가되고 경동사 ʋ에 중의성을 야기시키는 양화자질[QU]이 있다고 가정한다. 이렇게 함으로써 이 통사체의 표찰은 자질공유를 통해 <QU, QU>로 결정된다고 제안하고자 한다. 이런 과정을 통해<QU, QU>로의 표찰의 결정에 영향을 끼치는 양화자질은 의미접합부에서 중의성을 가지는 역 의미작용의 해석을 하게 하며, 이 때 표찰을 정하는 것은 의미접합부(Conceptual-Intentional Interface; CI Interface)에 관련 해석 정보를 전달하여 올바른 해석이 이뤄지도록 하기 위함이다.

This paper aims to provide a way to account for scope ambiguity in English through the most recent version of the Minimalist Program including (the very new system,) Labeling Algorithm. To do genuine explanation of the quantifier scope, I make a proposal that we need to assume Quantifier feature[QU] triggered by NP-adjunction at the outer SPEC of ʋ. The QU feature of the copied object quantifier appears to the [SPEC, ʋP] by NP adjunction or late merge based on Sideward Movement by Nunes(2001), and it brings about feature sharing with [QU] feature of ʋ. By labeling through feature sharing, they safely transfer relevant interpretable information to the CI interface to get the meaning of wide scope. To extend our idea, we adopted the suggestion of Tang(2001), Nunes(2001), and Chomsky(2000, 2013). The main goal of this paper is to extend their ideas to the scope interpretation at the CI interface, and propose that the inverse scope results from labeling in the narrow syntax and the [QU] feature activates the syntactic object to have a wide scope.

Since the introduction of MERGE, a structure-building operation on a workspace by Chomsky et al. (2019), relatively few studies have been done regarding the Subject Condition. The present study delves into subject phrases in different structural contexts, focusing on sub-extraction from them. Witnessing the variation in terms of judgements, we conducted the acceptability judgement task on different kinds of subject phrases. Accommodating the results of the acceptability judgement task, we propose that subject phrases in general undergo pre-MERGE Transfer prior to their external MERGE. Being sent to the interfaces before they are introduced to the derivation, this implies that they subsequently become opaque to sub-extraction. On the other hand, when extraction is permitted (at least in some cases), such an early Transfer of certain types of subject phrases is delayed, being accessible for further operation. Thus, they naturally enter the derivation at hand and receive V-feature from the matrix verb to achieve the relevant labeling; extraction out of them is then allowed as it can be fed by proper labeling. All in all, this paper deduces the Subject Condition within the framework of MERGE, by resorting to pre-MERGE Transfer without drawing an additional stipulation.

In this paper, I have presented some properties of FQs in Korean, the implication pointed by connectivity effects would seem to be : (i) there exist syntactic structure inside ellipsis sites, but it is unpronounced. (ii) Remnants in FQs in Korean are considered as a Contrastive Topic. In accordance with Takita et al. (2016), den Dikken (2008), and Ko (2011), I propose there exist a functional head H mediating the remnant (Contrastive Topic) and elided material in FQs in Korean that can salvage remnants from labeling failure at narrow syntax (NS). I also scrutinized to explore the nature of the interaction between narrow syntax (NS) and two interfaces with the goal of achieving an explanation of how elided FQ is realized. In Chomsky (2013, 2015), every syntactic object needs to be labeled for interpretation at the interfaces since those labels play certain roles in semantic and phonological computations. This paper aims to present the possibility that ellipsis should be licensed in narrow syntax. Furthermore, labels play a crucial role in ellipsis phenomena, specially in FQ in Korean.

A different scope behavior between double object construction (DOC) and prepositional dative construction (PDC) in English is one of the topics that has been much discussed to see how it can be syntactically accounted for. We can elucidate this puzzling data if (i) we adopt Labeling Algorithm (LA) (Chomsky 2015) and (ii) deploy Feature Splitting Internal Merge (Obata and Epstein, 2011). Given that DOC and PDC have distinct underlying structures posited by Bruening(2001,2010,2018), we can naturally capture the asymmetry of scope interaction between the two constructions. The resulting labels can be defined as a concomitant of LA via Feature Splitting Internal Merge. This paper also explores some unclear issues in the mechanism of labeling, {XP [F], YP[F]}. (Pukyong National University)

양화사의 작용역 현상을 인간 언어 본연의 관점에서 바라보고 어떤 기제를 통해 일어나는 현상인지에 관한 심도 깊은 설명을 하고 기존의 연구에서의 한계점을 극복하고 개선하고자 본 연구에서는 양화사의 작용역의 중의성을 최소주의의 가장 새로운 방식인 Chomsky(2013, 2015)의 표찰 알고리즘(Labeling Algorithm) 접근법에서의 자질 공유(feature sharing)와 Obata와 Epstein 의 자질분리 병합(Feature-splitting Internal Merge)을 적극 수용하여 최소주의 접근법으로 재분석하고자 한다. 양화명사구는 양화자질[QU]을 가지고 있고 v*에 파이자질 이외 양화자질[QU]이 있다고 가정함으로써 이 통사체의 표찰은 자질공유를 통해 <QU, QU>로 결정된다고 제안하고자 한다. 이때 결정된 <QU, QU> 표찰은 부호화(encoding)되어 의미접합부(Conceptual-Intentional Interface ; CI Interface)에서 양화사의 중의적 해석을 가능하게 한다. 자유로운 병합이 전제된 최근의 최소주의 흐름속에서 Chomsky가 제안하는 표찰 알고리즘을 통해 양화사가 두 개인 문장에서 결정된 표찰들 간의 위계는 의미해석 접합부에서 의미정보를 전달하여 해석을 하는데 중요한 역할을 하고 있다고 전제하여 본 논문에서는 양화사 작용역 현상에 적용 가능한 세 가지 방법을 제안한다. 양화사가 두 개인 문장에서 첫째, 핵 v가 보유한 파이 자질과 양화 자질을 동시에 R로 상속하는 경우와 둘째, 두 자질 중 파이 자질을 먼저 R로 분리 병합하는 경우와 마지막으로 두 자질 중 양화 자질을 우선 R로 분리 병합하는 경우 세 가지 경우의 수가 발생한다. 이 세 가지 경우의 수 중에 첫 번째는 표찰 결정의 실패로 의미접합부에 무의미한 정보를 주지만, 두 번째 경우는 역(逆)의미 작용역을, 세 번째 경우는 표면 작용역의 해석적 정보를 주게된다. 다시 말해서, 양화사 의미의 중의성은 운용상의 부담(burden)을 주는 의무적 이동(obligatory movement)이 아니라 자유병합에 의한 결과물이며 이는 최소주의의 관점 내에서 작용역 현상의 간소화와 다양한 구문에 적용 가능한 통합된 설명을 시도하는데 그 의의가 있다.

A central goal of this paper is to present a new account of Quantifier scope ambiguity phenomena based on Chomsky's (2013, 2015) Labeling Algorithm (LA). In the account, this paper argues, without appealing to traditional movement operations akin to QR, that an inverse scope of QNP is attributed to the output of the essential operation in Narrow Syntax(NS) which is LA. Obata and Epstein's(2011) Feature-Splitting Internal Merge present empirical and theoretical advantages. Following their assumption, we suggest three viable options. First, R attracts both φ-feature and Quantifier feature on v* simultaneously. Secondly, R attracts Quantifier feature first. In the case that R attracts φ feature first is the last viable option. Given this view, we naturally hypothesize that φ-feature and Quantifier feature each move independently. In this sense, Feature splitting is the optimally exploiting independent mechanisms and enables us to capture derivationally different types of feature sharing. By deploying three viable options, we safely capture rigid scope and inverse scope. In summary, syntax of scope relies on three distinctive devices : Quantifier features, Feature-Splitting Internal Merge and Labeling Algorithm. Chomsky demonstrates that labels are needed for interface interpretation. In the spirit of minimalism, we elucidate scope ambiguity from a labeling perspective and this analysis sheds light on how determine a complicated syntactic object such as{XP[F],YP[F]} via labeling system and the quest for simplicity of Quantifier Scope Interaction.

In this paper, we will consider how Labeling Algorithm in Chomsky(2013, 2015) can explain the syntax of there- constructions. To capture this, we will consider the previous analyses of there-constructions and their problems. Especially, we will show Goto’s (2016) analysis of there-constructions under Labeling Algorithm in Chomsky(2013, 2015) and point out his problems. Given this, we will propose the novel analysis of there-constructions under the theory of Labeling Algorithm in Chomsky(2015), suggesting the following assumptions. First, the expletive there is inserted to [Spec, T] to fill the subject position in conformity with the Extended Projection Principle. Second, since the Root(R) in there-constructions is unaccusative verb, the associate DP can not be raised to [Spec, R] but is directly merged with R. Third, since T in there-constructions is too weak to serve as a label, the expletive there can strengthen T. Thus, T in there-constructions can label TP after there-insertion. Given this, we can explain the anti that-trace effect in there-constructions.

