DOCSLIB.ORG

Particle Shift in Gerundive Nominalizations Bachelor ’SDiplomaThesis Supervisor:Mgr.JanChovanec,Ph.D. 2008

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Particle Shift in Gerundive Nominalizations � Bachelor ’S�Diploma�Thesis� � � � � � � � Supervisor:�Mgr.�Jan�Chovanec,�Ph.D.� � 2008 Masaryk University Faculty of Arts Department of English and American Studies English Language and Literature Helena Jezdinská Nominalizations in English: Particle Shift in Gerundive Nominalizations Bachelor ’s Diploma Thesis Supervisor: Mgr. Jan Chovanec, Ph.D. 2008 Ideclare that Ihaveworkedonthisthesisindependently, usingonly the primary andsecondary sourceslistedinthebibliography. ........................................................... HelenaJezdinská Acknowledgement Aboveall,I wouldlike tothankprofessorPetrKarlíkforall hisadvice,including recommendationofthe sources,valuableandinterestingdiscussionsand moralsupport. Iwouldalsolike tothankdr.JanChovanecfor beingmysupervisorandhelpingmeto copewiththeinadequaciesofthethesis.Last,butnotleast,I thankdr.Jarmila Fictumová,HonzaandJanafortheirhelpingmetoworkwiththeBNC. Table of Contents LISTOF ABBREVIATIONS ...........................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................2 1.NOMINALIZATION INCONTEMPORARY ENGLISH GRAMMARS ..................4 1.1. ENGLISH GRAMMAR BOOKS ..........................................................................4 1.1.1.QUIRK ............................................................................................................5 1.1.1.1.NOMINALIZATION ...............................................................................5 1.1.1.2.–ing CLAUSES ........................................................................................7 1.1.2.HUDDLESTON &PULLUM ........................................................................7 1.2. –ing FROM A CZECH GRAMMARIAN’S POINT OF VIEW ............................9 2.GENERATIVE APPROACH .....................................................................................12 2.1. LEES: TRANSFORMATIONAL RULES ...........................................................13 2.2. CHOMSKY: LEXICALIST HYPOTHESIS ........................................................15 2.3. MARANTZ: CRITICISM OF CHOMSKY .........................................................20 2.4. PARTICLE SHIFT IN “MIXED” NOMINALIZATION .....................................25 2.5. SUMMARY .........................................................................................................32 2.6. SOURCES FOR THE ANALYSIS .......................................................................34 2.6.1.THE BRITISH NATIONAL CORPUS .........................................................34 2.6.2.DICTIONARY OFPHRASAL VERBS .......................................................35 3.ANALYSIS:PARTICLESHIFTIN“POSS VERB- ing DP” ....................................36 3.1. DATA FOR ANALYSIS .......................................................................................36 3.2. THE WAY OF ANALYSING THE DATA ...........................................................38 3.3. BNC QUERIES OF PHRASAL VERBS AND “POSS VERB-ing DP” ..............38 3.3.1.PHRASAL VERBS .......................................................................................38 3.3.2.“POSS VERB-ing DP” .................................................................................43 3.3.3.ADDITIONALRESEARCHES ...................................................................46 3.3.3.1.“LONG”PRONOUNS ..........................................................................46 3.3.3.2.ADDITIONAL RESEARCH:“POSS VERB-ing DP” WITHPRT SHIFT .................................................................................................................46 3.4. CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................48 4.WORKS USED ANDCITED ....................................................................................51 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Since the facts inthis paper will be simplifiedfor the reasonof lucidity andbriefness, and some of the individual structures will be demonstrated by tree diagrams, the list below providesthemeaningsofall usedabbreviations: √root ADVadverb(alsoparticle) BNCtheBritishNationalCorpus 1 Ddeterminer DPdeterminer phrase FPfunctional projection Nnoun,nominalunit NPnounphrase ON nominalobject OP pronominalobject PoS partsofspeech PRON pronoun Prt particle Ssentence-likeunit vfunctionalheadofvP Vverb;verbalunit vPfunctional projectionof V VPverb phrase 1 British National Corpus . <http://corpora.fi.muni.cz/ske>. 