Refine
Year of publication
- 2017 (3195) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (1229)
- Part of Periodical (565)
- Part of a Book (303)
- Book (235)
- Doctoral Thesis (182)
- Review (160)
- Contribution to a Periodical (151)
- Working Paper (129)
- Report (112)
- Preprint (65)
Language
- English (1697)
- German (1379)
- Portuguese (44)
- Spanish (21)
- French (20)
- Multiple languages (16)
- Turkish (13)
- Ukrainian (2)
- Catalan (1)
- Hebrew (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3195) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3195)
Keywords
- taxonomy (65)
- Deutsch (60)
- Literatur (58)
- Financial Institutions (41)
- new species (40)
- Rezeption (28)
- Literaturwissenschaft (26)
- Fremdsprachenunterricht (24)
- Vergleichende Literaturwissenschaft (23)
- Banking Supervision (22)
Institute
- Medizin (381)
- Präsidium (283)
- Physik (237)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (212)
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (196)
- Sustainable Architecture for Finance in Europe (SAFE) (163)
- Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies (FIAS) (116)
- Biowissenschaften (105)
- Neuere Philologien (104)
- Informatik (92)
This paper discusses the syntactic properties of 'prepositional numeral constructions (PNCs)' in English, which is exemplified by 'about 250 babies' and 'over 16,000 animals'. In PNCs a preposition is followed by a numeral. Previous analyses have claimed that the preposition and the numeral make a prepositional phrase in PNCs, but we argue that this is not a satisfactory approach. In HPSG there are some possible analyses that might be proposed, but there are reasons for supposing that the best analysis is one in which the preposition is a functor, a non-head selecting a numeral head.
This paper investigates the syntax of the English "not only ... but also ..." construction, focusing on the linearization possibilities of "not only". Based on novel corpus data, I argue that the "not only ... but also ..." construction exhibits different properties from the "not ... but ..." construction or the adverbial "only". I propose that a linearization-based account, along with coordinate ellipsis, can explain the various linearization possibilities of "not only". I also propose that the construction as a whole is a subtype of the type correlative-coord-ph, which is a novel subtype of coord-ph. Finally, I argue that subject-auxiliary inversion triggered by the clause-initial not only is a new subtype of the type "negative-inversion-ph".
Partial inversion in English
(2017)
A typical finite clause in English has a single constituent that serves as subject. This constituent precedes the finite verb in non-inverted clauses like simple declarative clauses, follows the finite verb in inverted clauses like polar questions, agrees in person and number with the finite verb and with a tag subject when a tag is present, undergoes subject raising, and so on (Postal 2004). Five constructions violate these generalizations and in the literature have called into question the identity of the subject constituent. In each of these five constructions the finite verb agrees with a following constituent in a declarative clause despite the fact, among others, that the constituent preceding the verb exhibits subject behaviors of the kind identified by Keenan (1976). To the authors' knowledge, despite intensive analysis of several of these patterns, the group as a whole has not been subject to prior study. The constructions are: Presentational Inversion (e.g., On the porch stood marble pillars), Presentational there (e.g., "The earth was now dry, and there grew a tree in the middle of the earth"), Deictic Inversion (e.g., "Here comes the bus"), Existential there (e.g., There’s a big problem here) and Reversed Specificational be (e.g., "The only thing we’ve taken back recently are plants"). The approach of Sign-Based Construction Grammar (Sag 2012) enables us to establish precisely what all five patterns have in common and what is particular to each, revealing that a constructional, constraint-based approach can extract the correct grammatical generalizations, not only in 'core' areas of a grammar, but also in the hard cases, where concepts such as subject, which readily handle the more tractable facts, fail to fit the facts at hand. We see further that the five split-subject patterns, sometimes identified as clausal, yield to a strictly lexical analysis.
Against split morphology
(2017)
In this paper I present data from several Niger Congo languages, illustrating how the paradigms which make up the noun class systems of these languages are problematic to analyze within traditional morphosyntactic frameworks. I outline possible solutions to this problem, and argue for the introduction of an exemplar based Word and Paradigm (Blevins 2006) approach to morphology within SBCG. I then outline the consequences of this approach for the structure of the SBCG lexicon.