Chomsky (2000)의 최소주의에서는 격조사의 역할을 부수적인 것으로 간주한다. 격의 변화가 의미해독에 영향을 주지 않기 때문이다. Chomsky (2005)는 격 자질이 값을 가지는 것은 φ-자질의 일치로 일어난다고 주장한다. 특히 값이 없는 T의 φ-자질이 DP의 φ-자질로부터 값을 받을 때, 격이 주격으로 값을 가진다. Saito (2014)는 Chomsky (2005)의 주장에 대해 뒤섞기와 다중 격조사 현상이 나타나는 언어에서는 격의 값 부여와 표찰화가 다른 방법으로 이루어진다고 제안한다. Saito (2014)는 Bošković (2005)의 분석을 받아들여 격의 값 부여는 φ-자질의 일치와 무관하게 일어난다고 보고, T와 DP가 φ-자질 일치를 이루고 난 후에, DP가 TP의 spec자리로 내부병합을 할 경우, T로부터 격의 값을 부여받는다고 주장한다. 이러한 해석은 영어와는 다르게 다중 격조사를 T가 부여할 수 있게 된다. Saito (2016)는 격접미사가 발달된 한국어나 일본어 같은 언어에서는 격접미사가 명사에 붙어 항-표찰화 기제 역할을 한다고 주장한다. 본 연구는 이 주장을 받아들여 항-표찰화 기제 작동의 증거를 일본에서 통사적 데이터로 한국어에서 심리언어학적 데이터로 분석한다. 일본어에서 PP의 CP 밖으로의 뒤섞기는 {PP, CP}와 같은 통사체를 만들어 낸다. PP에 결합된 소유격접미사는 표찰화 기제가 작동할 때 PP를 보이지 않게 하여 CP가 표찰화 되도록 항-표찰화 기제역할을 한다. Park (2010)은 한국어 문장으로 구성된 실험에서 통사적 복합성이 문장처리에 심리적 부담이 높을 것이라는 전제에 반하는 증거를 제시하였다. 뒤섞기와 생략을 포함하는 문장에서 뒤섞기가 가장 빨리 문장처리 되고, 뒤섞기와 생략이 같이 포함된 문장이 생략만을 포함하는 문장보다 더 빨리 처리되었다. 다시 말해, 뒤섞기가 문장처리를 가속화하는 결과가 나왔다. 본 논문은 이러한 현상을 통사적 논항에 붙어있는 격접미사가 항-표찰화 기제 역할을 하여, 한국어 문장의 통사적 도출에서 표찰화가 가능하게 하는 것으로 보았다. 결론적으로, 통사적 도출에서 격접미사는 λ-자질을 포함하고 있어 항-표찰화 기제 역할을 하는 것으로 분석하였다.

Chomsky (2000) assumes that Case is a peripheral part from the narrow syntax because Case does not influence sentence meaning at CI interface. Chomsky (2005) proposes that Case is valued through φ-feature agreement. Saito (2014) suggests that some languages which permit scrambling and multiple occurrences of suffixal Case particles have different ways of Case valuation and labeling. Saito (2016) adopts Bošković’s (2005) analysis that Case value does not depend on φ-feature agreement for Korean and Japanese type languages. Saito (2016) suggests λ-feature as anti-labeling device at suffixal Case particles to label merged syntactic objects in Japanese. The goal of this paper is to suggest that λ-feature is inherent in suffixal Case particles. This suggestion can be inspected by syntactic data and psycholinguistic data. I, consequently, support Saito’s (2016) suggestion and propose that λ-feature at suffixal Case particles in Korean and Japanese operate as an anti-labeling device.

