Summary

   
    1. Binding Condition might obviate the need for constraints like Tensed S Condi-

tion
        and Specified Subject Condition.

       (a)  *Mary thinks that herself will win (TSC)  -> violates BC (A) 
       (b)  *Mary2 wants [S John to help herself2]  (SSC)   -> violates BC(A)

    2. Subjacency Condition obviates Complex Noun Phrase Constraint, Sentential 

Subject
       Constraint and WH-Island Constraint.
  
       (a) *Who are you reading a book that criticizes     ? (p.232)
       (b) *What would for me to do      annoy you? (p. 233)  
       (c) *What might he ask whether I hid      ? (p. 234)

  
   3. Complement and Adjunct
     (1)  a student of physics at Cambridge
                        NP
             DET                  N’
               a         N’                     PP
                  N            PP        at Cambridge 
                  student     of physics

         (a)  a Cambridge physics student                         

NP

         (b) *a physics Cambridge student

             DET            N’

                                                             a     NP             N’
                                                               Cambridge   NP           N
                                                                                      physics        student

       (2)  (a)  He will work [at the job] (complement)
            (b)  He will work [at the office] (adjunct)

       (3)  (a)  John will buy [NP the book] [PP on Tuesday]
            (b)  John will put [NP the book] [PP on the table]

                          VP                                                           VP
                          V’                                                             V’
                 V’                  PP                                  V            NP               PP
           V          NP      on Tuesday                        
         buy      the book                                          put        the book    on the table
 

    
    4. Structural Ambiguity
        (1)  He may decide [PP on the boat]
        (2)  He couldn’t explain [NP last night]

                      VP                                            VP
                       V’                                             V’
           V                      PP                      V’                   PP
        decide           on the boat                 V              on the boat
                                                         decide

   # Structural Ambiguity can be determined by semantic interpretation of PP or NP.