Högskolan Dalarna
Engelska D-uppsats
Supervisor: Jonathan White ()

The X-bar Theory and Vietnamese syntax

Spring term 2009
Doan Thuc Luong
690520-T031



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
4.1 The Noun Phrase Structure

7
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 topicprominent 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)
X-Bar Categories (X′)
Word Categories (X)

XP
ei
……
X’
ei
...…
X


NP, VP, AdjP, AdvP, PP, DP, DegP
N′, V′, Adj′, Adv′, P′, D′, Deg′
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.

Inflectional Phrase

IP(S)
3
NP
I'
3
I
VP

Complementizer Phrase

CP
3
….

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 topicprominent 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 , 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
ei
WP
X'
X'
ei
X
YP

(I) XP → WP X'
(II) X' → 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:
(III) X' → ZP, X'

X'
ei
ZP
X'

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

XP
ei
WP
X'
ei

ZP
X'
ei
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
(minimal phrase)

(b) phrases containing a head and a
complement

(c) phrases containing a head and an
adjunct

(d) phrases containing a head and a
specifier

(e) phrases containing a head, a
specifier, and a complement.

(f) phrases containing a head, a
specifier, and an adjunct


(g) phrases containing a head, an
adjunct and a complement

(h) phrases containing a head, a
specifier, an adjunct and a complement
(maximal phrase)

XP
g
X'
g
X
XP
g
X'
2
X
YP
XP
g
X'
2
X'
ZP
g
X
XP
2
WP

X'
g
X
XP
2
WP
X'
2
X
YP
XP
2
WP
X'
2
X'
ZP
g
X
XP
g
X'
2
X'
ZP
2
X
YP
XP
2

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
adjuncts

XP
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” ( 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
[01] The

two

famous

researchers

of linguistics

in Vietnam

Relative Clause
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
2
Spec' Quan

g
Spec
g
(Det)

N'(1)
qp
AdjP
g
Adj

N'(2)
rp
N'(3)
RC
wo
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
Post-Modification

Pre-Modification

Quantifier Classifier Head Noun Modifier Prep. Phrase Relative Clause Determiner
[02]Hai

người

Two

Cl

bạn

thân


trong lớp

mà tôi yêu quý

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

ấy
that

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

3

3

final

In respect to
Determiner

3

Classifier
Quantifier

3

Modifier

3

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'
wo
Quan
N'
qp
Cl
N'
wo
N'
RC
3
N'
PP
2
N'
AdjP'
g
g
N
Adj
g
g 6 6

Det

Hai người bạn thân trong lớp


ấy

mà tôi yêu quý

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
g
N'
3
Cl

[03a] Các
Cl

NP
g
N'
3
Cl
N'
3
N
RC
g
6


N'
3
N
NP
g
6
sinh viên

tiếng Anh

student(s)

English

[03b]

Các

sinh viên

học tiếng Anh

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

Cl

friend

close

in

class

who

I

love


Người bạn

thân

trong lớp

mà

tôi

yêu quý ấy

Cl

close

in

who

I

love

Người bạn

thân

trong lớp


mà

tôi

yêu quý

Cl

close

in

class

who

I

love

trong lớp

mà

tôi

yêu quý

in


class

who

I

love

Người bạn

mà

tôi

yêu quý

Cl

who

I

love

two

[02c]

[02c]


friend

friend

[02d] Người bạn
Cl

[02e]

[02f]

friend

friend

class

that

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

QuanP

ClP

DetP
ei
Det'
ei
…
Det
i
NP
QuanP
ei
Quan'

ei
Quan
…
i
NP
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” ( 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
Post verbal

Pre verbal
Modal/Aux

Head Verb

[04] have

studied

Complement Prep. Phrase
(Adverbial)
linguistics


for two years

Prep. Phrase
(Adverbial)
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

have studied linguistics

6

for two years

wo
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
g

I'
q

N'
g


I

VP
qp

N

V'
ei
V'
3
V

NP

g

6

(I) have studied linguistics

PP
PP

6
for two years

wo
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
Auxiliary have
Auxiliary be

- Infinitive phrase
- past participle phrase

- present participle phrase

will go
have seen
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
Post verbal

Pre verbal
Modal/Aux

Head Verb

Complement

Prep. Phrase
(Adverbial)

Modal/Aux
(clause final)

[05]đã

hoàn thành


chương trình học

tại Högskolan Dalarna

rồi

Time marker

finish
program study
at Högskolan Dalarna
have (already) finish the study program at Högskolan Dalarna (already)

Aspect Marker

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
g

V'
qp

N'

g

V'
3

N

V

NP

g

g

ei

PP

?
g
aux

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
ei
NP
T'
ei
T
VP
TP
ei
NP
T'
ei
VP
T
TP
ei
NP

T'
ei
T'
T
ei
T
VP

TP with pre verbal aux/modal

TP with clause final
aux/modal

TP with both pre verbal
aux/modal and clause final
aux/modal

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

T'
q

N'

T'
q

T

T
VP
qp

V'
3
V
g

PP

NP
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:

or

B:


Bác

ăn

tối

rồi

hay

chưa?

You

eat

dinner

Aspect.M.

or

Aspect.M?

Rồi

B: Chưa

(Have you had dinner yet?)


(already)
(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

car TopM

tôi

đã

mua

nhưng

nhà

thì

chưa

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
I

think

rằng/là anh nên đến

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
V'
N Ø
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