Linguistik-Klassifikation
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (367)
- Part of a Book (229)
- Article (66)
- Working Paper (47)
- Preprint (25)
- Report (7)
- Book (5)
- Review (3)
- magisterthesis (1)
Language
- English (653)
- German (77)
- Croatian (7)
- Portuguese (7)
- French (4)
- mis (1)
- Multiple languages (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (750)
Keywords
- Syntax (117)
- Deutsch (63)
- Wortstellung (48)
- Relativsatz (42)
- Thema-Rhema-Gliederung (38)
- Koreanisch (32)
- Englisch (30)
- Generative Transformationsgrammatik (30)
- Intonation <Linguistik> (28)
- Prädikat (27)
Institute
Linking in constructions
(2004)
In this paper I will make an attempt to show how the linking normally done in the lexicon also can be done in constructions. The motivation behind this is the flexibility it gives the grammar writer in underspecifying lexical entries. Being too rigid about linking in the lexicon may lead to unsatisfying results such as multiple lexical entries for what one intuitively feels is just one lexical entry, or alternatively, lexical rules which are not morphologically motivated. The aim is to show that this can be avoided by letting constructions introduce the linking information instead.
We present a constraint-based syntax-semantics interface for the construction of RMRS (Robust Minimal Recursion Semantics) representations from shallow grammars. The architecture is designed to allow modular interfaces to existing shallow grammars of various depth - ranging from chunk grammars to context-free stochastic grammars. We define modular semantics construction principles in a typed feature structure formalism that allow flexible adaptation to alternative grammars and different languages.
Recent analyses of mismatches at the syntax-semantics interface investigate e.g. modification of agentive nouns (Larson, 1998), modification of quantifying pronouns (Abney, 1987), or recursive modification (Kasper, to appear). Each of these analyses is tailored to a specific set of data, and it is not immediately obvious how they could be generalised to cover a larger set of data. I propose a unified analysis for these mismatches that attempts to bring out their common ground. This analysis shares some of its basic intuitions with the one of Kasper, but is more general because the mismatches are handled locally in the CONT feature. Its pivot is an elaborate syntax-semantics interface that is based on a surface-oriented syntactic analysis. This analysis generalises easily to the mismatches at the morphology-semantics interface for German separable-prefix verbs that were discussed in (Müller, 2003).
Negation and negative indefinites raise problems for the principle of compositionality of meaning, because we find both double and single negation readings in natural languages. De Swart and Sag (2002) solve the compositionality problem in a polyadic quantifier framework. The syntax-semantics interface exploits an extension of the Cooper storage mechanism that HPSG uses to account for scope ambiguities. In de Swart and Sag (2002), all negative quantifiers are collected into an N-store, and are interpreted by means of iteration (double negation) or resumption (negative concord) upon retrieval. This puts the ambiguity between single and double negation readings in the grammar, rather than in the lexical items. This paper extends the earlier analysis with a typology of negation and negative indefinites using bi-directional optimality theory (OT). The constraints defined are universal, but their ranking varies from one language to the next. In negative concord languages, the functional motivation for the marking of 'negative variables' wins out, so we use n-words. Double negation languages value first-order iteration, so we use plain indefinites or negative polarity items within the scope of negation. The bi-directional set-up is essential, for syntactic and semantic variation go hand in hand.
Linearization-based HPSG theories are widely used for analyzing languages with relatively free constituent order. This paper introduces the Generalized ID/LP (GIDLP) grammar format, which supports a direct encoding of such theories, and discusses key aspects of a parser that makes use of the dominance, precedence, and linearization domain information explicitly encoded in this grammar format. We show that GIDLP grammars avoid the explosion in the number of rules required under a traditional phrase structure analysis of free constituent order. As a result, GIDLP grammars supportmore modular and compact grammar encodings and require fewer edges in parsing.
In this paper, I shall discuss the semantic attachment of intersective modifiers in German coherent constructions. I shall show that a purely syntactic solution to the observable attachment ambiguity is undesirable for reasons of processing e ciency and/or massive spurious ambiguity. Instead, I shall follow Egg and Lebeth (1995) and propose an extension to Minimal Recursion Semantics, permitting the expression of underspecified semantic attachment. This rather trivial move, as we shall see, will not only be preferable for processing reasons, but it will also be more in line with the spirit of underspecified semantics, e ectively providing a compact representation of purely semantic distinctions, instead of unfolding these distinctions into a rain forest of tree representations and derivations. I will present an implementation of the underspecification approach integrated into the German HPSG developed at DFKI and compare its e ciency to an alternative implementation where semantic attachment is unfolded by means of retrieval rules.
Recent syntactic theory has highlighted the importance of peripheral constructions such as the comparative correlative construction. This construction involves a pair of filler-gap constructions with unusual properties. The first is a subordinate clause and the second a main clause. The construction has a number of related constructions. A version of HPSG, which assumes hierarchies of phrase types, can provide satisfactory analyses both for the comparative correlative constructions and for the related constructions. The two clauses in the comparative-correlative construction can be analysed as non-standard head-filler phrases differing from standard headfiller phrases in certain respects. The construction as a whole can be analyzed as a non-standard head-adjunct phrase, in which the head and the phrase have different categories.
This article proposes a semantics of directional expressions in Norwegian and German, regarded as VP modifiers. The analysis uses Minimal Recursion Semantics, as an integrated part of Matrix-based HPSG grammars. Directional expressions are analyzed as modifying an individual, the 'mover'. Context dependent directionals like here receive a decomposed analysis. Telicity values reflecting various types of directional and locative expressions are computed.
Within the tradition of Categorial Grammar, so-called 'non-constituent' coordination ('argument cluster' coordination and 'right node raising') has been analyzed in terms of the coordination of nonstandard constituents produced by the operations of type raising and composition. This highly successful research has expanded the domain of data that modern analyses of coordination must take into account. Recent HPSG work by Yatabe (2002) and Crysmann (2003) provides an interesting alternative approach to this problem in terms of the coordination of familiar, but 'elliptical' constituents. We argue that this approach is empirically superior to the Categorial Grammar analysis, both in terms of empirical coverage and cross-linguistic predictions. We reassess the relevant English data in small but important ways, and develop our own ellipsis analysis, building on Yatabe's and Crysmann's insights.
This paper presents an account of English non-restrictive ('appositive') relative clauses (NRCs) in the framework of 'construction based' HPSG. Specifically, it shows how the account of restrictive relative clause constructions presented in Sag (1997) can be extended to provide an account of the syntax and semantics of NRCs and of the main differences between NRCs and restrictive relatives. The analysis reconciles the semantic intuition that NRCs behave like independent clauses with their subordinate syntax. A significant point is that, in contrast with many other approaches, it employs only existing, independently motivated theoretical apparatus, and requires absolutely no new structures, features, or types.