1 INTRODUCTION The goal of this paper focuses ona specific problem of Englishnominalization,that is, ashift of an adverbial particle after object in gerundive nominalizations,formedfrom phrasalverbs(i.e.verbs withadverbial particles): (0) a. hislookinguptheword (gerundivenominalizationwithout particleshift) b. hislookingthewordup (gerundivenominalizationwithparticleshift) Manyspeakers of Englishlanguage,bothas a mother tongue andas a secondlanguage, unconsciously use nominalized structures every day. This paper will illustrate how nominalizations are usedinpractice,and,moreover,it will alsooffer a deeper insight into the internal structure of such noun phrases. Not only will the thesis focus on particle shift but it will also introduce the most important theories, as well as a contemporary view of nominalization. The thesis will be divided into two parts, theoreticalandpractical. The theoretical part will start with the descriptive English grammars, such as Quirk (1985). This part will deal with the generalized explanations of what English nominalizationis,as well as what types of nominalization canbe foundinEnglish.It will also present the problem of verb-particle structures and how the contemporary grammars anddictionaries cope withit.Inorder togodeeper intothe internal structure of nominal phrase,Chapter 2of the theoretical part will provide the development of the “generative” nominalizationtheories from Lees (1968) tothe moderntheories,suchas Marantz (1997), comparing the most opposing approaches, i.e. lexicalism vs. the frameworkofDistributedMorphology. The practical part will draw upon the paper by Harley and Noyer (1998) 2 regarding particle shift in “mixed” nominalization. Both verbal and nominalized structures will be examined, aiming at the analysis of a particular type of nominalizations, i.e. gerundive nominalizations with possible particle shift. The practical part will be based on the British National Corpus and verified by Collins CobuildDictionaryof Phrasal Verbs (1990). NOTE: all examples usedinthis paper are originallyexamples from the corresponding worksorfromtheBritishNationalCorpus. 3 1. NOMINALIZATION IN CONTEMPORARY ENGLISH GRAMMAR BOOKS Before the problem of nominalizationwill be discussed,it shouldbe clear what the term “nominalization” means.A gooddefinition can be foundin The Oxford Companionto the EnglishLanguage (1992)where “nominalization” isexplainedas: The process or result of forminga nounfrom a wordbelongingtoanother word class: writing/writings and shaving/shavings derived from write and shave by adding -ing ; sanity derivedfrom sane bytheadditionofthe nounformingsuffix -ity ; nominalization derivedfrom nominalize byadding -ation .(2) The process or result of deriving a noun phrase by a transformation from a finite clause " their rejecting my complaint or their rejectionof my complaint from They rejectedmy complaint .(p.702) 1.1. ENGLISH GRAMMAR BOOKS Books on English grammar can illustrate how the concept of “nominalization” is apprehended andhow it is explained toa broader audience,suchas students of English language.Theybringaverydetaileddescriptionof how andunder what conditions and rules these structures can be applied to English. For the following subchapters both Englishand Czechgrammarians have been chosen,in order to propose the individual viewsof“nominalization”inEnglish. 4 1.1.1. QUIRK 2 1.1.1.1. NOMINALIZATION In this work, the authors depict in detail, both morphologically and syntactically, the commontypes of Englishnominalizations.Inaddition,theyparticularlysingle out the semantics of the individual structures. The term “nominalization” is determined as “anounphrase […] whichhas a systematic correspondence witha clause structure […]. The nounheadof sucha phrase is normallyrelatedmorphologicallytoa verb (1) or to anadjective (2)”(p.1288): (1) his refusal tohelp ~He refuses tohelp. (2) the truth ofherstatement~Herstatementis true . The authors point out that there is a difference inmeaning betweena deverbal noun, suchas(3)and(4),andtheircorrespondingverbalnoun(5) and(6): (3) some paintingsof Brown’s ~(a)some paintingsthatBrownowns,or(b) some paintings paintedbyBrown (4) Brown’s paintingsof hisdaughter ~ (a) paintings depicting his daughter and painted by him, or (b) paintings depictinghisdaughter andpaintedbysomeoneelse butownedbyhim. (5) The paintingof Brown is asskilful as thatofGainsborough. ~(a)Brown’smodeof painting,or(b)Brown’s actionof painting. (6) Brown’sdeft paintingof hisdaughter isadelight towatch ~ItisadelighttowatchwhileBrowndeftlypaintshisdaughter. At this stage,the authors claim that the nouns in (3) and (4) withplural endings andthe 2Quirk, Randolph, et al. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language . London: Longman. 5 possibilityof beingreplacedbyother nouns,suchas pictures or photos ,are anexample of “a perfectly regular concrete count noun, related only to the verb paint by word formation” (p. 1291) while (5) and (6) show the properties of a noun by having the definite article in (5), whereas in(6) both a genitive construction and the adjective
