 ahead with those components when we refer to the complements of a verb that is object of a verb that is called an argument. So, I just wanted to introduce this term to you argument refers to the complement of a verb and when we look at the distribution in transitive works verbs do not have any argument transitive works have one and a and di transitive works have two arguments which means in transitive works will have no noun phrase in the in the predicate no n p in the v p inside the v p transitive works will have one n p inside the v p di transitive works will have two n p's inside v p that is what is the meaning of verb that is what the meaning of verb and its arguments. Arguments of a verb can only be an n p or an i p and sometimes a p p this making sense when we say argument of a verb can be an n p that should be pretty simple that is I John likes pizza the n p pizza is an argument of the verb which is like which is like how an entire sentence can be an argument of a verb argument of a verb or a post positional phrase can be an argument of a verb is what I am which is I will is something that I will work with you if we have a sentence John met with his doctor what is the what is the element that is an argument of the verb what is the what is the element that is an argument of the verb meet what is the phrase that is the argument of the verb meet John met with his doctor with his doctor is the entire phrase which happens to be the argument of the verb meet. Therefore, in that case the argument of the verb is the entire p p that is prepositional phrase how the whole sentence works as an argument is something that I will show you the relationship again the relationship between arguments and their verbs and their arguments is called categorical selection verbs select a particular category of element for its argument this is called categorical selection rules and this is also called a lot of times sub categorization. For example, the verb meet subcategorizes for a p p if I if I say this sentence a verb like meet subcategorizes for a p p it simply means any time we say we use the verb meet in a sentence we are going to have to use a p p as its complement a p p as its argument some verbs select for an n p and some and other times a verb selects for more than an n p I want to demonstrate that to you in a moment. Let us look at this example of the verb no it takes an n p as its argument what is the first sentence here can somebody read the first sentence for me please is it visible clear John knows the time what is the what is the argument of this verb no the time as an n p same verb can also take the full sentence as its complement as its argument when we say John knows that the world is full of noises the world is full that the world is full of noise is a complete sentence in fact it is more than a sentence which becomes the the complement of the verb no is this a good sentence. So, in this case the verb no can also take an entire sentence as its complement which means we can say a verb like no subcategorizes for an n p or for a complete sentence sometimes the same verb can also have an interrogative sentence as its complement and I have not talked to you about the difference between a declarative sentence and interrogative sentence in terms of their x bar and their structural representation hopefully I will get this time to do that today. If you look at another verb like ask we see ask just like the verb no takes as an n p as its complement it can also take but it does not take the whole sentence as its complement in number two to be if you see a sentence like John asked me that the world was full of noises this is not a grammatical sentence in English John asked me that the world was full of noises is not a grammatical sentence of English which simply means that a verb like ask does not subcategorize for a full sentence. However John asked me what the time was is a good sentence that that that refers to a categorical selection rule in the sense that a verb like ask can take as an interrogative sentence as a as its complement but not as the declarative sentence as a complement so a verb like ask can take an n p as its complement an interrogative sentence as its complement but not a declarative. I have just one more example of a verb wonder this sentence does not take n p as its complement such as a sentence like Paul wonders the time is not a good sentence therefore we can say it does not subcategorize for an n p it does not subcategorize for a full sentence either in the sense that we cannot say Paul wonders that the world is full of noises that is also an grammatical sentence so it the a verb like wonder does not allow us to have a full sentence as its as its complement. However a verb like wonder allows for an interrogative sentence as its complement and we can say Paul wonders what the time is now look at these three verbs know ask and wonder and then we see according to the categorical selection rules this verb these three verbs have different different elements as their complements as their complements as their arguments you with me likewise every verb will have to select one or the other categories as its complement the underlying assumptions of the things that we are discussing right now is arguments when we talk about the arguments of the verb we are still talking about things within predicate subject as a noun or a noun phrase is not part of the argument of the argument of the verb therefore we are not talking about how subjects work subjects is outside the predicate and with that their assumption is a subject is a required element in all the sentences of all the languages of the world we therefore we cannot have a sentence without a subject therefore subject is not part of the argument structure of a verb the verbs have freedom to select its argument depending upon its nature in the following way that you have seen but they do not have the birdie to select their subjects these are the underlying assumptions of what we are discussing a little bit more on categorical selection rules if we are talking about an adjective then adjectives will take a prepositional phrase in a language like English as its complement adjectives will not take n p as its complement or adjectives cannot take another adjective as its complement if you look at the examples that you see on the screen we can say fond of the fond of the fond of the tall student this is a good good good phrase fond of the tall student but we cannot say fond the tall student what is the difference between these two phrases fond of the tall student and fond the tall student the tall student is a tall student sorry tall students the tall student is a noun that is an np and of the tall student is a pp according to categorical selection rule imposed or the categorical selection rule that restricts and that restricts adjectives the rule says is, you can only take PPS as your compliment. Therefore, if it selects found of the tall student, of the tall