Högskolan Dalarna

Engelska D-uppsats
Supervisor: Jonathan White (jwh@du.se)

The X-bar Theory and Vietnamese syntax

Spring term 2009

Doan Thuc Luong
690520-T031
h07tldoa@du.se
 Table of contents
Page
Abstract 1
1- Introduction 1
1.1 Rationale 1
1.2 Aim 2
2. Theoretical Background 2
2.1 Universal grammar 2
2.2 X-bar syntax 3
2.3 Literature review 5
2.4 Vietnamese syntax profiles 5

3. Methodology 6
3.1 Research method 6
3.2 Linguistic examples 7

4. Data Analysis 7
4.1 The Noun Phrase Structure 10
4.1.1 The English Noun Phrase 10
4.1.2 The Vietnamese Noun Phrase 12
4.2 The Verb Phrase Structure 16
4.2.1 The English Verb Phrase 17
4.2.2 The Vietnamese Verb Phrase 19
4.3 The Complementizer Phrase Structure 21
4.3.1 The English Complementizer Phrase 21
4.3.2 The Vietnamese Complementizer Verb Phrase 22
4.4 Vietnamese Topic-comment Structure 23
4.4.1 Argument for the Topical Phrase 23
4.4.2 Complementizer or Topicalizer? 25
4.5 Vietnamese Structural Ambiguity 26
4.5.1 Ambiguity of the Topic-comment Structure 26
4.4.2 Ambiguity of the Noun Phrase 27
5. Summary 28
6. Conclusion 30
Reference 31
Abstract

X-bar syntax, a model of phrase structure theory seeking to capture the similarities between
different categories of phrases by assigning the same structure to them, has been widely applied
in universal grammar to analyze the phrase structure rules of many languages. This paper
sketches the application of the theory to Vietnamese phrasal and clausal structures. We have the
following purposes: 1) to test the applicability of the theory in the two main lexical phrasal units
and one functional clausal unit in Vietnamese: the Noun Phrase, the Verb Phrase and the
Complementizer Phrase; 2) to take into consideration a special language phenomenon in
Vietnamese: the Topic-Comment structure in the light of this theory; and 3) to paraphrase
ambiguous sentences with two different X bar schemata to explain the differences in meaning. A
literature review of Universal Grammar (UG) and X-bar theory is briefly mentioned and a cross
linguistic comparison between English and Vietnamese phrasal units is presented to serve the
analysis.

1. Introduction:

1.1 Rationale:

Vietnamese has been identified as part of the Mon-Khmer branch of the Austroasiatic language

family. Then, the Muong language was found to be more closely related to Vietnamese than

other Mon-Khmer languages, and a Viet-Muong sub-group was established (MS Encarta ®

Encyclopedia 2004).As the national and official language of Viet Nam, Vietnamese is spoken

throughout the country by nearly 70 million Vietnamese (or Kinh) people as their mother tongue

and by over 10 million people from ethnic minorities of Vietnam as their second and official

language. According to Gordon Raymond (2005), Vietnamese is also spoken by more than 3

million people in overseas Vietnamese communities, most notably in the United States and in

Australia. With such a number of speakers, Vietnamese is the most-widely spoken language of

the Austroasiatic language family.

However, the history of the study of Vietnamese syntax is not long and profound. The

first research on Vietnamese syntax made some cursory remarks on word classes and word

orders in some bilingual dictionaries compiled by European scholars in the 17th,18th and the 19th

centuries such as An Nam Portuguese and Latin Dictionary by Alexandre Rhodes in 1651 or

Latin-Annamese Dictionary by Jean-Louis Taberd in 1838 (Hiep 2002). It had not been until the

beginning of the 1930s that there were some general works on Vietnamese grammar. Since then,

1
some research on syntax has been carried out from different linguistic viewpoints. Surprisingly,

very few studies have been conducted in the light of universal grammar (UG) to analyze

Vietnamese syntax.

1.2 Aim

Taking into consideration the above-mentioned situation in the study of Vietnamese syntax, this

paper aims to apply UG in analyzing Vietnamese syntax with a focus on applying the X bar

theory of syntax to Vietnamese phrases. Aside from the analysis of common phrases, the topic-

prominent features of Vietnamese are also presented in the X-bar schema.

2. Theoretical Background

The term syntax, from Ancient Greek syn-, "together" and táxis, "arrangement", is the study of

rules for constructing sentences in natural languages. Besides, the term is also used to refer

directly to the rules that govern the sentence structure of any individual language, as in "the

syntax of English." Modern research in syntax attempts to describe languages in terms of such

rules. Syntacticians also attempt to find general rules that apply to all natural languages.

2.1 Universal grammar

Universal Grammar (UG) is ‘the system of principles, conditions and rules that are elements or

properties of all human languages’ (Chomsky 1976: 29). As implied in the term “Universal”,

this kind of grammar attempts to explain language in general, not describe specific languages. In

other words, UG is a collection of aspects of grammar that all languages share. The basic idea of

UG had been around for a long time but not until the 1950s did it become a prominent theory of

linguistics marked by the linguist Noam Chomsky’s Syntactic Structures. In this work, though,

the term “Universal grammar” was not mentioned. The author presented a mathematical theory

of language, namely phrase structure rules, which gave rise to the complete theory of UG in the

coming years. The rules are simple and easy to understand. For example, a sentence can be

represented as S → NP + VP. Thus, the arrow can be read as an instruction to rewrite the left-

2
hand symbol as the string of symbols on the right-hand side. The rewrite rules reveal that the

initial symbol S can be replaced by NP + VP. Other rules will similarly unpack NP and VP into

their constituents.

In his later work (1965), Chomsky developed the idea that each sentence in a language

had two levels of representation — a deep structure and a surface structure. The deep structure

represented the core semantic relations of a sentence, and was mapped on to the surface

structure. Chomsky believed that there would be considerable similarities between languages'

deep structures, and that these structures would reveal properties common to all languages,

which were concealed beneath their surface structures.

