Linguistik
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Preprint (122) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (122)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (122)
Keywords
- Deutsch (19)
- Multicomponent Tree Adjoining Grammar (9)
- Schweizerdeutsch (9)
- Syntax (9)
- Syntaktische Analyse (8)
- Semantik (7)
- Lexicalized Tree Adjoining Grammar (6)
- Dialektologie (5)
- Optimalitätstheorie (5)
- Range Concatenation Grammar (5)
Institute
- Extern (69)
- Sprachwissenschaften (1)
This paper is one argument for a theory of grammatical relations in Chinese in which there are no grammatical relations beyond semantic roles, and no lexical relation-changing rules. As the passive rule is one of the most common relation changing rules cross-linguistically, in this paper I will address the question of whether or not Mandarin Chinese has lexical passives, that is, passives defined as in Relational Grammar (see for example Perlmutter and Postal 1977) and the early Lexical Functional Grammar (LFG) literature (e.g. Bresnan 1982), where a 2-arc (object) is promoted to a 1-arc (subject).
In der folgenden Darstellung geht es einerseits darum, an Beispielen aufzuzeigen, inwiefern die schweizerdeutschen Mundarten und die deutsche Standardsprache in Lautung, Formenbildung, Satzbau und Wortschatz auseinandergehen können, andererseits aber immer auch um das Aufweisen von Gemeinsamkeiten. Oft werden nämlich bestimmte Erscheinungen des dialektalen Sprachbaus vorschnell als Eigenarten der Mundart verstanden, obwohl dieselben Erscheinungen auch im gesprochenen Hochdeutschen anzutreffen sind. Somit liegen also häufig nicht Unterschiede zwischen Mundart und Standardsprache vor, sondern Unterschiede zwischen gesprochener Sprache und geschriebener Sprache. [vollständige Überarbeitung für eine zweite Auflage]
Thirty-one years ago Tsu-lin Mei (1961) argued against the traditional doctrine that saw the subject-predicate distinction in grammar as parallel to the particular- universal distinction in logic, as he said it was a reflex of an Indo-European bias, and could not be valid, as ‘Chinese ... does not admit a distinction into subject and predicate’ (p. 153). This has not stopped linguists working on Chinese from attempting to define ‘subject’ (and ‘object’) in Chinese. Though a number of linguists have lamented the difficulties in trying to define these concepts for Chinese (see below), most work done on Chinese still assumes that Chinese must have the same grammatical features as Indo-European, such as having a subject and a direct object, though no attempt is made to justify that view. This paper challenges that view and argues that there has been no grammaticalization of syntactic functions in Chinese. The correct assignment of semantic roles to the constituents of a discourse is done by the listener on the basis of the discourse structure and pragmatics (information flow, inference, relevance, and real world knowledge) (cf. Li & Thompson 1978, 1979; LaPolla 1990).
This book is a full reference grammar of Qiang, one of the minority languages of southwest China, spoken by about 70,000 Qiang and Tibetan people in Aba Tibetan and Qiang Autonomous Prefecture in northern Sichuan Province. It belongs to the Qiangic branch of Tibeto-Burman (one of the two major branches of Sino-Tibetan). The dialect presented in the book is the Northern Qiang variety spoken in Ronghong Village, Yadu Township, Chibusu District, Mao County. This book, the first book-length description of the Qiang language in English, is the result of many years of work on the language.
A commonly held view in the literature on Scrambling and Clitic Doubling is that both constructions are sensitive to Specificity. For this reason Sportiche (1992) proposes to unify the two, an approach which has become quite standard in the relevant literature ever since. However, the claim that clitic doubling is the counterpart of Germanic scrambling has never been substantiated. In this paper we present extensive evidence from Greek that Clitic Doubling has common formal properties with Germanic Scrambling/Object Shift. Our evidence consists mainly of binding facts observed when doubling takes place, which seem, at first sight, to be completely unexpected. On closer inspection, however, it turns out that these facts are strongly reminiscent of the effects showing up in Germanic scrambling. We propose that these properties can be derived under a theory of clitic constructions along the lines of Sportiche (1992) implemented into the framework of Chomsky (1995). Finally we suggest the that the crosslinguistic distribution of Scrambling as opposed to Clitic Doubling should be linked to a parameter relating to properties of Agr: Move/Merge XP vs. Move/Merge X° to Agr. We show that this parameter unifies the behaviour of subjects and objects within a language and across languages. The paper is organised as follows. In section 2 we present evidence from binding, interpretational and prosodic effects that doubling and scrambling display very similar properties. In section 3 we present Sportiches account and point out some problems for it. In section 4 we present our proposal.
A lot of interest has recently been paid to constraint-based definitions and extensions of Tree Adjoining Grammars (TAG). Examples are the so-called quasi-trees, D-Tree Grammars and Tree Description Grammars. The latter are grammars consisting of a set of formulars denoting trees. TDGs are derivation based where in each derivation step a conjunction is built of the old formular, a formular of the grammar and additional equivalences between node names of the two formulars. This formalism is more powerfull than TAGs. TDGs offer the advantages of MC-TAG and D-Tree Grammars for natural languages and they allow underspecification. However the problem is that TDGs might be unnecessarily powerfull for natural languages. To solve this problem, in this paper, I will propose a local TDGs, a restricted version of TDGs. Local TDGs still have the advantages of TDGs but they are semilinear and therefore more appropriate for natural languages. First, the notion of the semilinearity is defined. Then local TDGs are introduced, and, finally, semilinearity of local Tree Description Languages is proven.
In syntax, the trend nowadays is towards lexicalized grammar formalisms. It is now widely accepted that dividing words into wordclasses may serve as a laborsaving mechanism - but at the same time, it discards all detailed information on the idiosyncratic behavior of words. And that is exactly the type of information that may be necessary in order to parse a sentence. For learning approaches, however, lexicalized grammars represent a challenge for the very reason that they include so much detailed and specific information, which is difficult to learn. This paper will present an algorithm for learning a link grammar of German. The problem of data sparseness is tackled by using all the available information from partial parses as well as from an existing grammar fragment and a tagger. This is a report about work in progress so there are no representative results available yet.
A hierarchy of local TDGs
(1998)
Many recent variants of Tree Adoining Grammars (TAG) allow an underspecifiaction of the parent relation between nodes in a tree, i.e. they do not deal with fully specified trees as it is the case with TAGs.Such TAG variants are for example Description Tree Grammars (DTG), Unordered Vector Grammars with Dominance Links (UVG-DL), a definition of TAGs via so-called quasi trees and Tree Description Grammars (TDG. The last TAg variant, local TDG, is an extension of TAG generating Tree Descriptions. Local TDGs even allow an underspecification of the dominance relation between node names and thereby provide the possibility to generate underspecified representations for structural ambiguities such as quantifier scope ambiguities. This abstract deals with formal properties of local TDGs. A hierarchiy of local TDGs is established together with a pumping lemma for local TDGs of a certain rank.
This paper proposes a compositional semantics for lexicalized tree adjoining grammars (LTAG). Tree-local multicompnent derivations allow seperation of semantiv contribution of a lexical item into one component contributing to the predicate argument structure and second a component contributing to scope semantics. Based on this idea a syntx-semantics interface is presented where the compositional semantics depends only on the derivation structure. It is shown that the derivation structure allows an appropriate amount of underspecification. This is illustrated by investigating underspecified representations for quantifier scpoe ambiguities and related phenomena such as adjunct scope and island constraints.