student that is a good sequence, just the taller student is not a good sequence that is why it crashes and results into an grammaticality. It cannot take that is an adjective cannot take an intermediate category as its compliment either that is we cannot say found tall student and it cannot an adjective cannot take itself as its compliment that is we cannot say found tall. Therefore, these sequences are not warranted and the only sequence that is warranted in these cases is when an adjective takes another takes a PPS as its compliment, get it? Talking about nouns, what do you see about noun? What are the restrictions on nouns? When we see queen of the blue oil is a good sequence, but queen the blue oil is not a good sequence. What does this tell us? Loudly please. Nouns require PPS. Compliment. Does not sound very, very encouraging. I think this is visible quite clearly visible. Yes, noun? Proposition phrase as a compliment of a noun is good, but noun phrase as a compliment of noun does not seem to be good. Is this not visible? I think that is all you have to say. Similarly, an adjective does not a noun does not take an adjective as its compliment we cannot say queen blue. Propositions typically require NP compliments where we can say on the brown table we cannot say on brown table in English. Therefore, on brown table is ruled out whereas on the brown table is a grammatical sequence. It does not prepositions do not take even bare nouns as its compliment we cannot say on brown. Prepositions do not take another prepositions, another prepositional phrase as its compliment in the sense that we cannot say things like on below the brown table. So if you are given an assignment like some of these grammatical sequences and ask to explain these are not big complicated problems. On the on below the brown table is not a good sequence because a preposition does not take a prepositional phrase as its compliment. There is something called semantic selection. If we were to talk about the same verb noun in terms of its semantics the same restriction will be described in different terms such as we can say a verb like noun for a verb like noun a compliment must be a question or a proposition or for a verb like ask and wonder a compliment must be a question only. This is making sense. Then what is the difference between categorical selection rule and a semantic selection? If this is making sense then please tell me the difference between categorical selection and semantic selection. I let you think about this for a moment. I think it is pretty simple to deduct and I have no doubt about your capability to do that you can see this. There is another aspect of elements in a sentence which is called lexical selection. Some of the elements terminal elements like a verb or a noun will always select a particular type of type of other element such as when we look at the verbs like depend or rely the only preposition that these two verbs will take is on. We can only say depend on or rely on these two verbs do not take any other preposition. Such type of restriction is called lexical selection restriction on the elements. You can look at the list a verb like hope will only select for for and a verb like toy will toy when it is used as a verb it can only select a preposition with. By the way let us go back go back to the sentence sorry let us go back to the last slide. Can you can you give me a sentence with toy? She toyed with my emotions. Do not toy with me. No, it is perfectly fine. You are right it may have semantic restrictions on this but we cannot say you have to say do not toy with me you cannot say do not toy on me do not toy for me do not toy at me other other prepositions are not allowed. Can I get a verb sentence with hope? We hear this sentence all the time hope for the best. We cannot say we cannot use any other preposition with this verb hope. Let us look at some of some examples of nouns and adjectives a noun like desire can only take for it will never take off or any other preposition at the same time a noun like love can take prepositions for and off. I assume that you can use these things in sentences and see these restrictions for yourself I am moving ahead with the other things that I have to do. Similarly some adjectives and I am only giving you examples of some of these categories there is a huge bunch of nouns verbs adjectives with these kinds of selectional restrictions on them. You can see an adjective like proud or ashamed can only take a preposition off nothing other than that an adjective like similar takes the preposition to and you can go to the list and see that. I was talking to you about selectional restrictions on verbs on different elements of sentences so far. Sometimes lexical items like words have their own selectional restrictions as well. Sometimes whole category have their selectional restrictions like verbs can only take certain types of complements and some of the some of such restrictions can be explained in semantic terms as well which are referred to as semantic selections. So now I combine couple of things that we have discussed earlier with current discussions. We have talked about lexical categories which means words and I am not sure if I have mentioned this before but we have if I have not then we are going to be talking about functional categories which are invisible elements in sentences such as tense, aspects, case, number and gender. When I say we will be talking about case, number, gender we are not going to be talking about singular and plural or present, past and future we are going to be talking about their representation in generative mechanism of sentences. How does a sentence how do we grow a sentence? How does it work and how are different aspects different elements of a sentence projected in X bar theory is what we are going to look at. A sentence I felt like spending little bit time on this thing but the structured into allow for that. So I can just go ahead and tell you that a sentence is called in X bar theory and in flexional phrase which with inflection refers to these invisible categories like tense, aspect, tense and aspect in particular. So when you draw a structure of a sentence you are going to see I am going to use the whole board today. So you are going to see here the X p is equivalent to an I p and then we have following the same restrictions on X bar we are going to have this, following endocentricity the head of an I p is going to be an I and the head of a and the complement of this I is going to be a V p. This may this making sense so far. Now what it means in simple terms is this is an ideal structure of a sentence where the specifier of a sentence which is usually an N p and could be more than that is the subject. This is where the subject occurs and the rest of the sentence which is part of the predicate occurs here. So the entire predicate is going to be the complement of the head of the sentence which is an I. Now what is this I is a little bit