Linguistik-Klassifikation
Refine
Year of publication
- 2003 (53) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (41)
- Part of a Book (7)
- Conference Proceeding (2)
- magisterthesis (1)
- Preprint (1)
- Report (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (53)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (53)
Keywords
- Koreanisch (6)
- Nominalphrase (4)
- Head-driven phrase structure grammar (3)
- Informationsstruktur (3)
- Japanisch (3)
- Passiv (3)
- Quantifizierung <Linguistik> (3)
- Relativsatz (3)
- Adjektiv (2)
- Adjunkt <Linguistik> (2)
- Argumentstruktur (2)
- Bulgarisch (2)
- Determinator (2)
- Deutsch (2)
- Extraktion <Linguistik> (2)
- Freier Relativsatz (2)
- Gerundium (2)
- Interrogativpronomen (2)
- Kasus (2)
- Klitisierung (2)
- Koordination <Linguistik> (2)
- Morphologie (2)
- Niederländisch (2)
- Raising (2)
- Semantik (2)
- Sinotibetische Sprachen (2)
- Syntaktische Kongruenz (2)
- Syntax (2)
- Topikalisierung (2)
- Wortstellung (2)
- Adverbiale (1)
- Ainu-Sprache (1)
- Akkusativ mit Infinitiv (1)
- Albanisch (1)
- Aspekt (1)
- Auxiliarkomplex (1)
- Diskontinuierliches Element (1)
- Doppelter Nominativ (1)
- Einbettung <Linguistik> (1)
- Ergänzung <Linguistik> (1)
- Expressivität <Linguistik> (1)
- Extraposition (1)
- Fokus <Linguistik> (1)
- Funktionsverbgefüge (1)
- Genus (1)
- Gradadverb (1)
- Grammatiktheorie (1)
- Griechisch (1)
- Hakha Chin (Lai) (1)
- Hebräisch (1)
- Inkorporation <Linguistik> (1)
- Insertion <Linguistik> (1)
- Kindersprache (1)
- Konjunktion (1)
- Kontrastive Syntax (1)
- Kymrisch (1)
- Lerntheorie (1)
- Nomen (1)
- Numerativ (1)
- Optimalitätstheorie (1)
- Parasitic gap (1)
- Partikelverb (1)
- Phrasenstruktur (1)
- Pragmatik (1)
- Prosodie (1)
- Qiang-Sprache (1)
- Regelordnung (1)
- Resultativ (1)
- Satzellipse (1)
- Skandinavische Sprachen (1)
- Spaltsatz (1)
- Sprachverstehen (1)
- Thema-Rhema-Gliederung (1)
- Tough-construction (1)
- Tschuktschisch (1)
- Type-Token-Relation (1)
- Türkisch (1)
- Valenz (Linguistik) (1)
- Verb (1)
- Verbalphrase (1)
- Vokativ (1)
- W-Bewegung (1)
Institute
- Extern (2)
In this paper we present an analysis of English measure noun phrases. Measure noun phrases exhibit both distributional idiosyncrasy, in that they appear in positions normally filled by degree adverbs: "a ten inch long string"; and agreement discord: "ten inches is enough", "it is ten inch/*inches long". The analysis introduces one idiosyncratic construction, the Measure Phrase Rule, which links together syntax and inflectional morphology. Combined with existing rules, in particular the Noun-noun Compound Rule, the new rule accounts for the both the distributional and agreement idiosyncrasies. The rule has been implemented and tested in the ERG, a broad-coverage grammar of English. Our analysis supports the position that broad-coverage grammars will necessarily contain both highly schematic and highly idiosyncratic rules.
Prenominals in Dutch
(2003)
For modeling the internal structure of noun phrases (Pollard and Sag, 1994, 385) treats the noun as the head and classi£es its dependents in terms of a three-fold distinction, £rst proposed in Chomsky (1970), between complements, adjuncts and speci£ers. For a phrase like the expensive picture of Sandy the structure looks as follows.
Ever since Chomsky's "On Wh-Movement" (Chomsky 1977) it has been assumed that topicalization and wh-question formation can be analyzed as instances of the same operation. Leaving certain features aside, this proposal carries over to the analysis of unbounded dependency constructions in HPSG since structurally, topicalization does not differ from wh-question formation in the analysis suggested in Pollard & Sag (1994: 157-163). In the present paper, we challenge this assumption and suggest an alternative analysis of unbounded dependency constructions. Here, topicalization and wh-question formation are considered as structurally different at least in certain languages. They may, however, be structurally identical in other languages. This difference is empirically reflected in patterns of relative clause extraposition. As has been pointed out by Culicover & Rochemont (1990: 28), an extraposed relative clause must not take an antecedent contained in a VP if the VP is topicalized but the relative clause is not.
Free relatives in German basically behave as NPs. As is first noticed by Groos and Riemsdijk (1981), an interesting property of free relatives that they do not share with ordinary relative clauses is that the relative pronouns are sensitive to matrix case requirements as well as to subordinate ones.
Few ideas have proven as influential within the HPSG-based literature on German verb clusters as Hinrichs and Nakazawa's (1989) idea of argument composition. Its basic idea is that in verb clusters, the arguments of a main verb are realized as the dependents of the auxiliary which governs that main verb, and not directly as dependents of the main verb. Thus, for instance in (1a), the tense auxiliary haben governs the transitive main verb gewinnen. As the head of the cluster gewonnen hat, the auxiliary haben effectively takes over the arguments from the main verb.
The aim of this paper is to provide a semantic account of valence alternations in Modern Greek of the following general form:
(1) NPk V NPi [P NPj] —> NPk V NPj [P NPi]
In other words, the valence alternations in Modern Greek we focus on in this paper are the ones involving direct internal arguments (i.e., objects) and indirect prepositional complements. Such alternation patterns in Modern Greek characterize mainly the behaviour of verbal predicates which participate in the so-called Locative Alternation phenomena.
In this paper I develop a unified analysis of the Japanese passive, which provides a uniform syntactic/semantic representation of the alleged varieties of passives (direct, indirect, possessive) as a complex predicate that encodes the triadic relation of "lack of control" among an agent, undergoer and event. Various differences among the direct, possessive, and indirect passives (the adversative effect implicature, the possibility of reflexive binding, the animacy constraint on the subject, etc.) are explained as cooperative effects of the core syntactic/sematic properties of the passive morpheme -(r)are and functional/pragmatic factors like conversational implicature and empathy constraints.
As the name of the framework suggests, one of the driving forces behind traditional HPSG analyses is the notion of head. With the exception of a few non-headed constructions (i.e., mostly coordination), constructions are typically seen as being headed by a particular word or phrase with the nonhead constituting a complement, specifier or adjunct. The head determines the internal composition of a phrase and is responsible for its external distribution. Moreover, syntactic headedness, as determined by morphosyntactic criteria, is typically assumed to coincide with semantic headness. In the case of NPs, for instance, this means that the semantic contribution (including the index) of the entire phrase is provided by the element that is the head by morphosyntactic criteria (typically the noun).
In this paper, we intend to challenge this view of heads on the basis of two constructions from English. In both instances, we will argue that the constituents that are responsible for the internal combinatorial make-up of the phrase do not constitute heads because they fail both to determine the external distribution of the phrase and to contribute the semantic index of the projected phrase. At the same time, however, we will show that it is possible to view these cases not as random departures from more well-behaved headed constructions, but instead as particular instantiations of more general construction types which do not impose strict conditions on external headedness.