Degree phrases

The ternary-branching analysis of DegPs with CP complements offered in Abney (1987) is underivable by Merge, as is Jackendoff's (1977) earlier one, Kayne's treatment of phrases containing Degs as specifiers of CPs headed by 'than' or 'that' is semantically implausible, and the classical Deg S' analysis of Sraith (1961), Bresnan (1973), Bowers (1975), or Baltin (1987), and LF-oriented proposals like Rouveret (1978) or Guéron & May (1984) all require obligatory adjunction to XP Comparative/Result Clause Extraposition), an operation which, according to Kayne(1994) and Chomsky (1995,1998) should not exist. At present, then, doctrine concerning how such CPs are derived is badly needed. This article claims that a solution to this long-standing problem can be reached if comparative and result clauses are complements to Degs, as in the classical analysis, whereas the APs (AdvPs, QPs) that accompany them are their specifiers, and shows how the surface order visible at P follows, without invoking Extraposition, if DegPs are generated as lowest complements of Larsonian projections and Degs are allowed to rise in order to c-command the 'degree' arguments (Corver 1997) associated with gradable A's, Adv's and Q's and avoid violations of the Head Final Filter of Williams (1982)