Pseudogapping is conceived to be closely related to two other elliptical constructions, VP Ellipsis and Gapping. Pseudogapping is overall more restricted in its distribution than VP Ellipsis, not Gapping. It was frequently claimed that Pseudogapping should be derived as VP Ellipsis, with the remnant having moved out of the VP before deletion. This paper aims to take a critical look at two previous approaches of Pseudogapping, Jayaseelan's(1990) Heavy NP Shift and Lasnik's(1995, 1999) Overt Object Shift, and attempts a new approach to the derivation of Pseudogapping on the basis of Chomsky's(2013) Labeling Algorithm(LA). To guarantee the legitimate derivation of Pseudogapping, this paper will suggest that three assumptions should be obligatorily satisfied such as Focus Phrase(FP) between TP and vP layer, a Focus feature on the Pseudogapping remnant, and vP Identity Requirement between antecedent clause and target clause.

The goal of this paper is to show the explanatory power of labeling algorithm in Chomsky(2013, 2014) and consider the correlation between subextraction and labeling algorithm. Especially, we will consider how the effects of Condition on Extraction Domain and Freezing effects can be made under the theory of labeling algorithm in Chomsky(2013, 2014) and Goto(2015). Especially, we will investigate the correlation between labeling and extraction phenomena in English under the theory of Goto(2015) and point out the problems of Goto’s(2015) analysis of correlation between extraction and labeling. After indicating Goto’s(2015) problems, we will propose that movement over the labeled syntactic object can be allowed, but movement over the unlabeled syntactic object can be disallowed. To prove our proposal, we will suggest the following empirical evidences as follows: (i) the grammatical contrast between PP-raising over wh-element which is the labeled syntactic object and PP-raising over topicalized element which is the unlabeled syntactic object in English (ii) the grammatical contrast between wh-subject raising over T with Agent Focus morpheme and wh-subject raising over T without Agent Focus morpheme in Kaqchikel, a Mayan language of Guatemala

English exhibits a peculiar agreement phenomenon in thereconstructions, where T agrees with the first conjunct of conjoined nominals rather than the entire conjoined phrase. Based on Lasnik’s (1995) proposal that the expletive there is an LF affix, Bošković (1997) suggested an account for this phenomenon. While attractive, Bošković’s analysis does not align with the latest syntactic theory. This paper proposes a solution for this phenomenon within Chomsky’s (2013, 2015) labeling algorithm framework, maintaining Bošković’s explanatory point. Specifically, it argues that the expletive there merges externally with the associate, forming {there, associate}, and undergoes obligatory movement due to the labeling algorithm. This reduces the issue to split phi-feature agreement of T. The analysis is further validated by explaining three challenging cases: lack of adjacency between there and its associate, unergatives and ergatives’ unsuitability for there-constructions, and a case difficult to explain without the Merge-over-Move Principle. This paper’s analysis offers a cohesive explanation for variations across different syntactic structures involving there-constructions. If this paper’s discussion is on the right track, it supports the validity of Chomsky’s labeling algorithm framework.

This paper proposes the labeling method for solving bin-picking problem in robot vision. It has the processing steps such as image thresholding, region labeling, and moment computation. To determine a target object from object, the modified labeling method is used to. The moment concept applied to determine the position and orientation of target object. Finally, some experiment result are illustrated and compared with the results of conventional shrinking algorithm and collision fronts algorithm. The proposed labeling method has reduced processing time.

This paper explores how to derive the word order of Old English(OE) subordinate clauses via the labeling system(Chomsky, 2013), which provides a new perspective on the word order in question. AUX-V, V-AUX, AUX-V-O and AUX-O-V orders are derived in OE subordinate constructions where quantified and pronominal objects are not selected. After arguing that the headedness parameter approach cannot capture these word orders, we show that these word orders can be derived unproblematically within the labeling system(Chomsky, 2013), where given SO={AUX, V}, one of the SO moves out of the SO in order for minimal search to select the remaining head as the label. Thus AUX-V order is derived in {AUX, V} if AUX moves out of the SO whereas V-AUX order is done if V moves out of {AUX, V}. Next if an object NP is merged in the remaining VP, producing SO={VP, NP}, one of the SO moves out of the SO again in order for the label of the SO to be selected, thus deriving AUX-V-O or AUX-O-V respectively. The labeling system adopted here rules out V-O-AUX order which did not exist in OE by virtue of no feature sharing in {VP, NP} during the derivation.