The modern theory of UG, inspired by Chomsky's notion that all languages have a

common structural basis, is a complex theory involving several sub-theories and models such as

“Principle and Parameters theory”, “X-bar theory”, “Government/Binding Model” and

“Minimalist Programme Model” (Robert 2009). Each of them suggests basic principles to

combine words to phrases and sentences with flexible options that may be adopted by a

particular language.

2.2 X-bar theory

X-bar syntax, initiated by Noam Chomsky then developed by his student Ray Jackendoff in the

1970s and incorporated into Government and Binding Theory in the 1980s, is a model of phrase

structure rules of languages’ grammar. According to the theory, in every phrase, there is always

the head of the phrase. The head of a Noun Phrase is the Noun, the head of a Verb Phrase is the

Verb and so on. Thus, any phrase can be formularized as an XP with an X as the head. It is easy

to identify the syntactic categories of XP and X as the phrasal level and lexical (word) level

respectively. Then it is demonstrated in the theory that there is an intermediate level, which is

larger than head level yet smaller than the maximal expansion of a phrase. That intermediate

category is named X-bar (X′). The following represents the basic phrase structure in X-bar syntax.

3
Phrasal Categories (XP) XP NP, VP, AdjP, AdvP, PP, DP, DegP
ei
X-Bar Categories (X′) …… X’ N′, V′, Adj′, Adv′, P′, D′, Deg′
ei
Word Categories (X) ...… X N, V, Adj, Adv, P, D, Deg

The theory allows us to define different structural relationships, which will be described in the

data analysis section.

The schema is also applied to identify the head of a sentence and the head of the

Complementizer Phrase. The sentence is reclassified as the sentential phrase with its head the

inflectional marker. Thus the rule can be written as: S → IP → (YP) I'. In term of this rule, the

VP is a complement of the I node, i.e., it is a sister of the I node, and the Subject is assigned the

function of the Specifier. As for the head of the Complementizer Phrase, it is obviously the

Complementizer. Hence, C is the head of CP, and the rule is CP → (YP) C'; thus, the IP is the

complement of the C node. A Complementizer Phrase functioning as the subordinate nominal

complement clause may take the verb of the main clause as its specifier.

IP(S)
3
Inflectional Phrase NP I'
3
I VP

CP
3
Complementizer Phrase …. C'
3
C IP

An important notion associated with the X-bar theory is the “head parameter”, which

specifies “the order of head and complement” (Chomsky 1988:70). There are two values of the

head parameter, “head initial” where the complements follow the head and “head final” where

the complements precede the head. A given language can be expressed in terms of whether

heads occur first or last in the phrases of that language, e.g. English and Vietnamese are head

initial languages.

4
 A detailed model of X-bar theory will be presented in the data analysis section.

2.3 Literature review

As mentioned in the introduction, there has been some research on Vietnamese syntax and

grammar carried out based on different linguistic viewpoints. However, specific research on

applying UG to analyze Vietnamese syntax has not been numerous or comprehensive. Most

research on Vietnamese syntax in term of this modern theory only mentions the phrasal

parameters. Among these studies, Tuong (2004) is a helpful reference for this paper. In his

study, the author has provided a deep analysis of the Vietnamese Noun Phrase from a generative

perspective. He has also mentioned the Determiner Phrase as the replacement for the NP in the

light of X bar syntax with various functional sub categories, including Classifiers (Cl), Numerals

(Num), Demonstratives (Dem), as well as Determiners (Det). Another useful paper is Duffield

(1998) with the minimalist orientation in observing Vietnamese syntax. Duffield has clearly

identified two important functional categories in Vietnamese: the Topical Phrase (TopP) and the

Tense Phrase (TP), and this work proves to be a good guideline for the analysis of this paper.

Last but not least, Hao (1992) offers an insight into the assumption that Vietnamese is a topic-

prominent language and the basic structure of Vietnamese also manifests a topic-comment

relation which is referred to as the Theme- Rheme structure in his paper. This supports the idea

of the functional category TopP suggested by Duffield (1998).

2.4 Vietnamese grammar profile

In order to help the reader with the coming analysis, a brief profile of Vietnamese grammar is

presented. The data for the profile are taken from various grammar books and internet resources

such as http://vietnamese-grammar.group.shef.ac.uk/, http://www.seasite.niu.edu, etc.

(1) Morphological considerations. Vietnamese is an isolating language. There are no

inflectional affixes, thus all the words are invariable. Words in Vietnamese are classified into 3

main groups: simple words, compound words and reduplicate words.

5
(2) Syntactic considerations. Vietnamese basically has an SVO word order. Syntactically,

Vietnamese is an analytic language. Thus, grammatical relationships rely mostly on word order

and functional markers. As a result, word order is critical to convey the meaning of phrases and

sentences.

(3) Word class. The word categories in Vietnamese have traditionally been classified into

nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, pronouns, numerals, classifiers, prepositions, conjunctions,

particles and interjections. As there are no word endings to show the class of the word, it is only

possible to identify the class of many words when they appear in phrases or sentences.

(4) Functional markers. Vietnamese possesses several functional markers. Among them are the

noun markers, tense markers, aspect markers and modality markers.

(5) Phrasal Units. Traditionally, there are five phrases in Vietnamese: The Noun Phrase, the

Verb Phrase, the Adjective Phrase, the Adverb Phrase and the Preposition Phrase. All the

phrases are head initial.

(6) Syntactic structures. There are five basic syntactic structures in Vietnamese: (a) structures

of modification, (b) structures of complementation, (c) structures of co-ordination, (d) structures

of predication, and (e) structures of commentation.