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Syntactic Aspects of Nominalization in Five Tibeto-Burman Languages of the Himalayan Area1
    Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area Volume 31.2 — October 2008 SYNTACTIC ASPECTS OF NOMINALIZATION IN FIVE TIBETO-BURMAN LANGUAGES OF THE HIMALAYAN AREA1 Carol Genetti University of California, Santa Barbara Research Centre for Linguistic Typology A.R. Coupe Ellen Bartee Kristine Hildebrandt You-Jing Lin La Trobe University SIL SIUE UC Santa Barbara The goal of this paper is to describe some of the syntactic structures that are created through nominalization processes in Himalayan Tibeto-Burman languages and the relationships between those structures. These include both structures involving the nominalization of clauses (e.g. complement clauses, relative clauses) and structures involving the nominalization of verbs and predicates (e.g. the derivation of nouns and adjectives). We will argue that, synchronically, clausal nominalization, structurally represented as [clause]NP, is the basic structure underlying many of the nominalizing constructions in these languages, even though individual constructions embed and alter this structure in interesting ways. In addition to clausal nominalization, we will illustrate the presence of derivational nominalization, represented as [V-NOM]N and [V-NOM]ADJ, although some nominal derivations target the predicate, not the verb root as their domain. We will also demonstrate that derivational nominalization can be seen as having developed from clausal nominalization, at least for some forms in some languages, and that the opposite direction of development, from derivational to clausal structures, is also attested. We will conclude with some syntactic observations pertinent to recent claims made on the historical relationship between nominalization and relativization, demonstrating that there are various ways that these structures can be related.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study of Three Variants of Gerund Construction from the Contrastive Perspective of Social and Natural Academic Abstracts on Construction Grammar Theory1
    2020 年 6 月 中国应用语言学（英文） Jun. 2020 第 43 卷 第 2 期 Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics Vol. 43 No. 2 A Study of Three Variants of Gerund Construction from the Contrastive Perspective of Social and Natural Academic Abstracts on Construction Grammar Theory1 Yan J IN & Mingtuo YANG Northwest Normal University Abstract English gerund construction is a system composed of 3 variants, including “Gerund + ø”, “Gerund + of + NP”, and “Gerund + NP”. The noun and verb attributes of the 3 variants are recursive, and in theory their frequencies vary regularly in different styles. An abstract is placed before the beginning of an academic papers, which has the basic characteristics of conciseness and generalization, and has special requirements for the use of gerunds. The purpose of this study was to empirically explore the system of gerund construction in abstracts of natural science and social science papers, and to specifically explore the inherent characteristics of noun and verb properties of the 3 variants. For this purpose, two corpora were constructed, one is about abstracts of natural science papers, and the other is about abstracts of social science papers. Finally, the results of chi-square test showed that there was no significant difference in the frequencies of the 3 variants in the abstracts of natural science and social science papers, and the two corpora can be studied as a whole. In the combined corpus, there were significant differences in the frequencies of the 3 gerund variants. The frequencies of these 3 variants and their gerund properties showed a recursive change. Keywords: gerund construction, gerund variants, Construction Grammar, nominalization, gerund system 1 The study was supported by the Humanities and Social Sciences Research Planning Fund of Ministry of Education for Western and Frontier Areas (14XJA740001).
