By Robert Frank
ISBN-10: 0262062291
ISBN-13: 9780262062299
ISBN-10: 0262562081
ISBN-13: 9780262562089
ISBN-10: 0585437041
ISBN-13: 9780585437040
In word constitution Composition and Syntactic Dependencies, Robert Frank explores an method of syntactic conception that weds the Tree adjacent Grammar (TAG) formalism with the minimalist framework. TAG has been widely studied either for its mathematical houses and for its usefulness in computational linguistics functions. Frank indicates that incorporating TAG's officially restrictive operations for constitution construction significantly simplifies the version of grammatical competence, rather within the elements excited by syntactic stream and locality. The empirical benefits of the ensuing version, illustrated with large case reports of subject-raising buildings and wh-questions, aspect towards a perception of grammar that's sharply constrained in its computational strength.
Read Online or Download Phrase Structure Composition and Syntactic Dependencies (Current Studies in Linguistics) PDF
Best grammar books
Download PDF by June Casagrande: Grammar Snobs Are Great Big Meanies: A Guide to Language for
The antidote to Eats, Shoots and Leaves—an uproarious and extremely American language publication in case you are uninterested in getting pulled over by means of the grammar police
What do suicidal pandas, doped-up rock stars, and a unadorned Pamela Anderson have in universal? They’re all a heck of much more attention-grabbing than studying approximately predicate nominatives and hyphens. June Casagrande understands this and has invented a complete new twist at the grammar booklet. Grammar Snobs Are nice huge Meanies is a laugh-out-loud humorous choice of anecdotes and essays on grammar and punctuation, in addition to hilarious evaluations of the self-appointed language specialists.
Chapters include:
• I’m penning this whereas Naked—The Oh-So Steamy Predicate Nominative
• Semicolonoscopy—Colons, Semicolons, Dashes, and different Probing Annoyances
• I’ll Take "I think Like a Moron" for $200, Alex—When to place Punctuation within citation Marks
• Snobbery Up with that you aren't placed Up—Prepositions
• Is Dangler on your Memo or Are you simply joyful to work out Me?
• Hyphens—Life-Sucking, Mom-and-Apple-Pie-Hating, Mime-Loving, Nerd- Fight-Inciting Daggers of the Damned
Casagrande grants useful and enjoyable language classes now not came upon wherever else, demystifying the topic and taking it again from the snobs. in brief, it’s a grammar ebook humans will truly are looking to read—just for the thrill of it.
Guglielmo Cinque's Functional Structure in DP and IP: The Cartography of PDF
This quantity provides the 1st result of a long term learn undertaking, funded by means of the Italian executive, which goals at mapping out the fantastic practical constitution of sentences, nominal words, and different significant words making up sentences. particularly, it examines the sensible constitution of DPs (determiner words) and IPs (inflection phrases).
- Handbook of Word-Formation (Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory)
- Inversion in Modern English: Form and function
- Generative Morphology
- Mongolian Grammar Textbook
- A Grammar of Saramaccan Creole
Extra info for Phrase Structure Composition and Syntactic Dependencies (Current Studies in Linguistics)
Sample text
I was wondering under which stone they found a note. Let us assume that [þwh] heads, the complementizers in these cases, must satisfy a well-formedness condition along the lines of Rizzi’s (1996) WhCriterion which requires that they enter into a certain structural relation with a [þwh] element, say, specifier-head agreement. In the (a) examples 50 Chapter 2 in (20) and (21), this is straightforwardly satisfied: the projection of the [þwh] D which moves into the specifier of the CP. In the (b) cases, however, satisfaction of this condition is not so straightforward since the DP projection bearing morphological wh-features is embedded within the projection of a preposition that does not carry such features.
Moreover, we can see why it is crucial that elementary trees like the one in (13a) must have a preexisting position for their complement: it yields a structural basis for the expression of the verb-complement dependency within the elementary tree. Similarly, the existence of the lower VP segment within the auxiliary tree in (15a) allows for the structural expression of a predication relation between the PP and the VP within this tree. Unfortunately, as soon as we set our sights on a wider range of phenomena, the tenability of the fundamental TAG hypothesis seems to erode, as there are a great many syntactic dependencies that can cross Setting the Stage 25 clausal boundaries.
In particular, a head may not select any properties that are expressed further down within a complement than the first elementary tree or extended projection. It is easy enough to imagine what such cases might look like. For example, a verb V1 may not select for particular properties of a DP complement to a verb V2 that heads the extended projection of V1 ’s complement, as in (18). (18) V1 [ . . [VP V2 DP]] A verb might, for example, require the embedded object to be definite. Similarly, an analysis of serve’s subcategorization requirements in which it directly constrains properties of the embedded subject, an analysis I take to be incorrect (see note 12), would similarly violate the extended projection view of selection.
Phrase Structure Composition and Syntactic Dependencies (Current Studies in Linguistics) by Robert Frank
by Jason
4.4