Saturday, January 24, 2026

Being a Syntactician (Some Preliminary Posts)

I am trying to convey to a non-linguist audience what it means to be a syntactician. The goal is to write something completely non-technical that nevertheless gives the reader with absolutely no background a pretty good idea of what we do when we do syntax. I have written several blog posts on this topic already, which I list below. But I am interested in writing something more substantive. So consider these posts as a kind of scratch pad with my notes. The first and the third posts are a bit redundant.

The Personality of a Syntactician (December 24, 2025)

(https://ordinaryworkinggrammarian.blogspot.com/2025/12/the-personality-of-syntactician.html)

Thinking Syntactically (for Non-Linguists) (September 18 2025)

(https://ordinaryworkinggrammarian.blogspot.com/2025/09/thinking-syntactically.html)

You Know You are a Syntactician When (April 17, 2017)

(https://ordinaryworkinggrammarian.blogspot.com/2017/04/this-was-originally-posted-march-31.html)

What Kind of Syntactician are You? (March 25, 2017)

(https://ordinaryworkinggrammarian.blogspot.com/2017/03/what-kind-of-syntactician-are-you.html)




Friday, January 23, 2026

Some Challenging Issues in Teaching Graduate Level Syntax

1. Grad: Does X (a hypothesis) really work? My professor as an undergrad said it does not. I agree with them.

Implication: Everything I learned at previously as an undergraduate (or Masters student) needs to be rigorously and systematically disproven before I will accept anything else.

Response: I call this phenomenon ‘imprinting’. Whatever theory a student first learns, they take that is the right theory. As a graduate student, you should consider what you have already learned to be a preliminary step, not the final word set in stone. It is likely that most things that you have learned will need to be revised or replaced in some way. Try to have an open mind!

2. Grad: I do not agree with those acceptability judgments. So my English is not characterized by the relevant principle. 

Implication: If I do not agree with the data, I am not going to read any papers on the subject, or look into it. And if you bring up that principle again, I will not fail to remind you that my judgments do not conform to it. In my opinion, it is a total waste of time.

Response: Acceptability judgements are complicated. Even if you disagree with them, it is worthwhile finding out what the range of judgments is, and how that range can be accounted for. Nowadays, it is also possible to explore acceptability judgements experimentally.

3. Grad: Is X a consensus point of view? How many people adopt it?

Implication: Please, I just want to know the most popular theory, the one most people accept. That is the one I want to use to write my paper, so I can get abstracts accepted at conferences.

Response: Consensus has nothing to do with truth. If society in general believes the sun revolves around the earth, that does not thereby make it true. For many issues (e.g., obligatory control, head movement, case) there are several approaches, and understanding those approaches is an important part of learning the subject matter, and making scientific progress on the issues.

4. Grad: Do we really need syntax to explain X? It could just be semantics, right?

Implication: Even without formulating any alternative analysis, we should just take it as a null hypothesis that an explanation not involving any syntactic principle is preferable. 

Response: Neither a syntactic nor semantic analysis can be taken as the null hypothesis. Every hypothesis must be argued for with the same rigor. Disentangling alternative analyses can be quite difficult, and takes a lot of effort.

5. Grad: I thought of an interesting idea, but I already see a paper about that topic published in LI. Oh well, somebody has beaten me to it. I will look for a different topic.

Implication: What makes an idea interesting to me is that I thought of it first. If somebody else has also thought of it, I am no longer interested.

Response: Doing research is engaging in a process involving lots of different people looking at topics from different angles. Your contribution to a particular topic might be completely different from what is already out there. You should try to develop your own ideas, even if there are other papers published on the topic.

6. Grad: I just thought of some interesting data. Let me search the internet intensely for a few days (or even weeks) to see if anything interesting has been written on it.

Implication: I need to find a model in the syntax literature, and apply that to my data. That is the way to do research.

Response: You should get used to doing these things on your own, without always having the crutch of somebody else’s analysis. Sit down in front of a blank piece of paper, and write! Of course, at some step in the process of doing research you need to add references, and a discussion of other approaches.

Tuesday, January 20, 2026

Inversion Seminar: The Scope of Inversion in English (Spring 2026)

Inversion Seminar

January 20th, 2026

Lecture 1:

I. Overview of Inversion in English

II. Analyses of Quotative Inversion

III. Presentatives as Inversion (contra Wood and Zanuttini 2023)


Friday, January 16, 2026

Where are they now? (written for Peace Corps Togo)

Where Are They Now?