3. Methodology

3.1 Research method

This paper is a data-based project. In order to analyze Vietnamese syntax and propose phrase

structure rules in the light of the general assumptions of X-bar Theory, a cross-linguistic method

is used. First of all, a detailed schema of X- bar structures is presented. Secondly, the phrasal

categories are studied comparatively: a brief presentation of the basic English phrase structures

is presented, then Vietnamese phrasal rules are mapped to compare with English, and finally the

X bar schema is applied to Vietnamese phrases. Due to the limited scope of the present research,

only four categories, namely the Noun Phrase (NP), the Verb Phrase (VP), the Complementizer

6
Phrase (CP) and the Topical Phrase (TopP), are considered in detail. The lexical Noun Phrase

and Verb Phrase are also projected into the functional phrases, the Determiner Phrase and the

Tense Phrase respectively. Beside this, the issue of Vietnamese structural ambiguity due to the

different segments of the sentence and the lack of functional markers are also addressed. A

summary of all the phrasal units in the X bar schema is presented at the end of the paper.

3.2 Linguistic examples

The Vietnamese examples composed for analysis in this paper were based on the writer’s own

native speaker intuition and were checked with other native speakers. Examples from Hao (2004)

and Thompson (1965) have been used to initialize the writer’s own examples and analyses.

4. Data Analysis

Syntax has traditionally considered phrases to be the basic units of the sentence. Chomsky

(1957) proposed that a sentence was composed of two phrase structures: The Noun Phrase (NP)

and the Verb Phrase (VP) and the sentence rule is S→NP+VP. Other phrasal constituents

mentioned in syntax in the 1950s were the Preposition Phrase (PP), the Adjective Phrase (AdjP)

and the Adverb Phrase (AdvP). In Chomskyan syntax, these phrasal categories (except the PP),

are named as lexical categories because their heads are open-class words (words expressing

lexical meanings and in opposition to closed-class functional words, i.e. words manifesting

grammatical functions), and these lexical categories could be conveniently incorporated into the

X-bar system. Then, in order to fit the sentential and clausal categories into the X-bar schema,

some functional projections were converted. First, the sentence was converted into the

Inflectional Phrase (IP) or Tense Phrase (TP). Then the subordinate clause was changed into a

Complementizer Phrase (CP). Functional categories such as the Determiner could also be

incorporated in the same way. Thus, the NP was reinterpreted as being part of a Determiner

Phrase (DP). No matter what kind the phrase is, it could be generalized under the two following

phrase structure rules for X- bar schema:

7
 XP
(I) XP → WP X' ei
WP X'
X'
(II) X' → X YP ei
X YP

The X (or the zero bar level-X0) is the head of the phrase which is a word level. Its properties

are projected to the phrasal level XP (or the double bar level X'') via the intermediate level

named X'. Thus, the X is the daughter of the X', and the X' is the daughter of the XP. The YP

under the X' is named complement of the head and it is the sister to the head. It should be noted

that the head and the complement are syntactically very close (for example, the V and the object

in a VP), and in English, the complement is preceded by the head. The WP under the XP is

named as the specifier; it is the sister to the X', and it precedes the X' in English (for example the

degree adverb in an AdjP).

Furthermore, an X' can be expanded into another X' with a ZP as sister to it. The ZP in

this projection is called an adjunct (in English any adverbial structure can be identified as an

adjunct). Hence, we have the third phrase structure rule:

X' X'
(III) X' → ZP, X' ei ei
ZP X' X' ZP

The comma indicates that the adjunct can either precede the X' (pre-head adjunct) or follow the

X' (post-head adjunct). The three rules can be combined as the following

XP
(I) Specifier rule
ei
XP → WP X'
(II) Adjunct rule WP X'
ei
X' → ZP, X'
(III) Complement rule ZP X'
ei
X' → X YP
X YP

While the head is the obligatory element in the phrase, other elements such as complements,

adjuncts and specifiers may or may not be present in the phrasal structures. Thus, it is possible to

have a wide range of structures:

8
(a) phrases containing only a head XP
(minimal phrase) g
X'
g
X
(b) phrases containing a head and a XP
complement g
X'
2
X YP
(c) phrases containing a head and an XP
adjunct g
X'
2
X' ZP
g
X
(d) phrases containing a head and a XP
specifier 2
WP X'
g
X
(e) phrases containing a head, a XP
specifier, and a complement. 2
WP X'
2
X YP
(f) phrases containing a head, a XP
specifier, and an adjunct 2
WP X'
2
X' ZP
g
X
(g) phrases containing a head, an XP
adjunct and a complement g
X'
2
X' ZP
2
X YP
(h) phrases containing a head, a XP
specifier, an adjunct and a complement 2
(maximal phrase) WP X'
2
X' ZP
2
X YP

The adjunct rule is recursive (Black 1998:7) there can be several adjuncts in a phrase and they

can be pre-headed or post-headed.

9
(i) maximal phrases with recursive XP
adjuncts 2
WP X'
2
X' ZP
2
ZP X'
2
X YP

As the result, the X bar schema has testified its advantages over the traditional flat

structure diagram not only by representing correctly the intermediate levels between the word

level and the phrasal level but also by distinguishing syntactically and functionally among the

specifier, the adjunct and complement. Besides, the possibility to phrasalize clauses and

sentences makes the theory more powerful for generalizing and analyzing syntactic structures.

The following are arguments for the possibility of applying the schema into Vietnamese phrasal

and clausal structures in comparison with English counterparts.

4.1 The Noun Phrase Structure

A Noun Phrase is “a construction that functions syntactically as a noun, consisting of a noun and

any modifiers, as all the men in the room who are reading books, or of a noun substitute, as a

pronoun” (http://dictionary.reference.com/). Both English and Vietnamese satisfy this definition.

However, the types and positions of modifiers and the head parameters in the two languages are

not the same.