In this paper I present an incremental approach to gapping and conjunction reduction where it is assumed that the first sentence in these constructions is fully parsed before the second sentence with the elided verb is parsed. I will show that the two phenomena can be given a uniform analysis by letting the construction type of the first conjunct be carried over to the second conjunct. This construction type imposes constraints on the arguments that the second conjunct can have. The difference between gapping and conjunction reduction is captured by the already existing constructions for sentence and VP coordination. The analysis is implemented in an HPSG grammar of Norwegian.
This paper explores the conundrum posed by two different control constructions in Yucatec Maya, a Mayan language spoken by around 800,000 speakers in the Yucatán Peninsula and northern Belize. Basic syntactic structure of the language is introduced, and a general SBCG treatment of control in YM is presented, alongside with an example of motion verbs as control matrices. The unruly case of intransitive subjunctive control, where the controllee appears with an unexpected status (incompletive) and without set-A morphology, is discussed and a proposal to treat it as nominalization is evaluated. The nominalization proposal is rejected based on the following grounds: (1) nominalization tends to attract definitive morphology, which is absent from intransitive subjunctive control constructions, (2) nominalization does not truly explain the lack of set-A morphology if one desires to provide a unified account of set-A morphemes, (3) verbs bereft of otherwise expected set-A morphemes have an independent motivation in the form of agent focus constructions.
In this paper we discuss two contrasting views of exponence in inflectional morphology: the atomistic view, where content is associated individually with minimal segmentable morphs, and the holistic view, where the association is made for the whole word between complex content and constellations of morphs. On the basis of data from Estonian and Swahili, we argue that an adequate theory of inflection should be able to accomodate both views. We then show that the framework of Information-based Morphology (Crysmann and Bonami, 2016) is indeed compatible with both views, thanks to relying on realisation rules that associate m units of forms with n units of content.
Over the past few years, there has been renewed interest in the treatment of resumption in HPSG: despite areas of convergence, e.g. the recognition of resumptive dependencies as dependencies, as motivated by Across-the-Board (ATB) extraction, there is no unified theory to date, with differences pertaining, e.g., to the exact formulation of amalgamation (Ginzburg and Sag, 2000), or the place of island constraints in grammar. While Borsley (2010) and Alotaibi and Borsley (2013) relegate the difference in locality of gap and resumptive dependencies to the performance system, Crysmann (2012, 2016) captures insensitivity to strong islands as part of the grammar. Harmonising existing proposals becomes even more acute, if we consider the cross-linguistic similarity of the phenomenon, in particular, if we compare languages like Hausa and Arabic, which both feature island insensitivity to some degree, as well as bound pronominal resumptive objects and zero pronominal resumptive subjects, to name just a few of the parallels. In this paper, I shall reexamine resumption (and extraction) in Modern Standard Arabic (henceforth: MSA) and propose a reanalysis that improves on Alotaibi and Borsley (2013) in several areas: first, I shall argue that controlling the distribution of gaps and resumptives by means of case is not only empirically under-motivated but also leads to counter-intuitive constraint specifications in the majority of cases. Second, I shall show that the case-based account of Alotaibi and Borsley (2013) can be straightforwardly supplanted with the weight-based account I proposed in Crysmann (2016): in doing this, one does not only get a better alignment of case assignment constraints with overtly observable manifestations of case, but such an account is also general enough to scale from case languages, such as MSA, to languages without case, such as Hausa, or many Arabic vernaculars. Finally, I shall address case in ATB extraction and propose a refinement of the Coordination Constraint of Pollard and Sag (1994) that accounts for exactly the kind of mismatch observed in mixed gap/resumptive ATB extraction
Explanations and "engineering solutions"? Aspects of the relation between Minimalism and HPSG
(2017)
It is not simple to compare Minimalism and HPSG, but it is possible to identify a variety of differences, some not so important but others of considerable importance. Two of the latter are: (1) the fact that Minimalism is a very lexically-based approach whereas HPSG is more syntactically-based, and (2) the fact that Minimalism uses Internal Merge in the analysis of unbounded dependencies whereas HPSG employs the SLASH feature. In both cases the HPSG approach seems to offer a better account of the facts. Thus, in two important respects it seems preferable to Minimalism.