English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

1.0 Introduction: Linguistic Theory always contained a promise: the explanation of language acquisition. 1 This promise has two natural dimensions: one profound dimension is the providing of insight into how children choose one grammar from among the set of possible grammars. Another dimension is equally important: the fundamental operations of grammar should be transparent and therefore find unique support in acquisition. 2 A typical case is the concept of transformation: the perennial appearance of copying ("Can I can come") supports the view that a transformation should be formulated as: copy then delete. This insight is maintained under the formulation of movement as Agree, Mark, Delete recently advocated by Chomsky (2000). In general, where adult grammars provide a conglomerate output, acquisition predicts that microscopic operations could appear as independent steps. In what follows we will develop an acquisition-oriented perspective on the question of the Universal Base Hypothesis and on the constraints governing Feature-checking. It then entails: A) an additional metric of economy, and B) an argument in behalf of a single Tns/Agr node. Finally we argue that Default choices in early child grammars support a theory of Multiple Grammars, where each module involves a different economy metric.

Multiple grammars, feature-attraction, pied-piping, and the question: Is AGR inside TP?