4.1.1 The English Noun Phrase

The English Noun Phrase consists of three main constituents: the pre-modification, the head and

the post-modification. The pre modification may contain sub-elements which can co-occur such

as determiner (some grammarians also sub classify determiner into pre-determiner, mid

determiner and post determiner), quantifier, modifier (adjective or noun). The two most

frequently-appearing post modifying structures are relative clauses (in full or reduced forms) and

preposition phrases. The following box diagram is the flat structure of a maximal English Noun Phrase:

10
 Table 1. The flat structure of a maximal English Noun Phrase

English Noun Phrase

Pre-Modification Post-Modification

Determiner Quantifier Modifier Head Noun Prep. Phrase Prep. Phrase Relative Clause
[01] The two famous researchers of linguistics in Vietnam whom I admire

If the X-bar schema is applied to this example, the determiner the and the quantifier two will be

identified as the Specifiers. The first PP of linguistics will be the complement as it has a close

syntactic relationship to the head. The modifier famous will be in the place of the pre-head

adjuncts. The relative clause whom I admire and the PP in Vietnam will function as the post-head

adjuncts. The example [01] is diagrammed as the following:

NP
qp
SpecP N'(1)
2 qp
Spec' Quan AdjP N'(2)
g g rp
Spec Adj N'(3) RC
g wo
(Det) N'(4) PP
3
N PP
g 6 6 6
The two famous researchers of linguistics in Vietnam whom I admire

The orders of the adjuncts are not problematic although there are 2 possibilities: (a) “famous” is

the daughter of N'(1), “whom I admire” is the daughter of N'(2) and “in Vietnam” is the

daughter of N'(3) as diagramed above, or (b) “whom I admire” is the daughter of N'(1) and “in

Vietnam” is the daughter of N'(2) and “famous” is the daughter of N'(3).

Another treatment of the NP is to consider it as the intermediate level of the Determiner

Phrase, i.e. “what we’ve been calling noun phrases are actually determiner phrases” (Poole

2002:65). Under this treatment, the NP is projected into the Determiner Phrase (DP) as the

complement for the D node. Example [01] may be presented as:

11
 DP
g
D'
ei
D NP
wo
Quan N'
qp
AdjP N'
g ep
Adj N' RC
ep
N' PP
3
N PP
g 6 6 6
The two famous researchers of linguistics in Vietnam whom I admire

4.1.2 The Vietnamese Noun Phrase

A maximal Vietnamese NP can be composed of seven constituents: the quantifier (Quan), the

classifier (Cl), the head noun (HN), the prepositional phrase (PP), the adjectival modifier (Adj),

the relative clause (RC) and the determiner (Det). The following box diagram is the flat structure

of a possible Vietnamese Noun Phrase:

Table 2. The flat structure of a maximal Vietnamese Noun Phrase

Vietnamese Noun Phrase

Pre-Modification Post-Modification

Quantifier Classifier Head Noun Modifier Prep. Phrase Relative Clause Determiner

[02]Hai người bạn thân trong lớp mà tôi yêu quý ấy

Two Cl friend close in class who I love that
(Those two close friends in my class who I love)

When Tables 1 and 2 are compared, it is obvious that English and Vietnamese noun phrases are

mostly identical in term of modifying elements. Nevertheless, there are two main differences:

(1) only Vietnamese has the classifier, and (2) the modifiers’ positions are distributed

differently. Vietnamese seems to be more head initial than English because adjectival modifiers

as well as determiners in Vietnamese Noun Phrase are post headed.

12
 Table 3. Head parameter of English and Vietnamese Noun Phrase

Head position initial final initial final

In respect to
Determiner 3 3
Classifier 3
Quantifier 3 3
Modifier 3 3
Prepositional Phrase 3 3
Relative Clause. 3 3
English Vietnamese

Thus, it is clearly seen that if the X bar schema is applied to the Vietnamese Noun Phrase with

the determiner as the specifier, a variation of the general rule should be licensed:

General rule XP → (WP) X' NP

2
Det N'

Variation XP → X' (WP) NP

2
N' Det

The variation results in the following diagrammatic representation for example [02]:

NP

N' Det
wo
Quan N'
qp
Cl N'
wo
N' RC
3
N' PP
2
N' AdjP'
g g
N Adj
g g 6 6
Hai người bạn thân trong lớp mà tôi yêu quý ấy

13
 Another difference between the English NP and the Vietnamese NP is that the English

NP can have the PP (usually with of) functioning as its complement (e.g. a student of linguistics)

while in Vietnamese, the complement is usually a noun modifier or a reduced relative clause:

NP NP
g g
N' N'
3 3
Cl N' Cl N'
3 3
N NP N RC
g 6 g 6
[03a] Các sinh viên tiếng Anh [03b] Các sinh viên học tiếng Anh
Cl student(s) English Cl student(s) learn(ing)English

One question that may arise is that what are the most essential elements of modification

in a Vietnamese Noun Phrase. The following are possible shorter Vietnamese Noun Phrases:

[02b] Hai người bạn thân trong lớp mà tôi yêu quý
two Cl friend close in class who I love

[02c] Người bạn thân trong lớp mà tôi yêu quý ấy

Cl friend close in class who I love that

[02c] Người bạn thân trong lớp mà tôi yêu quý

Cl friend close in class who I love

[02d] Người bạn trong lớp mà tôi yêu quý

Cl friend in class who I love

[02e] Người bạn mà tôi yêu quý

Cl friend who I love

[02f] Người bạn

Cl friend

It is clearly seen from the examples that the classifier is the most obligatory element in the

phrase. Hence, another possible approach is to identify the classifier as the specifier. This

projection leads to a diagram which is very similar to that of the English Noun Phrase. The

determiner then is considered to be the post head adjunct as in the new representation of

example [02] bellow:

14
 NP
q
SpecP N'
2 3
Quan Spec' N' Det
g wo
Spec N' RC
g 3
Cl N' PP
2
N' AdjP'
g g
N Adj
g g 6 6
Hai người bạn thân trong lớp mà tôi yêu quý ấy

However, these two approaches seem to be problematic: it sounds illogical to identify either the

determiner or the classifier as an adjunct because both of them are more functional than lexical.

