DOCSLIB.ORG

Gapping: a Constraint-Based Syntax-Semantics Interface

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gapping: a Constraint-Based Syntax-Semantics Interface Gapping: A Constraint-Based Syntax-Semantics Interface by Sang-Hee Park September, 2019 A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the State University of New York at Buffalo in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Linguistics Copyright by Sang-Hee Park 2019 ii Approved as to style and content by: Rui P. Chaves, Co-Chair Jean-Pierre Koenig, Co-Chair Robert D. Van Valin, Jr., Member iii Abstract This dissertation takes a surface-based and semantic underspecification approach to ellipsis and offers an account of the syntax/semantics of Gapping sentences. These are sentences which consist of a full clause and an elliptical clause (called a gapped clause) that com- prises two or more remnant constituents (e.g., John read poems and [Mary novels]). The approach taken in this dissertation analyzes gapped clauses as a syntactic unit indepen- dent from coordination, and formalizes them as a flat construction that includes all and only surface constituents. The analysis is based on novel data which provides evidence about the occurrence of Gapping in non-coordinate structures, as well as data that is not easily reconcilable with traditional analyses that postulate underlying full syntactic struc- tures for gapped clauses. Phenomena that were previously attributed to the syntax of a putative underlying structure are explained to follow from constraints on surface structure. Furthermore, the various readings of gapped clauses are captured using semantic under- specification, combined with an independently motivated matching constraint that ensures semantic parallelism between gapped clauses and their respective source clauses. The analysis of gapped clauses proposed in this dissertation is shown to interact with a general theory of coordination to generate scope ambiguities between the conjunction and scopal elements in the first conjunct. Often, multiple different derivations are required to account for these ambiguities. This dissertation argues against the need for this type of derivational ambiguity, which is empirically unsupported. Instead, it is proposed that iv the scopally ambiguous readings of Gapping sentences result from various ways of re- solving a single underspecified meaning, associated with a single syntactic analysis. This constraint-based, surface-oriented approach to Gapping accounts for phenomena that were problematic in other approaches. v Acknowledgements First and foremost, I would like to thank my advisors Rui Chaves and Jean-Pierre Koenig for their continuous support and guidance throughout my PhD. Rui Chaves reignited my interest in ellipsis when I was looking for a topic for my dissertation. Since then he has been infinitely generous with his ideas and advice, and has always been quick to respond even to half-baked ideas. Every meeting with him was a source of inspiration and motivation for me to explore new ideas and to push myself to greater depth and clarity of thoughts. His profound knowledge and interest in ellipsis and coordination, and his support and enthusiasm have been instrumental in carrying out this research. As anyone who writes a dissertation on ellipsis would say, I feel privileged and fortunate to have had him as my advisor. My sincere gratitude also goes to Jean-Pierre Koenig. His ways of approaching and solving linguistic problems have always impressed me, and his sharp insight and deep knowledge about just any aspect of language and linguistics have tremendously improved my work. In every meeting I had with him, he challenged me with probing questions, came up with solutions to the problems I had, and put me onto the literature I needed – with incredible understanding and patience. I am particularly grateful for his encouragement to explore more aspects of the semantics of Gapping (using my “cradar”), which shaped this dissertation in innumerable ways. I would also like to thank him for all those late-night discussions over Skype when we were working in different time zones. vi I am extremely grateful to my other committee member, Robert Van Valin, too. I benefited a lot from interacting with him in his seminars and individual meetings. His interest in my term paper on Gapping and his wonderful suggestions for extending the paper into future work have been invaluable in developing this dissertation. I also thank him for reading very carefully through the manuscript and providing helpful feedback and suggestions in later stages of this research. In addition to my committee members, my dissertation owes a great deal to many other people. I would like to thank my colleagues Hanno Beck, Erika Bellingham, Braden Brown, Thomas Diaz, Richard Hatcher, Ali Lawson, Aron Marvel and Thomas St. Pierre for their company, discussions and for their generosity in sharing their intuitions with me. Looking for something that is unspoken in a non-native language might have been much more challenging than it was if it had not been for their help. A special thanks is due to Hanno Beck for reading and commenting on earlier versions of this work, and also for numerous conversations over the years. I also thank my other colleagues Yoshihiko Asao, Rebecca Calvetti, Shea Gabriel, Dawei Jin and Hao Sun for their intellectual and emotional support which enriched my experience at UB. I owe a debt of gratitude to my teachers I had at Duksung Women’s University and Seoul National University. I am immensely grateful to Prof. Hee-Cheol Yoon for igniting my interest in linguistics during my undergraduate study at Duksung Women’s University. I would also like to thank Prof. Eun-Jung Yoo for her guidance and kind encouragement during my study at Seoul National University and continuously since then. I had the privilege of presenting earlier versions of this work at a number of