    [Show full text]
  • Nominalization – Lexical and Syntactic Aspects
    Manfred Bierwisch Nominalization – Lexical and Syntactic Aspects 1. The Issue The main tenet of the present paper is the thesis that nominalization – like other cases of derivational morphology – is an essentially lexical phenomenon with well defined syntactic (and semantic) conditions and consequences. More specifically, it will be argued that the relation between a verb and the noun derived from it is subject to both systematic and idiosyncratic conditions with respect to lexical as well as syntactic aspects. Familiar cases like (1) and (2) illustrate the point: (1)(a) Daß Eva nach Bern fuhr, überraschte uns. (That Eva drove to Bern, surprised us.) (b) Evas Fahrt nach Bern überraschte uns. (Eva's drive to Bern surprised us.) (2)(a) Daß Peter die Regeln erklärte, war nützlich. (That Peter explained the rules, was useful.) (b) Peters Erklärung der Regeln war nützlich. (Peter's explanation of the rules was useful.) While the choice of morphological markers is lexically determined and highly idiosyncratic – fahren/Fahrt (drive/drive) vs. erklären/Erklärung (explain/explanation)-, syntactic combination follows general rules: the verb assigns nominative and accusative case to the subject and direct object, the derived noun systematically requires genitive case for both complements. These observations exhaust neither the idiosyncratic nor the systematic properties of nominalizations, but they highlight the central issue of the present paper: The relation between lexical entries that enter into verbal and nominal constructions, respectively, can neither be captured in purely syntactic terms, nor can it be reduced to lexical properties, ignoring the systematic syntactic (and semantic) conditions and consequences. This raises the question how the systematic and idiosyncratic conditions of nominal and verbal constructions are represented, and how they interact.
    [Show full text]
  • Nominalization and Its Various Uses in Thulung Aimée Lahaussois
    Nominalization and its various uses in Thulung Aimée Lahaussois To cite this version: Aimée Lahaussois. Nominalization and its various uses in Thulung. Languages of the Tibeto-Burman Area, 2003, 26 (1), pp.33-57. halshs-00004758 HAL Id: halshs-00004758 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00004758 Submitted on 30 Sep 2005 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Nominalization and its various uses in Thulung Rai1 Aimée Lahaussois LACITO-CNRS Villejuif, France The phenomenon of extensive nominalization in Sino-Tibetan languages is a pattern whose extent was first described by Matisoff for Lahu (Matisoff 1972), and has been described as typical for Sino-Tibetan nominalization (Bickel 1999), with the same morpheme found in languages throughout Tibeto-Burman for nominalization, relativization, and also sometimes to express a genitive relationship. For Lahu, this pattern is seen in the various uses of ve in the following examples (all from Matisoff 1972). Genitive 1. ŋà ve mí-ch I shoulder-bag ‘my shoulder-bag’ Relativization 2. và qhe chu ve Pîch-pā ô tê γâ pig as fat Shan that one person ‘That Shan over there who’s fat as a pig’ Nominalization 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Particle Verbs in Italian
    Particle Verbs in Italian Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades des Doktors der Philosophie an der Universit¨at Konstanz Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft vorgelegt von Quaglia, Stefano Tag der m ¨undlichen Pr ¨ufung: 23 Juni 2015 Referent: Professor Christoph Schwarze Referentin: Professorin Miriam Butt Referent: Professor Nigel Vincent Konstanzer Online-Publikations-System (KOPS) URL: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:352-0-376213 3 Zusammenfassung Die vorliegende Dissertation befasst sich mit italienischen Partikelverben (PV), d.h. Kon- struktionen die aus einem Verb und einer (meist r¨aumlicher) Partikel, wie andare fuori ‘hinaus-gehen’ oder buttare via ‘weg-schmeißen’. Solche komplexe Ausdr¨ucke sind in manchen Hinsichten interessant, erstmal sprachvergleichend, denn sie instantiieren eine morpho-syntaktische Struktur, die in germanischen Sprachen (wie Deutsch, Englisch, Schwedisch und Holl¨andisch) pervasiv ist, aber in den romanischen Sprachen nicht der- maßen ausgebaut ist. Da germanische Partikelverben Eingenschaften aufweisen, die zum Teil f¨ur die Morphologie, zum teil f¨ur die Syntax typisch sind, ist ihr Status in formalen