Thus, the possibility of moving from the lexical NP to some functional phrases should be taken

into account. The English NP can be converted into the DetP (DetP→…→ D NP). Similarly, the

Vietnamese NP can project itself into the ClP, the QuanP and the DetP:

DetP
DetP ei
Det'
ei
… Det
i
NP
QuanP QuanP
ei
Quan'
ei
Quan …
i
NP
ClP ClP
ei
Cl'
ei
Cl NP
The 3 dot symbol (…) indicates that there may be intermediate functional categories between the

NP and the top projection; namely, The QuanP and ClP can appear between the NP and the

15
DetP, and the ClP can appear between the NP and the QuanP. The revised diagram for [02] is

presented as bellow:

DetP
g
Det'
q
QuanP Det
g
Quan'
qp
Quan ClP
g
Cl'
qp
Cl NP
wo
N' RC
3
N' PP
2
N' AdjP'
g g
N Adj
g g 6 6
Hai người bạn thân trong lớp mà tôi yêu quý ấy

The functional category approach for the NP proves to be an effective suggestion to

solve the problem which arises in the lexical category approach because it is easier to assign the

functions for the classifier, the determiner and the quantifier.

4.2 The Verb Phrase Structure

A verb phrase is “a phrase consisting of a verb, its auxiliaries, its complement, and other

modifiers” (http://dictionary.reference.com/). The head of the Verb Phrase is the Verb and,

functionally speaking, the complement here is composed of direct and indirect objects, subject

complement and object complement. “Other modifiers” imply any adverbial constructions such

as adverbs, PPs and subordinate clauses. There are substantial differences between English and

Vietnamese Verb Phrases, especially in the way that the grammatical categories of the Verb

such as tense, aspect and voice are marked.

16
4.2.1 The English Verb Phrase

A fully- constituted English Verb Phrase is composed of 4 elements: the modal and/or

auxiliaries group, the head, the complements (which may be the direct and indirect objects, the

subject and object complements), and the adverbials. The following box diagram is the flat

structure of a possible English Verb Phrase:

Table 4. The flat structure of a maximal English Verb Phrase

The English Verb Phrase

Pre verbal Post verbal

Modal/Aux Head Verb Complement Prep. Phrase Prep. Phrase

(Adverbial) (Adverbial)
[04] have studied linguistics for two years at Högskolan Dalarna

The following is the basic diagrammatic presentation of the example [04] in the X-bar schema,

The verb studied is interpreted as the Head. The object linguistics is the Complement and the

two adverbials for two years and at Högskolan Dalarna are identified as the Adjuncts:

VP
wp
………. V'
qp
V' PP
ei
V' PP
3
V NP
g 6 6 wo
have studied linguistics for two years at Högskolan Dalarna

The questions that may arise are: (1) what could be the specifier for the VP and (2) how the

Auxiliaries/Modal or the inflectional suffix should be treated? Traditionally, the subject of the

sentence is filled in the position of the specifier (VP→ NP[subject] V' ). Nevertheless, this rule

does not conform to the basic rule of generative grammar (S→ NP VP). Once the X bar schema

is applied in this way, the VP takes the subject as its specifier, thus it means the VP is equivalent

to the whole sentence. Besides, it sounds illogical to consider the auxiliaries/modal/ inflectional

17
as sub elements of the V0 level. To solve the problem, linguists have suggested a new node

labeled as Inflection Phrase (IP) (Black 1998:11; Poole 2002:61). The term “Inflection” here is

just conventional. It not only means the inflectional verbal suffixes but also the

modals/auxiliaries. The rule phrasalizes the sentence: S→ IP. Consequently, the Verb Phrase is

projected in the following branching diagram (example [04]):

IP (=S)
ei
NP I'
g q
N' I VP
g qp
N V' PP
ei
V' PP
3
V NP
g 6 6 wo
(I) have studied linguistics for two years at Högskolan Dalarna

With this new projection, the subject of the sentence now acts as the specifier of the IP. The

inflectional marker functions as the head of the projection and VP turns to be the complement

for the I node.

The evidence to approve this argument is that there must be one and only one of the

inflectional elements in a sentence: the past tense marker, a present tense marker or a modal.

Besides, this element is obligatory whereas the VP can be left out as shown in the short answers

and structure of co-ordinations:

(4b) Have you studied linguistics at Högskolan Dalarna? Yes I have

(4c) I have studied linguistics at Högskolan Dalarna and Mr. Huy has, too.

Thus, it can be seen that the obligatory inflection is the head of the sentence if the sentence is

converted in to the IP. Furthermore, it is clearly seen that the VP must match with the I node,

which evidences the head-complement relationship between the I and the VP.

18
The I node The matching VP Examples
Modal - Infinitive phrase will go
Auxiliary have - past participle phrase have seen
Auxiliary be - present participle phrase is living

4.2.2 The Vietnamese Verb Phrase

A maximal Vietnamese Verb Phrase may consist of the pre-verbal auxiliary/modal, the Head,

the Complements, the Adverbials and the post-verbal, or more exactly, the clause final auxiliary

Table 5. The flat structure of a maximal Vietnamese Verb Phrase

The Vietnamese Verb Phrase

Pre verbal Post verbal

Modal/Aux Head Verb Complement Prep. Phrase Modal/Aux

(Adverbial) (clause final)
[05]đã hoàn thành chương trình học tại Högskolan Dalarna rồi
Time marker finish program study at Högskolan Dalarna Aspect Marker
have (already) finish the study program at Högskolan Dalarna (already)

It is clearly observed from Tables 4 and 5 that the structures of English and Vietnamese Verb

phrases are nearly identical since both language have the same SVO/C(A) pattern. The only

difference is the clause final auxiliary/modal in Vietnamese, which results in the more initial

headed feature of the Vietnamese Verb Phrase. The X bar schema presentation of the example

[05] of the Vietnamese Verb Phrase may roughly be the following:

VP
p
NP V'
g qp
N' V' PP ?
g 3 g
N V NP aux
g g ei qp g
Tôi(I) đã hoàn thành chương trình học tại Högskolan Dalarna rồi

The problem with this attempt is that there is no suitable slot for the clause final “rồi”, which

indicates the perfect aspect. The only treatment for it is the position for the adjunct. However, the

clause final markers in Vietnamese really function as the Markers of time, aspect or modality, i.e.

