摘要：Core Functional Categories are defined to be v0, T0, C0. They differ in that T0 is not treated as a phase head, while C0 and v0 are assumed to be phase heads: 1) a) [+ phase]: C0, v(*). b) [- phase]: T0. These heads are assumed to bear uninterpretable φ-features. T0 forms a defective a domain unless it is selected by C0. In other words, if T0 is selected by the phase head C0, it starts bearing a full φ-feature set; otherwise, it cannot inherit the features from C0, which leads to a defective domain allowing exceptional case marking (henceforth, ECM). Accordingly, T0 cannot also delete the features of the goal it enters an agree relation. In this respect, the defective features are Case/T0 features in the sense of Pesetsky & Torrego (2007). At this point, some other studies suggest that the defectivity is peculiar to only phase heads, and that T0 is ruled out of this argumentation: 2) a) [+ [+/- defective]]: C0, v0. b) [- [+/- defective]]: T0. There is an asymmetry in the understanding of defectivity between these two reasoning. The aim of this study is to discuss this asymmetry, and present evidence as to which distinction on defectivity does exist. We employed ECM data in Turkish to discuss the relevant distinction with reference to specific empirical proofs such as long distance scrambling, binding and negative polarity items. The results of the study support in favor of Pesetsky & Torrego (2007).
关键词：Core Functional Categories;Exceptional Case Marking;Defective;Inheritance;Phase