Grammatiktheorien bestritten: werden PV im Lexikon oder in der Syntax gebaut? Dieselbe Frage stellt sich nat¨urlich auch in Bezug auf die italienischen Partikelverben, und anhand der Ergebnisse meiner Forschung komme ich zum Schluss, dass sie syntaktisch, und nicht morphologisch, zusammengestellt werden. Die Forschungsfragen aber die in Bezug auf das grammatische Verhalten italienischer Partikelverben von besonderem Interesse sind, betreffen auch Probleme der italienischen Syntax. In meiner Arbeit habe ich folgende Forschungsfragen betrachtet: (i) Kategorie und Klassifikation Italienischer Partikeln, (ii) deren Interaktion mit Verben auf argument- struktureller Ebene, (iii) strukturelle Koh¨asion zwischen Verb und Partikel und deren Repr¨asentation.
    [Show full text]
  • Verb Nominalization of Manggarai Language: the Case of Central Manggarai Dialect in West Flores Indonesia
    International Journal of Language and Literature June 2016, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 122-136 ISSN: 2334-234X (Print), 2334-2358 (Online) Copyright © The Author(s). 2015. All Rights Reserved. Published by American Research Institute for Policy Development DOI: 10.15640/ijll.v4n1a13 URL: https://doi.org/10.15640/ijll.v4n1a13 Verb Nominalization of Manggarai Language: The Case of Central Manggarai Dialect in West Flores Indonesia Agustinus Semiun1 & Kosmas Jeladu2 Abstract This paper presents nominalization process but concentrating on nominalizing verbs of central Manggarai dialect of Manggarai language in West Flores island Indonesia. The aim is to explain how verbs of the dialect are nominalized. By applying closed interview, observation and documentary techniques of qualitative approach, this paper present very valuable findings. Firstly, the Central Manggarai Dialect, has its own way to nominalize verbs but not by changing lexical verbs into lexical nouns. Secondly as shown by the data, the Central Manggarai Dialect performs seven types of verb nominalization like those presented by Comrie and Thompson in Shopen (2007) that is action nominalization, agentive nominalization, instrumental nominalization, manner nominalization, locative nominalization, objective nominalization, and reason nominalization. As seen in the content pages of this paper, Central Manggarai Dialect uses third singular possessive enclitics -n and third plural possessive –d to denote action nominalization, the free word ata is used to denote agentive nominalization, a bound marker or prefix -ter and free word palang denoting place nominalization, the free words le or ali, or wajole, or wajoali denoting reason nominalization. Interestingly to denote objective nominalization the verb it- self, with no certain marker or free word, is used.
    [Show full text]
  • Linguistic Background: an Outline of English Syntax
    Allen 1995: Chapter 2 - An Outline of English Syntax Allen 1995 : Natural Language Understanding Contents Preface Introduction previous Part I Part II Part III - Context / World next chapter chapter Knowledge Syntactic Processing Semantic Interpretation Appendices Bibliography Index Summaries Further Readings Exercises Chapter 2: Linguistic Background: An Outline of English Syntax 2.1 Words 2.2 The Elements of Simple Noun Phrases 2.3 Verb Phrases and Simple Sentences 2.4 Noun Phrases Revisited 2.5 Adjective Phrases 2.6 Adverbial Phrases Summary Related Work and Further Readings Exercises for Chapter 2 [Allen 1995: Linguistic Background: An Outline of English Syntax 23] http://www.uni-giessen.de/~g91062/Seminare/gk-cl/Allen95/al199502.htm (1 / 23) [2002-2-26 21:16:11] Allen 1995: Chapter 2 - An Outline of English Syntax This chapter provides background material on the basic structure of English syntax for those who have not taken any linguistics courses. It reviews the major phrase categories and identifies their most important subparts. Along the way all the basic word categories used in the book are introduced. While the only structures discussed are those for English, much of what is said applies to nearly all other European languages as well. The reader who has some background in linguistics can quickly skim this chapter, as it does not address any computational issues. You will probably want to use this chapter as a reference source as you work through the rest of the chapters in Part I. Section 2.1 describes issues related to words and word classes. Section 2.2 describes simple noun phrases, which are then used in Section 2.3 to describe simple verb phrases.