19
like the modals or auxiliaries in English. The other problematic issue is, like in English, there is a

need to separate the preverbal auxiliary/modal from the V0 and to isolate the NP subject from the

VP. Therefore, the proposal of the functional projections should be considered now.

Vietnamese, classified as an analytic and isolating language, has no verbal inflections but

only markers to express tenses (TM) and aspects (AM). As the result, the term Tense Phrase

(TP) is used as the replacement for the English term Inflection Phrase (IP) in this paper

(following Duffield 1998). To simplify the analysis, the T here symbolizes both the TM and AM

TP
TP with pre verbal aux/modal ei
NP T'
ei
T VP
TP
TP with clause final ei
aux/modal NP T'
ei
VP T
TP
TP with both pre verbal ei
aux/modal and clause final NP T'
aux/modal ei
T' T
ei
T VP

The example [05] presented in the TP projection now should be:

TP
qp
NP T'
g q
N' T' T
q
T VP
qp
V' PP
3
V NP
g ei qp
Tôi(I) đã hoàn thành chương trình học tại Högskolan Dalarna rồi

20
The following example evidences the head function of the T node in Vietnamese:

[05b] A: Bác ăn tối rồi hay chưa?

You eat dinner Aspect.M. or Aspect.M? (Have you had dinner yet?)
B: Rồi (already)
or
B: Chưa (not yet)

The shortest possible way for answering a Yes-No question in Vietnamese is using the time

marker or aspect marker only. The coordination test also shows that the marker is mandatory

while the specifier and the verb can be deleted:

[05c] Xe thì tôi đã mua nhưng nhà thì chưa

car TopM I TM bought but house TopM AspectM
As for a car I have bought but as for a house I haven’t.

These tests give further evidence that the TP analysis is logical. It is obvious that the functional

TP proposal offers some advantages to logically locate the subject of the sentence and plausibly

clarify the function of the time and modality markers, especially the clause final marker in

Vietnamese.

4.3 The Complementizer Phrase Structure

In a complex sentence, the main verb in the superordinate clause is followed by a subordinator

which introduces a subordinate clause. In the X-bar theory of syntax, the subordinator is

renamed the complementizer and the sub-clause is its clausal complement. Then the whole unit

becomes the Complementizer Phrase (CP) with the complementizer as the head and the CP in

turn as the complement for the V node in the superordinate clause (Black 1988:9).

4.3.1 The English Complementizer Phrase

English has a wide range of complementizers collocating with the verbs preceding them:

the V the Complementizer

ask/ wonder/ want to know… if, whether
who, whom, whose, what, which where, when, why, how
know/ believe/ think/ hope… that

21
[06] I am wondering whether the economic situation will improve.
[07] My mother asked where I would go on my holiday.
[08] They believed that the Earth was square.

Example [08] is represented as:

IP
3
NP I'
g 3
N' I VP
g g g
N [+ past] V'
ei
V CP
g
C'
3
C IP
g wo
They believed that the Earth was square.

The term complementizer is used because of its effect to turn an IP into a complement. In some

occasions, the complementizer “that” can be omitted as in example [09b]. In this case, the

symbol ‘Ø” will be inserted to the slot of the complementizer. Other complementizers are

obligatory. Example [10b] is ungrammatical:

[09a] We know that you are right. [09b] We know you are right.
[10a] We want to know if he is coming. [10b] *We want to know he is coming.

4.3.2 The Vietnamese Complementizer Phrase

Like in English, the Vietnamese CP is head initial (CP→ C'→ C IP). However, Vietnamese has

only one word- the conjunction rằng- as the complementizer. In spoken language, the

conjunction là, which is also considered as the topicalizer (see the next section), can be used to

replace rằng.

22
[09] Tôi nghĩ rằng/là anh nên đến
I think that you should come

Following is the diagram of example [09] with “rằng anh nên đến” identified as the CP:

TP
2
NP T'
g 2
N' T VP
g g g
N Ø V'
3
V CP
g
C'
3
C TP
g 6
Tôi nghĩ rằng anh nên đến

It can be seen from [8] and [9] that the structures of the CPs of both languages are identical. Like

the conjunction “that” in English, “rằng” or “là” is generally optional. This paper will also ague

about the possibility of treating a sentence with a CP as a topic comment sentence in the next

section.

4.4 Vietnamese Topic-comment Structure

4.4.1 Argument for the Topical Phrase

Languages can be classified as Subject prominent languages, the languages “in which the

grammatical units of SUBJECT and PREDICATIVE are basic to the structure of sentences and

in which sentence have subject-predicate structure” (Richards et al. 1992:362) or as Topic

prominent languages, the languages “in which the grammatical units of TOPIC and COMMENT

are basic to the structures of sentences” (Richards et al. 1992:363). Vietnamese is basically an

SVO patterned language (Duffield 1998, Fukuda 2006) and thus belongs to the group of Subject

prominent languages. However, especially in spoken communication, Vietnamese is also

identified as a Topic prominent language. Thomson (1965:290) first mentioned this structure as

“sentence initial position occupied by focal complements”. Duffield (1998:97) identified it as

23
“topicalised constituents appear sentence initially, preceding the subject.” And he suggested a

functional projection for the structure, the Top(ical)P. Specially, Hao (1992, 2004) recognized

the pattern as the Theme-Rheme structure in which the Theme is the thing being talked about

and the Rheme is what is said about the Theme and argued that all Vietnamese sentences obey

that pattern, even the Subject Predicate pattern, which is considered as the Theme- Rheme

pattern with the Theme identical to the subject. Following are two possible utterances in

Vietnamese:

Subject-predicate utterance [10] Topic-comment utterance [11]

Tôi đã đọc cuốn sách này rồi Cuốn sách này tôi đã đọc (nó) rồi
I TM read Cl book this AM Cl book this I TM read it AM
(I have already read this book.) As for this book, I have already read (it).

