Event Structure and the Encoding of Arguments: the Syntax of the Mandarin and English Verb Phrase Jimmy
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Event Structure and the Encoding of Arguments: The Syntax of the Mandarin and English Verb Phrase by Jimmy Lin Submitted to the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science in partial ful¯llment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY August 2004 °c Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2004. All rights reserved. Author.............................................................. Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science August 3, 2004 Certi¯ed by. Boris Katz Principal Research Scientist Thesis Supervisor Accepted by . Arthur C. Smith Chairman, Department Committee on Graduate Students 2 Event Structure and the Encoding of Arguments: The Syntax of the Mandarin and English Verb Phrase by Jimmy Lin Submitted to the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science on August 3, 2004, in partial ful¯llment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Abstract This work presents a theory of linguistic representation that attempts to capture the syntactic structure of verbs and their arguments. My framework is based on the assumption that the proper representation of argument structure is event structure. Furthermore, I develop the hypothesis that event structure is syntactic structure, and argue that verb meanings are compositionally derived in the syntax from ver- balizing heads, functional elements that license eventive interpretations, and verbal roots, abstract concepts drawn from encyclopedic knowledge. The overall goal of the enterprise is to develop a theory that is able to transparently relate the structure and meaning of verbal arguments. By hypothesis, languages share the same inven- tory of primitive building blocks and are governed by the same set of constraints|all endowed by principles of Universal Grammar and subjected to parametric variations. Support for my theory is drawn from both Mandarin Chinese and English. In particular, the organization of the Mandarin verbal system provides strong evidence for the claim that activity and state are the only two primitive verb types in Chinese| achievements and accomplishments are syntactically-derived complex categories. As a speci¯c instance of complex event composition, I examine Mandarin resultative verb compounds and demonstrate that a broad range of variations can be perspicuously captured in my framework. I show that patterns of argument sharing in these verbal compounds can be analyzed as control, thus grounding argument structure in well- known syntactic constraints such as the Minimum Distance Principle. Finally, I argue that cross-linguistic di®erences in the realization of verbal arguments can be reduced to variations in the way functional elements interact with verbal roots. Overall, my work not only contributes to our understanding of how events are syntactically represented, but also explicates interactions at the syntax-semantics interface, clarifying the relationship between surface form, syntactic structure, and logical form. A theory of argument structure grounded in independently-motivated syntactic constraints, on the one hand, and the semantic structure of events, on the other hand, is able to account for a wide range of empirical facts with few stipulations. Thesis Supervisor: Boris Katz Title: Principal Research Scientist 3 4 Acknowledgments Although situated at the beginning of my thesis, this section was the last to be completed chronologically. As I jokingly complained to Boris, I was having writer's block. not on any technical matters, but on properly acknowledging the many people that have accompanied me on my incredible journey through MIT over the past seven years|from undergrad, through m. eng, and ¯nally ph.d. This marks the end of my formal education, and the beginning of my career in academia, something I look forward to with a combination of excitement and apprehension. But I'm getting ahead of myself. For the longest time, the appropriate words to express my heart-felt gratitude simply eluded me. The following is my rough essay. I am not a linguist, but a computer scientist, by training. Yet, this thesis is a work in theoretical linguistics. This I owe to Alec Marantz, for not only teaching me about linguistics, but also how to be a linguist. When I ¯rst got in touch with him nearly a year ago, I knew that I was interested in pursuing a theoretical inquiry into argument structure and lexical semantics, but I was ill-equipped to tackle such an undertaking. I was very surprised by his enthusiasm and willingness to work with me, being a student from outside the linguistics department. I must have impressed him somehow, but whatever it was, it certainly wasn't my knowledge of linguistics|I had no formal training beyond a couple undergraduate courses. I am grateful that Alec took me under his wing; what little I know now is a direct result of my weekly meetings with him, where he no doubt has often endured my embarrassing ignorance of this vastly complex ¯eld. Alec is a wonderful advisor, and his clarity of thought has been incredibly valuable in helping me untangle the complex and intricate web of verbal phenomena, and in helping me sort through many alternative analyses. When I was at a loss for words in praising Alec, I looked through theses of his recent students to see how they have thanked him. Liina phrased it the best: \Alec has the rare talent of being a mentor without ever telling you what to do". The most remarkable fact about Alec's style is that, despite his obvious theoretical influences in this work, the ultimate product is a theory that I nevertheless feel \is mine". My path to this present theory of verbal argument structure has been long and circuitous. Previously, I have worked on, and still continue to build, applications that provide humans e±cient access to information using natural language. My career in computational linguistics and natural language processing I owe to Boris Katz, with whom I have been working since my arrival at MIT seven years ago. Back then, I was a young, brash freshman, seeking a passion toward which to devote my seemingly boundless energy. I'd like to think that I've come a long way since then, and I am eternally grateful that Boris has seen me through every step of the way, both the good, the bad, and the ugly (and yes, there were plenty of all three). I am forever indebted to him for providing me the opportunity to do great work, the environment to excel, the freedom to grow, and the support to achieve excellence. Boris taught me to appreciate language, with its incredible intricacies and subtleties|to take a step back and marvel at this amazing cognitive faculty we are all endowed with. Most important of all, Boris taught me that doing research isn't like doing a problem set, the weekly cycle of do-it-then-forget-about-it homeworks ubiquitous in the undergraduate 5 curriculum. Any problem worth tackling cannot be solved in the course of a week, or even a month; research breakthroughs require inspiration, dedication, sacri¯ce, and most of all, perseverance. And yes, I will always remember his lectures on drinking too much. I was pleasantly surprised that C.-T. James Huang agreed to be on my thesis committee. This being Jim's sabbatical year, he wanted to disappear from all us pes- tering students. I'd like to say it was yuan2 fen4, but regardless, my few interactions with Jim have left me in awe. In an extremely short amount of time, he was able to penetrate my work and point out deep, unresolved issues with which I had been struggling. His insightful comments lead to a re-structuring of a critical analysis, post-defense. In the end, he left me with a much stronger piece of work than that which I initially had. Michael Collins and Patrick Winston rounded out the rest of my committee. I must thank both of them for their interest in this work, even though it aligned marginally, at best, with their own research agendas. Mike was extremely helpful in pointing out aspects of the work that were not clear; some of these points were mud- dled prose (which I have since corrected), but others were unresolved research issues I was forced to confront head-on. My work is all the better for it. Patrick has been a great influence on my academic career; I fondly remember the many discussions we had about the wonders of human cognition and the contributions of vision and language to our ability to reason and learn. Above all, however, I shall remember him for his advice on how to present oneself, one's research, and one's accomplishments. Vision, step, news are three words that will forever be ingrained in me. In the early stages of this work, Hooi Ling Soh helped me enormously with the vast literature on Mandarin Chinese. Like Alec, she endured my ignorance of the subject and patiently listened to my half-baked ideas without prejudice. I'd also like to thank Danny Fox, Irene Heim, Sabine Iatridou, and Shigeru Miyagawa for many helpful discussions and advice along the way. I especially appreciate Sabine for giving me a hard time and questioning my most basic assumptions. I owe Beth Levin for helpful comments on an earlier manuscript, and would like to thank Andrew Koontz- Garboden for discussions and mutual encouragement. I must also thank all the people who have provided me with judgments, both in English and in Mandarin. They have been enormously helpful in con¯rming my own intuitions and helping me navigate the murky waters of grammaticality. Before I leave Cambridge, I must thank MIT for being at the center of all these amazing memories. But thanks alone just won't do it.