    [Show full text]
  • What Does the Copula Do? Kunio Nishiyama Cornell University, [email protected]
    University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics Volume 4 | Issue 2 Article 15 1-1-1997 What Does the Copula Do? Kunio Nishiyama Cornell University, [email protected] This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. http://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol4/iss2/15 For more information, please contact [email protected]. What Does the Copula Do? This working paper is available in University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics: http://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol4/ iss2/15 What Does the Copula Do?* Kunio Nishiyama 1. Introduction It is widely assumed in the literature on the copula that there are at least two kinds of copula (cf. Higgins 1973): (1) a. John is a boy. (predicative) b. Dr. Jekyll is Mr. Hyde. (equative) It is controversial whether these different usages should be treated differently or can be given a unified account, and this is not my concern here. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the syntactic structure of predicative copular sentences like (1a) from a crosslinguistic perspective. Since Bach (1967), it has often been claimed that the copula is a tense-supporter.1 For example, Rapoport (1987: 152ff) notes the following contrast: (2) a. I consider [Xeli a nut]. b. Xeli *(is) a nut. In a small clause structure like (2a), no copula is necessary, even though there seems to be a predication relation between Xeli and a nut. In the matrix sentence, however, the copula is necessary (2b). Since (2a) shows that the copula is not necessary for predication, Rapoport (1987: 157) claims that “[b]e is inserted to support the feature of INFL, in the cases above [2b] the features of tense ([- past]) and agreement.” According to this hypothesis, (3) is analyzed as (4): (3) Sal was strong.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 on Agent Nominalizations and Why They Are Not Like Event
    On agent nominalizations and why they are not like event nominalizations1 Mark C. Baker and Nadya Vinokurova Rutgers University and Research Institute of Humanities -Yakutsk Abstract: This paper focuses on agent-denoting nominalizations in various languages (e.g. the finder of the wallet), contrasting them with the much better studied action/event- denoting nominalizations. In particular, we show that in Sakha, Mapudungun, and English, agent-denoting nominalizations have none of the verbal features that event- denoting nominalizations sometimes have: they cannot contain adverbs, voice markers, expressions of aspect or mood, or verbal negation. An apparent exception to this generalization is that Sakha allows accusative-case marked objects in agentive nominalizations. We show that in fact the structure of agentive nominalizations in Sakha is as purely nominal as in other languages, and the difference is attributable to the rule of accusative case assignment. We explain these restrictions by arguing that agentive nominalizers have a semantics very much like the one proposed by Kratzer (1996) for Voice heads. Given this, the natural order of semantic composition implies that agentive nominalizers must combine directly with VP, just as Voice heads must. As a preliminary to testing this idea typologically, we show how a true agentive nominalization can be distinguished from a headless subject relative clause, illustrating with data from Mapudungun. We then present the results of a 34-language survey, showing that indeed none of these languages allow clause-like syntax inside a true agentive nominalization. We conclude that a generative-style investigation into the details of particular languages can be a productive source of things to look for in typological surveys.
