Sideward Movement Jairo Nunes Assuming the general framework of the Minimalist Program of Chom- sky 1995, this article argues that Move is not a primitive operation of the computational system, but rather the output of the interaction among the independent operations Copy, Merge, Form Chain, and Chain Reduction(deletionof chain links for purposesof linearization). The crucial aspect of this alternative model is that it permits con- strained instances of sideward movement, whereby a given constituent ‘‘moves’’ from a syntactic object K to an independentsyntactic object L. This version of the copy theory of movement (a) provides an expla- nation for why (some) traces must be deleted in the phonological component, (b) provides a cyclic analysis for standard instances of noncyclic movement, and (c) accounts for the main properties of para- sitic gap and across-the-board extraction constructions. Keywords: sideward movement, copy theory, Linear Correspondence Axiom, traces, parasitic gaps, across-the-board movement 1 Introduction A fundamental property of human languages is that elements may be interpreted in positions different from the ones where they are phoneticallyrealized. Within the principles-and-parameters framework (see Chomsky 1981, Chomsky and Lasnik 1993), this ‘‘displacement property’’ is captured by means of a movement operation relating structural positions in a phrase marker. With the recent developments of the principles-and-parameters framework that have culminated in the Minimalist Program (see Chomsky 1993, 1994, 1995), the operation Move is specifically described as follows (see Chomsky 1994:fn. 13, 1995:250): given the syntactic object S with constituents K and a, Move targets K, raises a, and merges a with K, forming S¢; the operation is cyclic if S 4 K and noncyclic otherwise. S¢ differs from S in that K is replaced by L 4 { g, { a,K}} or L 4 {kg, gl, { a,K}} , depending on whether movement proceeds by substitution or adjunction. Move also forms the chain CH 4 ( a, t), a two-element pair where t (the trace of a) is a copy This article is based on chapter IV of my dissertation (see Nunes 1995). The current version was written with support from CNPq (grant 300897/96-0) and FAPESP (grant 97/91180-7). Portions of the material discussed here have been presented at NELS 26 (MIT/Harvard University), the International Conference on Interfaces in Linguistics (Universidade do Porto), the XIII Instituto Brasileiro de Lingu ¨õ ´stica (ABRALIN/UFAL), the Troisie ‘me Colloque International ‘‘Langues et Grammaire’’ (Universite ´ de Paris 8), the XVII Summer Courses/X European Courses (Universidad del Paõ ´s Vasco), Michigan State University, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, University of Connecticut, University of Maryland, University of Southern California, and the Zentrum fu ¨r Allgemeine Sprachwis- senschaft, Sprachtypologie, und Universalienforschung. I am thankful to the audiences at these presentations for comments and suggestions. Special thanks to Mark Arnold, Norbert Hornstein, Richard Kayne, Ellen Thompson, Juan Uriagereka, and two anonymous LI reviewers. 303 Linguistic Inquiry, Volume 32, Number 2, Spring 2001 303–344 q 2001 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology