Cyclic Linearization of Syntactic Structure
DANNY FOX and DAVID PESETSKY
Abstract
This paper proposes an architecture for the mapping between syntax and phonology
– in particular, that aspect of phonology that determines the linear ordering of
words. We propose that linearization is restricted in two key ways. (1) the relative
ordering of words is fixed at the end of each phase, or ‘‘Spell-out domain’’; and (2)
ordering established in an earlier phase may not be revised or contradicted in a later
phase. As a consequence, overt extraction out of a phase P may apply only if the
result leaves unchanged the precedence relations established in P. We argue first
that this architecture (‘‘cyclic linearization’’) gives us a means of understanding
the reasons for successive-cyclic movement. We then turn our attention to more
specific predictions of the proposal: in particular, the e¤ects of Holmberg’s
Generalization on Scandinavian Object Shift; and also the Inverse Holmberg Ef-
fects found in Scandinavian ‘‘Quantifier Movement’’ constructions (Ro¨gnvaldsson
(1987); Jo´nsson (1996); Svenonius (2000)) and in Korean scrambling configura-
tions (Ko (2003, 2004)). The cyclic linearization proposal makes predictions that
cross-cut the details of particular syntactic configurations. For example, whether an
apparent case of verb fronting results from V-to-C movement or from ‘‘remnant
movement’’ of a VP whose complements have been removed by other processes, the
verb should still be required to precede its complements after fronting if it preceded
them before fronting according to an ordering established at an earlier phase. We
argue that ‘‘cross-construction’’ consistency of this sort is in fact found.
1. Introduction
1
This paper proposes an architecture for the mapping between syntax and
phonology – in particular, that aspect of phonology that determines
Theoretical Linguistics 31 (2005), 1–45 0301–4428/05/0031–0001
6 Walter de Gruyter
1
The present paper is the first installment in a larger project (Fox and Pesetsky (in
prep.)). The inspiration for this work can be traced to a conversation with John

ordering. In Fox and Pesetsky (in prep.), we will argue that this archi-
tecture, when combined with a general theory of syntactic domains
(‘‘phases’’), provides a new understanding of a variety of phenomena
that have received diverse accounts in the literature. This shorter paper
focuses on two processes, both drawn from Scandinavian: the familiar
process of Object Shift and the less well-known process of Quantifier
Movement. We will argue that constraints on these operations can be
seen as instances of the same property of grammar that explains the fact
that movement is local and successive cyclic. We begin by sketching a
model in which locality and successive cyclicity are consequences of the
architecture that we propose, rather than specific facts about movement
itself. We next present our proposal in somewhat greater detail, and
show how it can account for a wide range of apparent limitations on
movement – in particular, superficially contradictory restrictions on
Object Shift and Quantifier Movement. The restrictions on Object Shift
include those grouped under the rubric of Holmberg’s Generalization,
which Quantifier Movement does not seem to obey. We will argue that
Quantifier Movement instead obeys a near mirror-image of Holmberg’s
Generalization (an ‘‘Inverse Holmberg E¤ect’’), but that both Holmberg’s
Generalization and its mirror image are expected if our proposed archi-
tecture is correct.
Our discussion will be for the most part informal, but we will con-
clude by o¤ering a more formal implementation of our proposals. This
Frampton, and to a fruitful additional meeting with John Frampton and Sam
Guttmann. We are grateful to both of them, and also to the students and visitors who
attended our Spring 2003 seminar at MIT, where much of this work was first presented
and developed. We also want to express our gratitude for the contributions to our work
of Elena Anagnostopoulou, Jonathan Bobaljik, Misi Brody, Noam Chomsky, Anders
Holmberg, Sabine Iatridou, Kyle Johnson, Noriko Kawasaki, Heejeong Ko, Alec
Marantz, Andrew Nevins, Øystein Nilsen, Jon Nissenbaum, Christer Platzack, Norvin
Richards, Joey Sabbagh, Peter Svenonius, Shoichi Takahashi, and Sophia Tapio, among
others. We also wish to thank for their comments and questions audiences at Sophia
University (Tokyo); Universite´ de Paris VII; Indiana University; Kyoto University
(Kaken Ellipsis Workshop); University of Vittoria (Basque Country); University of
Milan-Bicocca; the University of Massachusetts/Amherst; the Workshop on Interfaces
(Chaˆteau de la Brete`che); the 2003 LSA Summer Institute (Michigan State University);
GLOW 2003 (Lund); and the First North American Syntax Conference (Concordia
University, Montreal).
2 Danny Fox and David Pesetsky