본 연구는 스페인어의 ‘대명사-명사구(pronoun-nominal phrase)’ 구조와 관련된 세 가지 이슈를 다룬다. 첫째, 한정적 복수 명사구가 주어로 기능할 때 동사는 복수 1,2인칭으로 표시될 수 있는데 본고에서는 이러한 ‘불일치(unagreement)’ 또는 ‘1,2인칭 일치’ 현상을 통사적 관점에서 설 명하고 더 나아가 본고의 분석이 한국어, 영어, 이탈리아어의 ‘대명사-명사구’ 구조에도 적용될 수 있는지를 논의해본다. 둘째, 복수 1,2인칭대명사만 ‘대명사-명사구’ 구조에 출현이 가능하고 복수 3인칭대명사와 단수 1,2,3인칭대명사는 출현할 수 없는 이유에 대해 형태적 복잡성 차이에 입각하여 설명을 제시한다. 형태적 복잡성 차이에 입각한 분석은 ‘대명사-명사구’ 구조와 관련하 여 스페인어와 이탈리아어 사이에 존재하는 차이의 이유도 설명할 수 있음을 보여준다. 그리고 영어에서 명사구를 보충어로 취하는 인칭대명사를 한정사로 분석하는 Postal(1969)의 분석은 {nosotros/vosotros} los coreanos처럼 복수 1,2인칭대명사와 정관사가 동시에 출현하는 사례를 설명하는데 있어 어려움에 직면한다는 것을 지적하고 본고의 분석은 이러한 어려움까지도 해결 할 수 있음을 보여준다. 끝으로, 복수 1,2인칭대명사와 한정적 복수 명사구가 ‘대명사-명사구’ 구 조를 형성할 때 두 요소가 어떤 방식을 통해 결합하고 또 어떤 식으로 동사에게 복수 1,2인칭 일 치를 유발하는지를 최소주의적 관점에서 논의한다. 본고에서는 Chomsky(2013, 2015)의 표찰 알 고리즘(labeling algorithm)에 입각한 Hiraiwa(2017)의 분석을 소개한 다음 그의 분석은 스페인어의 ‘불일치’ 현상을 설명하기에는 충분하지 못함을 지적하고 그 대안을 제시한다.

This paper deals with three issues related to the so-called ‘pronounnominal phrase (PN)’ structure in Spanish. First, we try to provide an analysis of the so called ‘unagreement’ phenomenon from a syntactic point of view; we argue that this phenomenon is deeply related to the pro-drop properties; we also discuss whether our analysis can be applied to other languages such as Korean, English and Italian. Second, based on the difference in morphological complexity we offer an analysis of why only 1st/2nd plural personal pronouns are allowed to appear in the PN structure, whereas 3rd plural personal pronouns and 1st/2nd/3rd singular personal pronouns are not allowed to appear in this structure; we claim that our analysis based on the morphological complexity can also explain why Spanish and Italian show a big difference regarding the PN structure; furthermore, we point out that Postal (1969)’s analysis faces a difficulty in explaining the PN structure like ‘nosotros los coreanos’ and then argue that this problem can also be solved by our analysis. Finally, from a minimalist perspective we discuss in more detail how personal pronouns and definite plural NPs combine to form the PN structure and how the 1st/2nd agreement is triggered on the verb. For this, we first point out that Hiraiwa (2017)’s analysis based on the labeling algorithm (Chomsky 2013, 2015) is not sufficient to account for the ‘unagreement’ phenomenon and then suggest an alternative.

In the ever-changing landscape of finance, the fusion of artificial intelligence (AI)and pair trading strategies has captured the interest of investors and institutions alike. In the context of supervised machine learning, crafting precise and accurate labels is crucial, as it remains a top priority to empower AI models to surpass traditional pair trading methods. However, prevailing labeling techniques in the financial sector predominantly concentrate on individual assets, posing a challenge in aligning with pair trading strategies. To address this issue, we propose an inventive approach that melds the Triple Barrier Labeling technique with pair trading, optimizing the resultant labels through genetic algorithms. Rigorous backtesting on cryptocurrency datasets illustrates that our proposed labeling method excels over traditional pair trading methods and corresponding buy-and-hold strategies in both profitability and risk control. This pioneering method offers a novel perspective on trading strategies and risk management within the financial domain, laying a robust groundwork for further enhancing the precision and reliability of pair trading strategies utilizing AI models.

