Heavy NP shift is an operation that involves re-ordering (shifting) a "heavy" noun phrase (NP) to a position to the right of its canonical position under certain circumstances. The heaviness of the NP is determined by its grammatical complexity; whether or not shifting occurs can impact the grammaticality of the sentence. Ross (1967) is thought to have been the first to systematically investigate the properties of heavy NP shift. Although the term heavy NP shift derives from the theoretical framework of transformational grammar, which describes the process in terms of movement of the NP, linguists working in other frameworks also use this term. And in approaches to syntax where NP is analyzed as a determiner phrase (DP), heavy NP shift is called heavy DP shift. Factors contributing to the heaviness of an NP Early observations of weight or heaviness have been credited to a rhythmical feel that unconsciously takes shape in languages, that is, the tendency of growth, to go from shorter to longer elements within a phrase. In these early observations, it was noted that when there are two constituents differing in size, the smaller constituent usually precedes the longer one. This observation has been more recently coined as the "principle of end-weight". The literature proposes many different definitions of weight or heaviness such as number of words in the NP (length of NP), number of nodes in the NP, and more generally number of phrasal nodes. Other observations on heaviness include: Complexity of NP A NP's internal syntactic structure makes it 'complex'. A complex or heavy NP is one with a noun head and a modifying clause. ex: NP[my rich uncle from Detroit] is complex as its noun head my and a modifying clause rich uncle from Detroit. The internal structure is complex enough to be shifted to the right of its canonical position. NP[N'[N my][NP[NP[AP rich][NP uncle]][PP[P from][NP Detroit]]]]] Separability of NP According to Chomsky (1975), the separability of the indirect object is determined by the complexity of the direct object (NP). It is not length in words but rather the complexity of the object that determines the "naturalness of formation". ex: "They brought all the leaders of the riot in" appears more natural than "They brought the man I saw in." According to Chomsky (1975), the constituent [the man I saw], although shorter than the constituent [all the leaders of the riot], is more complex. Relative