The purpose of this paper is to deal with the justifications of Agree and motivations of Move with respect to the recent Minimalist Program. Chomsky (1998) claims that Move consists of Agree (or Attract) and ancillary Merge. Agree is an independent op ...

The purpose of this paper is to deal with the justifications of Agree and motivations of Move with respect to the recent Minimalist Program. Chomsky (1998) claims that Move consists of Agree (or Attract) and ancillary Merge. Agree is an independent operation and the ancillary Merge is contingent on Agree which just follows the path of Agree in order to accomplish Move. Therefore, the ancillary Merge for Move may be considered as being just triggered by the EPP feature, which results in the EPP feature being the essential trigger of Move.
Section 1 pointed out the problems (Chomsky, 1995) of the previous Attract theory. By justifying the problems of the theory, I looked for the phenomena and motivations for Agree and Move concerning Chomsky (1998). In section 2.1, I dealt with the serious notions (Probe and Goal) related to Agree and Move. According to Chomsky (1998), the [-interpretable] features are deleted through satisfying the following conditions (1):
(1)a. Matching Condition: Probe and Goal have to be identical features, if not identical feature values.
b. Domain Condition: Goal must be in the complement of Probe.
c. Locality Condition: There must be in the complement of Probe.
d. Activation Condition: In order to participate in Agree, both Probe (=Attraction Features) and Goal (=Attracted Features) must be active. (a must contain an uninterpretable feature in order to be active.)
In section 2.2 I focused on the Activation Condition and Attract with some critical data. In this section, various implications of the Activation condition is investigated and evaluated in terms of the Minimalist Program. In section 3.2 and 3.3, I dealt with the remaining problems related to Agree and Move. In reference to 3.2. I reviewed the problem that the arguments carmot undergo Pure Merge going into the SPEC of T, v, C.
3.3 dealt with the relationship between Case feature and Agree. Related to the point, I proposed (2).
(2) Pure Merge in a Theta-position is required and restricted to an argument.
As discussed in the main sections, there are two functions of Case feature. First, Case feature makes Agree satisfy the Activation Condition of Goal. Second, Case feature satisfies the Activation Condition of Pied-Piping (=Identify). Aside from the two functions, Case feature identifies the domain of Agree. Related to the problem, I proposed (2). Throughout this paper, I tried to justify the underpinning process that Move undergoes. By adapting Chomsky (1998)'s recent ideas (Agree, Probe, Goal, and Phase), we may justify the process of Move clearly. Issues and problems that are associated to Move and Agree should be explored in-depth in the near future so as to create a greater understanding.

1. Chomsky(1995)의 유인(Attract)의 문제점
2. 일치(Agree)와 이동(Move)에 대한 Chomsky(1998)의 분석
3. 일치(Agree)와 관련된 문제와 주장
인용문헌
〈Abstract〉

1. Chomsky(1995)의 유인(Attract)의 문제점
2. 일치(Agree)와 이동(Move)에 대한 Chomsky(1998)의 분석
3. 일치(Agree)와 관련된 문제와 주장
인용문헌
〈Abstract〉