    [Show full text]
  • Nominalizations, Agentless Passives, and Social Actor Mystification
    NOMINALIZATIONS, AGENTLESS PASSIVES, AND SOCIAL ACTOR MYSTIFICATION: NEWSPAPER EDITORIALS ON THE GREEK FINANCIAL CRISIS by WILLIAM ALAN LINGLE A thesis submitted to the University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of English Language and Applied Linguistics School of English, Drama and American & Canadian Studies College of Arts and Law University of Birmingham April 2017 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. Abstract Nominalization and agentless passives have attracted sustained attention in critical linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), where, it is argued, they ‘mystify’, i.e., reduce reader comprehension of, the role of social actors in depictions of events, particularly in news media discourse. Yet the capacity of readers to generate inferences automatically from textual cues and background information has not been adequately reflected in CDA accounts of reader cognition. The question of whether particular instances of nominalization or agentless passives actually reduce reader comprehension of social actors’ agentive roles was put to an empirical test by asking volunteer readers to identify social actors deleted from newspaper editorials by the addition of nominalization and agentless passives.
    [Show full text]
  • Noun Generation for Nominalization in Academic Writing
    Noun Generation for Nominalization in Academic Writing Dariush Saberi, John Lee Department of Linguistics and Translation City University of Hong Kong [email protected], [email protected] Abstract Previous studies on automatic manipulation of clausal structure have mostly concentrated on Nominalization is a common technique in aca- syntactic simplification, typically by splitting a demic writing for producing abstract and for- mal text. Since it often involves paraphras- complex sentence into two or more simple sen- ing a clause with a verb or adjectival phrase tences (Siddharthan, 2002; Alu´ısio et al., 2008; into a noun phrase, an important task is to Narayan and Gardent, 2014). More recent re- generate the noun to replace the original verb search has also attempted semi-automatic nomi- or adjective. Given that a verb or adjective nalization (Lee et al., 2018), which aims to para- may have multiple nominalized forms with phrase a complex clause into a simplex clause by similar meaning, the system needs to be able transforming verb or adjectival phrases into noun to automatically select the most appropriate one. We propose an unsupervised algorithm phrases. that makes the selection with BERT, a state- Noun generation is a core task in the nom- of-the-art neural language model. Experimen- inalization pipeline (Table2). Resources such tal results show that it significantly outper- as NOMLEX (Meyers et al., 1998) and CAT- forms baselines based on word frequencies, VAR (Habash and Dorr, 2003) have greatly facili- word2vec and doc2vec. tated this task by providing lists of related nouns, 1 Introduction verbs and adjectives.
    [Show full text]
  • Handout 1 (Writing): Nouns, Verbs, and Adjectives
    Communication in the Mathematical Sciences, Spring 2020 Handout 1 (Writing): Nouns, Verbs, and Adjectives Definitions Noun A person, place, or thing. The kinds of words that refer to things, people, and other nameable or conceivable entities. Examples: lily, hoax, telephone, bargain, idea, proof, theorem, terror, George Washington, conciousness. Verb An action word. The kinds of words which are inflected for tense and which often refer to an action or a state. Examples: He kicked the football. I thought I saw a pussycat. I am strong. Adjective A descriptive word. Typically refers to a property or state. Often it is a word you can put “very” in front of (but not always; exceptions include “major”, “additional”, etc.) Examples: big, round, red, afraid, gratuitous, hesitant, occupational. Nominalization A noun derived from a verb or an adjective. Examples: nominalize (verb) → nominalization Verb → Nominalization: discover → discovery resist → resistance react → reaction Adjective → Nominalization: careless → carelessness different → difference proficient → proficiency Exercises Exercise 1: Underline the nouns. 1) I love watching my cat play with the pink yarn. 2) It is raining! Everyone, grab your umbrella and rain hat and watch out for the puddles! 2) Our lack of data prevented evaluation of UN actions in targeting funds to areas most in need of assistance. Communication in the Mathematical Sciences, Spring 2020 Exercise 2: Underline the verbs. 1a) Once upon a time, as a walk through the woods was taking place on the part of Little Red Riding Hood, the Wolf's jump out from behind a tree occurred, causing her fright. 1b) Once upon a time, Little Red Riding Hood was walking through the woods, when the Wolf jumped out from behind a tree and frightened her.
    [Show full text]