Chris Collins, January 14, 2026

1. Where did you serve as a Peace Corps Volunteer?

I served as a Peace Corps Volunteer in Togo from 1985 to 1987. I taught math at the Lycée level, for one year in Notsé and then for a second year in Danyi-Apéyémé.

2. What are you doing now (professionally or personally)?

I am professor of linguistics at New York University. My research interests include linguistic fieldwork in Africa. In particular, I study Ewe, a language spoken in Ghana, Togo and Benin.

3. How did your Peace Corps Togo experience prepare you for success in your current role or life path? 

My Peace Corps experience laid the foundation for my career as a linguist doing fieldwork in Africa. I learned to speak Ewe, which I have continued working on for my whole career.

If you are curious, here is a picture of my cohort in the Peace Corps:

https://ordinaryworkinggrammarian.blogspot.com/2021/04/peace-corps-togo-1985.html

Here is a summary of my career:

https://ordinaryworkinggrammarian.blogspot.com/2024/11/biographical-notes-technology-review.html#more

Here are some notes on my recent trip to Togo (summer 2025):

https://ordinaryworkinggrammarian.blogspot.com/2025/06/togo-diary-june-july-2025.html#more

4. What is one skill or lesson from service that you still use today?

The Peace Corps taught me basic life skills about working in a foreign country and thinking outside of the box in order to get things done. I also learned to appreciate the people of Togo who showed me so much support, even when their lives were materially much more difficult than mine.

Some other smaller skills are listed here:

https://ordinaryworkinggrammarian.blogspot.com/2019/10/ten-things-i-learned-in-peace-corps.html

5. Any advice you’d give to current or future Volunteers?

Your time in Togo might be the most interesting and intense period in your entire life. Keep a journal, and send regular letters home. You will love to look back at them later. 

Syllabus: Inversion Seminar, Spring 2026 (near final draft)

Course Description

Collins and Branigan 1997 (see also Collins 1997) inaugurated the study of quotative inversion into generative syntax. In the interim, there have been many studies engaging with various aspects of their analysis in different languages, including Alexiadou and Anagnostopolou 2001, 2007, Branigan 2011, Bruening 2016, Gärtner and Gyuris 2014, Matos 2013, Murphy 2022, Richards 2010, Suñer 2000, Storment 2024, 2025a, de Vries 2006, amongst others.

This course will review the existing literature on quotative inversion, and explore a new analysis in the framework of Collins 2024 (‘Principles of Argument Structure’ MIT Press, Cambridge) taking into account the insights of previous work.

Along the way, we will discuss the relation of quotative inversion to other inversion constructions. The choice of topics will depend on the interests of the participants.  Some possible topics include (but are not limited to): predicate inversion in copular constructions, subject-object inversion in Bantu, locative inversion in Bantu, French stylistic inversion, presentatives (“Here comes John!”), Austronesian VSO and VOS word order, Austronesian voice systems, Heavy XP Shift, there-expletive constructions, the dative alternation, and related inversion phenomena from a cross-linguistic perspective.

Seminar Syllabus

Wednesday, December 24, 2025

The Personality of a Syntactician

I have written this blog post to highlight some personality traits of syntacticians (Ordinary Working Grammarians). It is meant for both linguists and non-linguists.

You know you are a syntactician when….

1.

You are talking to somebody, but start to drift off because they just produced an interesting sentence.

2.

After explaining the fine points of Spanish grammar to your friend, they are surprised to learn that you do not speak a single word of it.

3.

You try to steer the conversation in the direction of interesting syntactic constructions, and your friends and family roll their eyes and snicker, saying ‘Here we go again!’

4.

You obsess over an interesting new sentence you have just noticed, even losing sleep.

5.

You tend to gravitate towards being with other syntacticians, with whom you can discuss ‘cool facts’.

6.

You pester your friends and family by asking for grammaticality judgments, even your own children.

7.

When reading a novel, you sometimes stop in the middle of a page to think about the structure of sentences. 

8.

You love to talk to foreigners because of the interesting grammatical patterns in their speech.

9.

You view your knowledge of English as your own personal syntactic database.