complex in the sense that it has several elements in it. Let me show you the use of these things in a couple of sentences. Some of the very simple sentences like this I like pizza or Raju likes pizza. How do you think these categories will project themselves on this structure? The subject of the sentence will come here and when we draw an actual tree we do not write all of these things I am doing it just for you to see that the subject is an N p which is also known as the specifier of the whole sentence and in this case is in one of these examples it is Raju. When we look at the word phrase we see the structure of the developing like this. There is no specifier available here for this verb but what is the verb in this sentence? This second one we have the verb like and then as a complement of this verb we have an N p. I am just going to expand that so the verb is like. Now what comes here as an I is tense and what is the tense of the sentence? Present. So this is where the tense is going to show up and then we get I like pizza. Now so let me give you 30 seconds and one more sentence before I come and talk about these things. Hold on. So are these things clear now that the sentence is a combination of a subject and a predicate and because subject is outside the verbal structure of the sentence so there must be a subject otherwise the sentence is not complete in all the languages of the world which also means a sentence must have a predicate because without the two coming together we do not have a sentence and verbs may or may have its complement that is sometimes some verbs may not have their complements. Before I come to these sentences I want to give you a sentence I am eating a pizza. Can you write this sentence in your notebook? I am eating a pizza. I am eating a pizza. Can you very quickly draw this thing in your notebook before I do it on the board? It should not take more than 30 seconds. What I am interested in finding out is as far as the VP of that sentence is concerned we still have eat and pizza. As far as the subject of that sentence is concerned that is still that is I. So which goes which is in a specifier of the sentence and we have a VP. We are interested in this domain of I and what is the tense of that sentence? Present. Is there something called present continuous as tense or how many tenses have you heard about? Present. How many tenses have you heard about? If we talk about tense. Three. How many of them? Three. Which are they? Present. Past tense. Past tense. Like I said I keep admiring this all the time you guys are very bright. So what is continuous in that? Continuous is an aspect which makes us and these are very elementary very simple things. It just requires our attention not really a not really a matter of great discovery. When we say aspect we simply mean the tense is something which is different from aspects and if that is so then we need to know two things about them about that particular thing. First what does it do in a sentence and second how where does it get represented? These are the only two questions that we need to answer. So can you tell me about the first thing? First question should be simple what does it do in a sentence? What does an aspect do in a sentence? For example in this sentence I am eating a pizza. What refers to this aspect is eating and not the whole part of eating. The inflection on the verb eat which is an ing it refers to something which is what you said is continuous. So that continuous aspect tells us that continuous aspect tells us that this whole process of eating is still in progress is still continuing. This is why we call it a continuous aspect. So when it comes to representation of these aspects where do we represent that aspect in this structure? If we are happy with this structure that you see on the board right now then we know that we have no place for the representation of aspects in this structure. Is this true? Do you see any place where we can represent it? Where aspect can be represented in this structure? There is no place for that. As far as this much was in practice this structure was in practice what was assumed is tense and aspects both are going to be here. Now one projection that is I cannot take both of them or we can say they are the same thing. If we say that only I is going only the projection I is going to contain both tense and aspect then we are making a wrong prediction through this structure that there is no difference between tense and aspect. However they happen to be two different things. Now the only reason why I am mentioning this to you is because this Ip this head I this is one example of inflection in a sentence. This is why the whole thing is called inflection phrase number one. Number two when people worked on these things further they came up with this idea that no this Ip has two things in it at least tense and aspect. So this must be divided into a tense phrase and an aspect phrase that was another development. A consequence of that development was which one projects the sentence that is which one is more important in a sentence tense or aspect that is do we call an Ip a tp or something else. Are you with me? It is not really very significant for us to go into each one of these details but I want you to know and be familiar with these complications in going further and complications in retaining the simplicity of Ip both. That is the point that I want you to understand making sense. So I when we say inflection or I it simply means a bundle of features which could contain tense aspect and few more. At one point Ip was divided into two tense phrase and aspect phrase. And then when the sequencing people worked on the sequencing of both they started calling the whole thing as agreement phrase. These are not important things for us to discuss at this elementary level but I just wanted you to know why this kind of why these things came into existence why these things were discussed at all in the whole debate of projection and phrases structure rules. I want you to take a note of two three sentences from here. Sentences like the first one John loves Mary is a simple sentence that you have seen the structure is in front of you. We have talked about words like no and then we know that sometimes such a word may have the entire sentence as it is complement. So when we have a sentence like I John knows that Bill loves Mary how do we project these sentences in X bar. That is number one and number two we have sometimes interrogative sentences like who likes Mary. Where does this where do these elements like who and what go in the phrase structure. If you can help me finding that book looking at the phrase structure and not me going through each one of these sentences one by one on the board probably we can move little faster. So please look at this book please get me these the structure of these things and would not be a matter of surprise maybe I will ask some of you to draw these things on the board. Thank you.