To separate the Topic and the Comment, Vietnamese speakers usually insert the optional

conjunction thì or là which are identified as “topicalizers”. The example [11] can be read Cuốn

sách này (thì) tôi đã đọc rồi.

The Topic (WP) of the sentence can be of different grammatical categories:

[12] Xe này (thì ) tôi sẽ bán NP as the Topic

Car this I TM sell
[13] Đi thì tôi sẽ đi VP as the Topic
Go I TM go
[14] Anh bảo tôi đi thì tôi sẽ đi Minor sentence as the Topic
You tell me go I TM go

As the result, a whole sentence in the Topic Comment pattern can be phrasalized to the

functional category TopP. Thus thì or là can be treated as the head of a TopP:

Vietnamese Top(ical)P TopP

ei
TopP→ WP Top' (WP) Top '
ei
Top' → Top TP Top TP

Following is the suggested X bar schema representation of the example [11]:

24
 TopP
3
DetP Top'
g 3
Det' Top TP
3 ei
ClP Det NP T'
g g 3
Cl' N' T' T
2 g 3
Cl NP N T VP
g g
N' V'
g 2
N V DetP
g g 4
Cuốn sách này (thì) tôi đã đọc nó rồi

The TopP node suggested surely helps properly project the topic-comment pattern of

Vietnamese. The open issue for this section is whether the normal Vietnamese pattern, i.e. the

Subject Predicate (or the Theme Rheme structure with the Theme identical to the Subject)

should be treated in this proposal or in the traditional way.

4.4.2 Complementizer or Topicalizer

In a complex sentence, the subordinating complement clause, which is converted into the CP,

may be considered as the comment in a topic- comment sentence and then the superordinating

clause would be the topic. If this argument is valid, the complementizer can be changed into the

topicalizer. One piece of evidence for this suggestion is the word “là” which is used both as the

head of the CP and the TopP.

Following are the two representations of example [09], one as a TP with an internal CP

and one as a TopP with two internal TPs:

25
 TP
2
NP T'
g 2
N' T VP
g g g
N Ø V'
3 TopP
V CP 3
g TP Top'
C' 2
2 Top TP
C TP 6 g 6
g 6 Tôi nghĩ là anh nên đến [9b]
Tôi nghĩ là anh nên đến [9a]

It seems that the above suggested conversion is not problematic at all. However, there should be

comprehensive investigation into the case to have the suggestion accepted.

4.5 Vietnamese structural ambiguity

As mentioned in the previous section, morphosyntactically speaking, Vietnamese is a non

inflectional analytic language. Thus there are only two morphosyntactic devices to constitute

sentential and phrasal elements: the word order and the use of functional words. In other words,

the language relies mostly on syntax. As the result, if some sentences are differently segmented

and if the functional markers in the sentences are omitted, the sentences will be ambiguous.

4.5.1 Ambiguity of the topic comment structure

The topicalizers thì or là are usually omitted in Vietnamese. In spoken language, the topic is

separated from the comment with a short pause. However, in written language, the lack of the

markers usually causes ambiguities. Following is an example of this:

[15] Ông già đi rất nhanh

man (n) old (adj) walk (v) very fast
You (pro) aged (predicative) get (v) very fast

The sentence [15] can be segmented as:

[15a] Ông già đi rất nhanh [15b] Ông già đi rất nhanh
Subject Verb Adverbial Subject Verb Adverbial
The old man walks very fast You get aged very fast

26
The ambiguity arises from the word Ông, which is both nouns and pronouns. If it is considered

as a pronoun, there must be no modifying adjective attached to it and it is used to address a man

in friendly way. As a noun, it means a male adult, and it can be post-modified by adjectives.

To define the exact meaning, the topicalizer thì should be inserted after the subject/topic as

diagramed below:

TopP TopP
3 3
NP Top' NP Top'
3 3
Top TP Top TP
g g
T' T'
3 3
T VP T VP
5 ei 4 wo
[15a] Ông già (thì) đi rất nhanh [15b] Ông (thì) già đi rất nhanh
the old man walks very fast you get aged very fast

4.4.2 Ambiguity of the Noun Phrase

Like in English, a NP in Vietnamese can be post modified by a relative clause. If the relative

pronoun mà (that) is left out, people can have different interpretations. Examine this NP:

[16] Người gíao viên mới đến từ Hà Nội

Cl teacher new come from HaNoi

[16] can be interpreted in two ways as:

[16a] Người gíao viên mới đến từ Hà Nội

The new teacher coming (who comes)from Hanoi
Cl Head Adj Relative clause
[16b] Người gíao viên mới đến từ Hà Nội
The teacher newly coming (who has just come) from Hanoi
Cl Head Relative clause

In oral language, there is a pause either after viên or after mới, which helps identify the exact

meaning of the utterance. In written language, the phrase can be disambiguated by adding the

relative word mà, which mean the same as that in English:

27
 ClP
g
Cl'
qp
Cl NP
ei
N' RC
2
N' Adj'
g g
N Adj
g g wo
[16a] Người gíao viên mới (mà) đến từ Hà Nội

ClP
g
Cl'
wo
Cl NP
wo
N' RC
g
N
g qp
[16b] Người gíao viên (mà) mới đến từ Hà Nội

It is clearly seen that the above graphical presentations in X bar schema contribute to the clarity

of syntactic analysis.