Friday, December 19, 2025

My Principal Contributions to Syntactic Theory

I list my top contributions to syntactic theory. Each of these contributions is either a theoretical innovation and/or a major empirical discovery or exploration. The main criteria for inclusion in the list is: The subjective impact that they have already had on syntactic theory, or the potential impact. In other words, they are not chosen based on citation indices. They are listed roughly in order of subjective impact. 

I have worked on many other very interesting empirical problems including conjunction adverbs, relative clause deletion, negating quantifier phrases, neg-raising, pluractionality, verbal linkers, null prepositions, serial verb constructions, why versus how come, etc. All of these studies have been influential in their own way, in their own corner of the field, but they have more limited theoretical or empirical scope, so I do not include them in the list below.

1. Imposters (with Paul Postal)

Even though the DP 'yours truly' is third person singular, it refers to the speaker. Collins and Postal (2012) refer to this kind of DP as an imposter. The syntactic analysis presented there analyzes imposters as having an outer 'shell' an inner 'core', each having a distinct set of phi-features. The discovery and analysis of imposters has the potential to completely change how we view pronominal systems cross-linguistically.

2. Theory of Implicit Arguments

An implicit argument is an understood unexpressed argument. For example, if you say 'The book was written last year', it is understood that the book was written by somebody (or something in the case of a book written by AI). Implicit arguments have been recognized as an important part of syntactic theory since the seminal work of Tom Roeper. But most theories tend toward the idea of 'semantically present, syntactically absent.' I challenge all that with detailed and systematic evidence showing implicit arguments must be syntactically projected. The diagnostics that I developed have already been applied successfully in Buli, Ewe, Greek and Oshiwambo, in addition to English. My theory of implicit arguments has consequences for the analysis of the passive cross-linguistically, but also for general principles governing the syntax-semantic interface.

3. Smuggling Derivations

Locality of movement has been an important topic at least since Chomsky 1964 (LBLT), and Ross' 1967 thesis. Smuggling describes a way that locality constraints can be circumvented. A constituent X contained in Y is smuggled out of a locality constraint by movement of Y (Y is the smuggler). Since I proposed smuggling derivations in 2005 in the context of the derivation of the passive, they have become the focus of intense study from many corners, see collected papers in Belletti and Collins 2020.

4. Formalizing Minimalist Syntax (with Edward Stabler)

Minimalist syntax is formal theory of the syntactic aspects of the human capacity for language. In the past, discussions of subtle theoretic aspects of the theory often had a vague hand-wavy quality. My formalization with Edward Stabler has completely recast those discussions, making it possible to state hypotheses in a precise testable manner. For example, the formalization in Collins and Stabler 2016 has led to important theoretical discussions of the distinction between copies and repetitions, and the place of workspaces in syntactic derivations.

5. Quotative Inversion (with Phil Branigan)

In English, the subject usually precedes the main verb. But there is a systematic exception to this generalization with quotative inversion: "I am leaving." said John. In this example, the verb 'said' precedes the subject 'John'. In 1996, we gave a detailed analysis of the syntactic properties of quotative inversion, including the transitivity constraint. Since then, the transitivity constraint has become an important challenge for theories of locality and argument structure.

6. Eliminating Labels (Simplest Merge)

The original formulation of Merge produced a label: Merge(A,B) = {A, {A,B}}, where A is the label. I argued in Collins 1997 and Collins 2002 for simplest Merge, where Merge(A,B) = {A,B}. A different set of converging arguments for simplest Merge were given in Seely 2006. Since Chomsky 2013 (POP), simplest Merge has become the standard in minimalist syntax.

7. Morphology as Syntax (with Richard Kayne)

Morphology of syntax (MaS) is a research program that asks the question of whether morphological phenomena can be accounted for syntactically, without any reference to a morphological component.

Summary

Taken together these contributions reflect several consistent threads in my research. A major feature of my work is a commitment to deep empirical exploration of particular phenomena (e.g., imposters, quotative inversion), revealing new and interesting generalizations, connections to other languages, and surprising insights into the structure of the human language faculty. Equally important is a commitment to articulating highly syntactic analyses of various phenomena, and comparing them to alternative non-syntactic accounts (e.g., MaS). Lastly, my work is defined by a commitment to a deep understanding of the theoretical foundations of the field of natural language syntax. These three strands woven together define my contributions as a syntactician.