(29), but v is the closest term of vP that can defi ne its label, and hence is
the only LI that can enter into a labeling relation with vP via minimal
Search 0.
Now, if we are right in claiming that every operation of syntax in fact involves
M 0 ◦S 0 , then it is naturally predicted that (32) generally applies to any instance
of M 0 ◦S 0 (WS), irrespective of which relation R it serves to establish. We will
argue that this prediction is indeed borne out.
Let us consider binding, which is known to be possible only when the
binder c-commands the bindee (in fact, c-command is part of the defi nition
of binding). Thus, John can bind himself in (34a) but not in (34b), since John
c-commands himself in (34a) but not in (34b).
(34) a. Johni loves himselfi.
b. ∗Johni’s father loves himselfi.
We argue that this “c-command requirement” can be seen as a natural conse-
quence of minimality (32). To begin, let us introduce a formal condition on
the Bind(ing) relation:^25
(35) Bind:
{α, β} may count as an instance of Bind only if α and β are headed by n.
In (34a), the subject nP John occupies the “Spec-T” position as shown in (36a),
while this position is occupied by the nP that contains John (i.e., John’s father)
in (36b).
(36) a. {John, {T, {... himself.. .}}}
b. {nP (= John’s father), {T, {... himself.. .}}}
In (36b), Depth(John) > Depth(John’s father). Thus, John’s father, a possible
binder, is closer to himself than John, and hence the Bind-relation in (34b) is
blocked by the minimality condition in (32), coupled with the formal restriction
in (35).
We can see that cases of chain-formation also satisfy (32). Building on the
discussion in Section 4, we defi ne the formal restriction on the Chain-relation
as in (37).
(37) Chain (cf. Chomsky 2001):
{α, β} may count as an instance of Chain only if there exists an element
γ such that γ ∈ α and γ ∈ β.
Readers can easily confi rm that the Chain-objects in (24) and (27) meet (32)
and (37).
We argue that these conditions can also account for the general immobility
of “trace” objects. For instance, once John gets stabilized in a Case-marked,
On the primitive operations of syntax 39