5. Summary

Based on the above analyses, this section aims to sketch the schemata of the Vietnamese phrases

in term of the X- bar theory. Due to the scope of the paper, the AdjP, the AdvP and the PP were

not analyzed. Nevertheless, the three phrases, which are nearly identical to those of English, will

be also outlined in this part in order to make the diagram list complete. The list comprises of ten

phrasal units. Among them there are five lexical categories namely the NP, the VP, the PP, the

AdjP, the AdvP and five functional categories listed as the DetP, the TP, the DegP, the CP and

the TopP:

28
(A) The Noun Phrase NP
- The adjuncts are determiner, 2
prepositional phrase, adjective Cl N'
modifier, relative clause 2
- the complement is noun modifier or N' adjunct
reduced relative clause 2
adjunct N'
2
N complement
(B) From NP to functional phrases DetP
- depending on the presence or absence 2
of the elements, the NP can be Det'
converted in to ClP, QuanP and DetP 2
QuanP Det
2
Quan'
2
Quan ClP
2
Cl'
2
Cl NP
(C) The Verb Phrase VP
- The adjuncts can be the PP Adverb 2
- The complements are objects or NP V'
predicative adjective 2
Adjunct V'
2
V' Adjunct
2
V Complement(s)
(D) From VP to TP TP
- T(1) is clause final marker 2
- T(2) is pre verbal marker NP T'
2
T' T(1)
2
T(2) VP
(E) The Adjective Phrase AdjP
- The adjunct is the PP 2
- The complement may be a PP or NP Deg Adj'
in Vietnamese 2
Adj' Adjunct
2
Adj Complement
(F) From AdjP to Degree Phrase DegP
- The AdjP becomes the complement in 2
the Degree Phrase (DegP) Deg'
2
Deg AdjP

29
(G) The Adverb Phrase AdvP
- The adjunct is the PP in Vietnamese 2
Deg Adv'
2
Adv' Adjunct
2
A Adv
(H) From AdvP to Degree Phrase DegP
- The AdvP becomes the complement 2
in the DegP Deg'
2
Deg AdvP
(I) The Prepositional Phrase PP
- The PP takes an NP as its complement 2
in Vietnamese P'
2
P NP
(J) The Complementizer Phrase CP
- The complementizer takes a TP as its 2
complement C'
2
C TP
(K) The Topicalizer Phrase TopP
- The Specifier may a an NP, a VP or a 2
TP Spec Top'
2
Top TP

6. Conclusion

The X bar approach to syntax has attempted to generalize natural languages with the minimal

phrase structures rules, and its applicability to certain languages has been studied extensively.

This paper examined three most important phrases in Vietnamese, namely the NP, the VP and

the CP under a cross-linguistic comparison with English. Then the three phrases were patterned

into the X-bar schema. Besides, the NP and the VP were also interpreted in term of the

functional categories, the DP and the TP respectively. The result, which indicates that the X-bar

schema is fit for revising the structure rules of Vietnamese Phrases, successfully supports the

universality of this theory. Furthermore, it is obvious that this approach is flexible enough to

incorporate instances of special variation of Vietnamese syntactic structure, namely the Topic

Comment structure, by using TopP phrasalization. Moreover, the paper suggested the

30
conversion of the CP into TopP, since this conversion makes the syntactic analysis minimal.

The paper also focused on the structural ambiguity in Vietnamese due to the different

segmentations of the strings and suggested the solution for disambiguation by using different X-

bar branching presentations.

The paper to some extent supported the Chomskian grammar. However, there are several

open issues requiring deep analyses for the Vietnamese language such as the passive structure

and the question form. The findings of this study may be incorporated in the future English

monograph on Vientnamese syntax.

Reference:

Baltin, M and Collins, C. (eds.). 2001. The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory. Blackwell. Oxford.

Black, Cheryl A. 1998. A step-by-step introduction to the Government and Binding theory of syntax. Summer
Institute of Linguistics in Mexico. 12 February 2009. <http://www.sil.org/mexico/ling/E002-IntroGB.pdf>

Chomsky, N. 1976. Reflections on Language. Temple Smith. London.

Chomsky, N. 1957. Syntactic Structures. Mouton & Co. Fifth printing 1965.

Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

Chomsky, N. 1988. Language and Problems of Knowledge. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

Chomsky, N. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge. MA: MIT Press.

Crystal, D. 2003. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. Cambridge University Press.

Duffield, N. 1998. Auxiliary Placement and Interpretation in Vietnamese. Paper presented at Proceedings of
the 34th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago.

Fukuda, Shin. 2006. Control in Vietnamese. A survey paper for Control Project. 02 March 2009.
<http://accent.ucsd.edu/pdf/Vietnamese_Fukuda_UCSD_05.pdf>

Gordon, Raymond G (ed.). 2005. Ethnologue: Languages of the World. Fifteenth edition. Dallas. Tex.: SIL
International. Online version. <http://www.ethnologue.com/>

Hao, CX. 1992. Some preliminaries to the syntactic analysis of the Vietnamese sentence.Mon-Khmer Studies
Journal. 27January 2009. <http://sealang.net/archives/mks/pdf/20:137-152.pdf>

31
Hao, CX. 2004. Sơ thảo ngữ pháp chức năng. Nxb Giáo dục. Hà Nội.

Hiep, NV. 2002. Vài nét về lịch sử nghiên cứu cú pháp tiếng Việt. Tạp chí Ngôn ngữ số 10 năm 2002.

Hoa, ND. 1996. Vietnamese verbs. Mon-Khmer Studies Journal. 27January 2009.
<http://sealang.net/archives/mks/pdf/25:141-159.pdf>

<http://dictionary.reference.com/>

<http://vietnamese-grammar.group.shef.ac.uk/>

MS Encarta ® Encyclopedia 2004

Poole, G. 2002. Syntactic theory. Palgrave. New York.

Richards, JC and Platt,J and Platt, H. 1992. Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics.
Longman.

Robert, N. From Traditional Grammar to Government Binding Theory. EpistemicForms. 29 February2009.

<http://epistemic-forms.com/po-Government%20Binding%20Theory.html>

Santorini, B and Kroch, A. 2007. The syntax of natural language: An online introduction using the Trees
program. University of Pennsylvania. 16 March 2009. <http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~beatrice/syntax-
textbook>

Thompson, LC.1965. A Vietnamese grammar. University of Washington Press. Seattle.

Tuong, HN. 2004. The structure of the Vietnamese noun phrase. Vietnamese Grammar Project. 07 January
2009. <http://vietnamese-grammar.group.shef.ac.uk/VGP/papers/nguyenhungtuong/dissertation.pdf>

32