경계선 추적을 통해서 결정된 영역의 내부를 래스터 스캔하면서 내부를 일정한 값으로 채워 넣는데 이를 '색칠하기 (blob coloring)'라고 하며 보통은 ‘연결 성분 라벨링(Connected Region labeling)'라 부른다. 이 과정은 각 독립적인 영역들을 고유의 라벨 값으로 구분하여 표시하게 된다. 본 논문에서는 래스터 스캔 결과로 산출된 동치테이블을 동일한 라벨끼리 그룹 화 하는데 수많은 그룹이 서로 얽혀서 복잡하므로 신속하고 간단하게 처리할 수 있는 개선된 알고리즘을 제안하고자 한다. 동치테이블 내에서 동일한 그룹으로 묶기 위한 이동 절차를 8단계 알고리즘으로 제시하고 이에 따른 수행 결과를 보여준다.

There is the boundary following algorithm called by blob coloring or connected region labeling, which means that each pixel of the internal region can be filled with group label values by the raster scanning. This process represents to assigns the individual label value to each region. In this paper an improved equivalent table algorithm to be simpler and faster than the previous tangled complex labelling algorithm will be proposed when grouping different labels to the same region. 8 steps algorithms for grouping in the equivalent table will be presented and the yielding results will be shown.

This paper aims to explain Chomsky's (2013) Labeling Algorithm and to provide appropriate solutions to the problems it contains. Chomsky (2013) argues that the obligatory raising of subject to Spec-TP (i.e., EPP) is no longer driven by feature checking, but the Labeling Algorithm. However, it seems difficult to apply this algorithm to VS(O) constructions which license the postverbal subject in Spec-v*P, since the Labeling Algorithm forces the subject to move out of the base-generated position (i.e. Spec-v*P). In order to resolve this problem, we have proposed a revised Labeling Algorithm, which is different from Chomsky's original one in that a minimal search operation is applied at the phase level and in ‘top to bottom’ fashion. It is also shown that the revised Labelling Algorithm is compatible not only with VS(O) constructions in Null Subject Languages, but also with SV(O) constructions in non-Null Subject Languages.

We propose in this paper the structure of the so-called attributive appositional construction in Korean, which consists of two noun phrases without involving any grammatical element. According to this structure, the two noun phrases form a small clause, in which the predicate noun phrase moves just before the subject noun phrase. In other words, we claim that the construction in question undergoes a predicate inversion. Our proposal accounts for the fact that the first noun phrase has a predicate function. It also accounts for why the genitive Case marker “uy” cannot appear on the first noun phrase: a nominal which is dependent on a noun head can usually have the genitive Case marker in Korea, but the first noun phrase, a predicate, is not dependent on the second noun phrase, a subject. We also try to answer to the question: Why the predicate noun phrase should move? We claim that it is due to the labeling algorithm of Chomsky (2013), according to which one of the two constituents of a small clause should move in order that the small clause gets labeled. On the other hand, there are some pieces of evidence that the second noun phrase is the head of the entire structure of the so-called attributive appositional construction. This is exactly what the labeling algorithm predicts: because it is the first noun phrase, a predicate, that moves, the label of the small clause would be that of the remaining second noun phrase, a subject. So, the so-called attributive appositional construction in Korean provides a case supporting the labeling algorithm of Chomsky (2013).

This paper examines the structure of infinitive complements in English and aims to show how they are derived in accordance with Chomsky’s (2013, 2014) Labeling Algorithm. It first demonstrates that at the stage of merging the embedded subject with its TP, the infinitive complement of raising predicates is labeled as TP, while that of control predicates is labeled as <?, ?>. As to infinitive complements of perception and causative verbs, it is said based on empirical evidence that they are TPs and as in the ECM construction, their subjects agree with the matrix V with an agreement feature inherited from the matrix v. As a result, the derived structure is labeled as <?, ?> at the point of merging the embedded subject and the matrix VP, the embedded T being defective.

In this paper, we consider properties of two types of labeling: labeling through movement in Chomsky (2013) and labeling through Transfer in Narita (2011) and Takita (2014). Pointing out the flaws of two types of labeling, we will suggest the interactive approach between two types of labeling as follows: First, following Chomsky (2013), Narita (2011), and Takita (2014), we assume that there can be no merger of two phrasal SOs, that is *{XP, YP}. Second, we assume a strict spell-out by each labeling operation, not a cyclic spell-out by phase in Chomsky (2000). Finally, following Narita (2011) and Takita (2014), labeling renders elements within the interior of the labeled phrase inaccessible to further syntactic operations. Given these proposals, we will propose the novel approach of the motivation of the possessor-raising in an Inalienable Possessor Constructions (IPC) and the illegal object scrambling in IPC in Korean.