Refine
Year of publication
- 2003 (497) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (162)
- Working Paper (109)
- Conference Proceeding (62)
- Part of a Book (40)
- Preprint (40)
- Doctoral Thesis (33)
- Part of Periodical (29)
- Book (8)
- Report (6)
- Review (5)
Language
- English (497) (remove)
Keywords
- Deutschland (24)
- Morphologie (14)
- Phonologie (12)
- Geldpolitik (11)
- Aspekt (10)
- Englisch (9)
- Koreanisch (8)
- Europäische Union (7)
- Going Public (7)
- Kindersprache (7)
Institute
- Physik (63)
- Center for Financial Studies (CFS) (56)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (35)
- Medizin (17)
- Rechtswissenschaft (14)
- Biowissenschaften (12)
- Geowissenschaften (12)
- Informatik (12)
- Extern (11)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) Mannheim (11)
Capturing word order asymmetries in English Left-Peripheral Constructions: A Domain-Based Approach
(2003)
Left-Peripheral Constructions: A Domain-Based Approach Even though the word order in English is rather straightforward, the distributional possibilities of left-peripheral elements like topic phrases, wh-phrases, and negative operators (introducing an SAI) are quite intriguing and complex. In particular, there seems to exist no straightforward way of capturing the linear order asymmetries of these elements in the main and embedded clauses. The prevailing analyses have resorted to movement processes with multiple functional projections. The goal of this paper is to explore an alternative analysis to such movement-based analyses. In particular, this paper adopts the notion of topological fields (DOMAIN) proposed by Kathol (2000, 2001) within the framework of HPSG. The paper shows that within this DOMAIN system, the distributional possibilities as well as the asymmetries we find in English left peripheral constructions can easily follow from the two traditional views: (i) a topic precedes a focus element, and (ii) in English a wh-phrase and a complementizer competes with each other for the same position.
Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar : 2003
(2003)
This paper discusses how the English Resource Grammar (ERG) captures the optionality of certain complements of verbs based on a single lexical entry coupled with an ontology of markings distinguishing optional from obligatory as well as unrealized from realized elements. Subject-head and head-complement structures are modified accordingly, but due to the lack of a possibility to express and use relational goals in grammars implemented in the LKB system, the ERG encoding falls short of the goal of treating optional complements in a general way. Instead, it requires two new types of ˋauxiliary' phrases which are otherwise unmotivated. We show that the problem can be overcome by using a recursive relation selecting a member from a list. The use of a lean implementation platform not supporting such relational goals, such as the LKB, thus results in a loss of generality of the grammars that can be expressed, which undermines the closeness of the implemented grammar to current linguistic analyses as one of the hallmarks of HPSG-based grammar implementation. The case study presented in this paper thus supports the position argued in Götz and Meurers (1997) that a system for the implementation of HPSG-based grammars should include both universal implicational principles as well as definite clauses over feature terms.
Specificational pseudoclefts (SPCs) have been a great challenge for a syntactic theory, because, despite the surface division between the pre- and post-copular elements, the post-copular 'pivot' behaves as if it occupied the gap position in the precopular wh-clause. This paper argues that movement-based or deletion-based syntactic approaches and purely semantic approaches have problems in dealing with syntactic properties and connectivity problems of SPCs in English. Observing the parallelism between SPC pivots and short answers to questions, it proposes an HPSG account based on a non-deletion-based QDT (Question-in-disguise theory) approach and on the equative analysis of the specificational copular sentences. The paper shows that SPCs must be handled by an integrated account of the syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic properties of the construction, and argues that the connectivity problems should be approached from such an integrated view.
On the notion 'determiner'
(2003)
Following a common practice in generative grammar, HPSG treats the determiners as members of a separate functional part of speech (Det). The status of the functional parts of speech is a matter of debate and controversy. The auxiliaries, for instance, are commonly treated as members of a separate functional category (Aux or Infl) in many variants of generative grammar, including GB, MP and LFG, but in GPSG and HPSG, it is a matter of equally common practice to treat them as members of V and to reject the postulation of a separate functional category, see Pullum & Wilson (1977) and Gazdar, Pullum & Sag (1982). This text makes a similar case for the determiners; more specifically, it argues that the determiners are categorially heterogeneous, in the sense that some are members of A, whereas others are members of N. The argumentation is mainly based on inflectional morphology and morpho-syntactic agreement data. The consequences of the categorial heterogeneity are hard to reconcile with the specifier treatment of the determiners in Pollard & Sag (1994) and with the Det-as-head treatment in Netter (1994), but it can smoothly be integrated in the functor treatment of the prenominals in Allegranza (1998) and Van Eynde (2002).
We present an approach to the interpretation of non-sentential utterances like B's utterance in the following mini-dialogue:
A: "Who came to the party?"
B: "Peter."
Such utterances pose several puzzles: they convey 'sentence-type' messages (propositions, questions or request) while being of non-sentential form; and they are constrained both semantically and syntactically by the context. We address these puzzles in our approach which is compositional, since we provide a formal semantics for such fragments independent of their context, and constraint-based because resolution is based on collecting contextual constraints.
Wasow (1977) argues that linguistic theory should recognize two qualitatively distinct types of rules: syntactic rules, which can affect more "superficial" grammatical function properties; and lexical rules, which affect deeper lexical semantic properties of lexical items. However, lexicalist theories of grammar have replaced syntactic rules with lexical rules leaving Wasow's dichotomy potentially unexplained. Our goal in this paper is to recapture Wasow's insight within a lexicalist framework such as HPSG. Building on Sag & Wasow's (1999) distinction between lexeme and word, we claim that there is a contrast between lexical rules that relate lexemes to lexemes (L-to-L rules) and lexical rules that relate words to words (W-to-W rules) and that these differences follow from the architecture of the grammar. In particular, we argue that syntactic function features (ARGST, VALENCE, etc.) are not defined for lexemes, while lexical semantic features (CONTENT) are. From this it follows that L-to-L rules can affect lexical semantic features, and not syntactic function features. In addition, since words are defined for syntactic function features, W-to-W rules can change them. In this paper, we support this hypothesis by examining certain differences between two types of Noun Incorporation construction, and their relation to other rules in the grammar. We argue that Compounding Noun Incorporation is an L-to-L type and that Classifier Noun Incorporation is a W-to-W type; we base our argument on the interaction of Noun Incorporation and Applicative Formation in the Paleo-Siberian language Chukchi and the isolate language Ainu.
This paper examines reprise questions: questions which request clarification of the meaning intended by a speaker when uttering a word or phrase. As such they can act as semantic probes, providing information about what meaning can be associated with word and phrase types. We present corpus evidence regarding the meaning of nouns and noun phrases, and argue that this evidence runs contrary to the usual treatments of semantics in HPSG, and to the traditional generalised quantifier view of NPs as sets of sets. Instead we outline an analysis of NPs as (possibly functional) sets of individuals.
This paper seeks to improve HPSG engineering through the design of more terse, readable and intuitive type signatures. It argues against the exclusive use of IS-A networks and, with reference to the English Resource Grammar, demonstrates that a collection of higher-order datatypes are already acutely in demand in contemporary HPSG design. Some default specification conventions to assist in maximizing the utility of higher-order type constructors are also discussed.