Normalization grammar and syntax

Normalization grammar is a Minimalist model of syntax where the basic Narrow Syntactic operations are driven by a process known as Normalization of relations (De Vos 2008). Normalization can be seen as a set of constraints on information structure that can either drive syntactic derivations or constrain syntactic representations (depending on one's perspective). This means that Normal Forms can be construed as LF interface conditions which determine the nature of syntactic computation.

Normalization model of grammar

Visualizing normalization

Here is a link to a PowerPoint presentation which provides a graphic explanation of the concepts explained in the Lingua (2008) paper. De Vos 2008 Normalization Grammar PPS

Why should normalization be explored in syntactic theory?

There are many possible answers to this question. My favourite answer is because it would be surprising if it were true! There is no reason why syntactic structures should resemble database structures -- and yet the resemblance is uncanny. To the extent that it is true, it suggests that Chomsky's Strong Minimalist Hypothesis could actually be on the right track: Narrow Syntax is determined by interface conditions and nothing else. Other reasons for exploring normalization include the fact that it is very restrictive and makes very precise predictions (stemming from the fact that it is very precisely defined outside of linguistic theory). It also achieves a radical simplification of Narrow Syntax. But putting this aside, there are also many advantages and theoretical implications of this approach.

There are 2 basic components to the system

Functional dependency (subsuming AGREE and SUBCAT): Most syntactic relations are construed as Functional Dependencies and, as such, are subject to Normalization.
Normalization: a set of well-formedness constraints which are motivated outside of linguistic theory.

These lead to the following bare output conditions:

LF output conditions: Normal forms 1--7 i.e. syntax inputs to the LF/CI interface normalized syntactic relations of the form (A,B).
PF output conditions: Although these do not strictly follow from Normalization (since in a T/Y model LF and PF do not interact directly) (a) if Narrow Syntax computes over Functional Dependencies and passes (Normalized) dependencies to the LF interface, (b) then it is a reasonable hypothesis that Narrow Syntax also passes the same representations (i.e. Normalized relations) to the PF interface. PF output conditions might include something like: normalized relations are mapped to linear precedence i.e. a normalized relation of the form (A,B) is mapped to A >> B.

Implications for the narrow syntactic architecture

Normalization grammar achieves a radical simplification of the syntactic apparatus. All Narrow Syntax does is to (a) create a numeration with SETMERGE, and (b) Normalize the relations contained in it.
Normalization grammar makes very specific claims about the nature of `bare output conditions' and about the nature of the LF interface.
(Binary) MERGE does not have to be stipulated; it is an artifact of Normalization of a numeration created by (non-binary) SETMERGE.
MOVE does not have to be stipulated; it is an artifact of normalization acting on interpretable/uninterpretable feature pairs.
Phrase structure building does not have to be stipulated beyond the creation of a numeration; it is an artifact of normalization
Chain formation (and copies) do not need to be stipulated; also an artifact of normalization.
Since "coindexation" (or using pointers) is inherent in Normalization, the fact of Binding is expected (although Principles A,B and C require further explanation).

Implications for broader theory

To the extent that this model is successful it supports the Strong Minimalist Hypothesis that the interfaces (specifically the CI interface) determines core properties of grammar
It provides an extra-linguistic motivation for notions of wellformedness, constraints on data structure, information structure etc.
Since normalization can be used to optimize the lexicon and data-storage capacity:
- it provides an explanation for why L1 acqusition of grammar is linked to the acquisition of the lexicon in children.
- it provides incremental locii for natural selection to operate and thus, pending future research, could possibly provide a rationale for the evolution of language.

Remaining issues for future research

There are lots
What are the computational properties of a normalization-driven grammar?
How does this normalization based grammar `speak’ to Locality: minimality, subjacency, islandhood, phases etc?
How does this normalization based grammar relate to the PF interfaces?
Is the full power of Functional Dependency used elsewhere in grammar (for example in definining anaphoric domains and in SUBJECThood (De Vos 2007,2008)?

Papers on Normalization...

... in Narrow syntax

The basic tenets of a normalization-driven syntax are explained in the following paper.

De Vos, M. 2008. Deriving Narrow Syntax through constraints on information structure: a parallel between linguistic models of displacement and database theory. Lingua 118 (2008) 1864–1899. [Accepted Authors Manuscript version De Vos 2008 Lingua Web Version] [DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2008.05.002].

Codd's original article can be found here:

... and PF output conditions

De Vos, M. 2009. Expletives on the interface: Linearization and PF output conditions. Presentation at the Leiden University Wednesday Syntax Meeting 24 June 2009. [Draft manuscript]
De Vos, M. 2009. Afrikaans mixed adposition orders as a PF-linearization effect: Disharmony is asuperficial side effect of deeper harmony. Presentation at the Theoretical Approaches to Disharmonic Word Orders Conference, Newcastle University, May 30th-June 1st 2009. [Draft manuscript De Vos 2009 Afrikaans Adpositions]
De Vos 2010. Spec-head vs Head-Spec. (ms).

There are also some other papers on the uses of functional dependencies in a Minimalist framework on my research page.

Some online tutorials on normalization

An introduction to the relational model of database design on wikipedia -- always a good place to start

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relational_model

Normalization page on Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_normalization

Functional Dependency pages on Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_dependency and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multivalued_dependency

There are many online tutorials providing basic introductions to database normalization. Here are a few to get you started, but there are many out there if you do a google search.