confer- ences. I am especially thankful to the reviewers and audiences at HPSG 25 (The University of Tokyo) and at Sinn und Bedeutung 23 (Universitat Autonoma` de Barcelona) for their helpful feedback. I am also grateful to Kyle Johnson, Frank Richter and Manfred Sailer for their comments on earlier versions of parts of this study. vii My life in Buffalo would not have been so fulfilled without my friends Oksana Yefim- chuk and Jung-a Yi who always provided me a home away home. Oksana, I thank you for your support and friendship all along, and I will truly miss the times I spent with you in Buffalo. Jung-a, thank you for the chats and delicious food, and for your smile that made my days more beautiful. Last but not least, I am deeply thankful to my family for their support and trust in me. Without their understanding and sacrifice, I could not have pursued, nor finished, this long adventure. Finally, I would like to thank my husband Hyun-Cheol Park for his unfailing love and support. We met shortly before I started my masters, and he has always been so encouraging and understanding of my academic pursuit, even when we were continents apart. And now, I am so happy to be there for you, Hyun-Cheol, and I’m excited about the new life chapter we’re starting together! viii Contents Abstract iv Acknowledgements vi 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Phenomenon Overview . .2 1.1.1 Basic features of Gapping . .3 1.1.2 Gapping and other types of ellipsis . 15 1.2 Main Contributions and Claims . 20 1.3 Outline . 21 2 On the Distribution of Gapping 23 2.1 Putative Syntactic Conditions . 24 2.1.1 Gapping and coordination . 24 2.1.2 Embedded Gapping . 32 2.2 Consequences for Theories of Gapping . 38 2.2.1 vP coordination accounts . 39 2.2.2 Syntactic ambiguity accounts . 43 2.2.3 Categorial Grammar accounts . 47 2.2.4 Fragment-based accounts . 52 ix 2.2.5 Interim Summary . 56 2.3 Information Structure . 57 2.3.1 Focus and QUD . 57 2.3.2 Gapped clauses as answers to an implicit QUD . 60 2.4 Summary . 66 3 Theoretical Background 67 3.1 Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar . 67 3.2 Semantic underspecification . 72 3.3 Lexical Resource Semantics . 76 4 Gapped Clauses as Fragments 90 4.1 Introduction . 91 4.2 Problems for Reductionist Accounts . 93 4.2.1 Problems with deletion-based accounts . 93 4.2.2 Problems with Johnson’s movement-based analysis . 99 4.2.3 Lack of locality effects . 101 4.3 General Approach . 104 4.3.1 KOS: A theory of discourse . 105 4.3.2 Fragments in Ginzburg & Sag (2000) . 106 4.3.3 Syntactic parallelism . 112 4.4 An HPSG of Gapped Clauses . 118 4.4.1 Some additional assumptions . 119 4.4.2 A new construction type for gapped clauses: gap-ph ........ 121 4.5 Summary . 132 x 5 On the Interaction between Gapping and Scopal Operators 133 5.1 The Scope Ambiguity Puzzle . 134 5.1.1 Basic data . 136 5.1.2 Constructions that allow for Gapping scope ambiguity . 139 5.2 Against Syntactic Ambiguity . 141 5.3 An Account Based on Semantic Underspecification . 145 5.3.1 A type-driven semantics for the Gapping scope ambiguity . 146 5.3.2 The semantics of coordination . 150 5.4 Gapping: HPSG Syntax-Semantics Interface . 152 5.4.1 Coordinate structures . 152 5.4.2 Scope ambiguity in conjunctive Gapping . 161 5.5 Summary . 171 6 Summary and Conclusion 172 6.1 Summary of Contributions . 172 6.2 Future Research . 173 Bibliography 176 xi Chapter 1 Introduction Academic science can sometimes feel like self inflicted torture when that ex- periment just won’t work. Everybody deals with it in different ways. Some turn to partners, others to alcohol and some just throw their lives at a problem.1 This dissertation is concerned with Gapping – elliptical sentences consisting of a gapped clause (exemplified by the underlined string above) and a preceding source clause which provides the interpretation for the missing material in the gapped clause.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Syncom.Sluicing
    SynCom Case 98 Sluicing Jason Merchant University of Chicago August 2003 Contents 1. Introduction 2. Movement vs. non-movement approaches 3. Theoretical consequences 3.1. Non-movement approaches 3.2. Movement approaches 4. Puzzles and prospects 4.1. Sluicing-COMP generalization puzzles 4.2. Sluicing in non-wh-in-specCP languages 4.3. Multiple sluicing 4.4. Swiping 5. Conclusion References Glossary 1. Introduction Sluicing is the ellipsis phenomenon illustrated in (1), in which the sentential portion of a constituent question is elided, leaving only a wh-phrase remnant. (1) a. Jack bought something, but I don’t know what. b. A: Someone called. B: Really? Who? c. Beth was there, but you’ll never guess who else. d. Jack called, but I don’t know {when/how/why/where from}. e. Sally’s out hunting — guess what! f. A car is parked on the lawn — find out whose. The sluices in (1) should be compared to their non-elliptical counterparts in (2), with which they are synonymous. (2) a. Jack bought something, but I don’t know what he bought. b. A: Someone called. B: Really? Who called? c. Beth was there, but you’ll never guess who else was there. d. Jack called, but I don’t know {when/how/why} he called. e. Sally’s out hunting — guess what she’s out hunting! f. A car is parked on the lawn — find out whose is parked on the lawn. Sluicing appears to be widespread cross-linguistically (unlike VP-ellipsis), and may in fact be found in some form or another in every language (like nominal ellipses, 1 gapping, stripping, and fragment answers).
    [Show full text]
  • Gapping: in Defense of Deletion
    Gapping: In Defense of Deletion Elizabeth Coppock Northwestern University 1 Introduction Gapping refers to the following type of construction: (1) [α John likes caviar] and [γ Mary beans]. Typically, Gapping involves two such conjoined clauses, where the second clause contains no pronounced verbal material, as in (1). Following usual terminology, I call the missing material the Gap, the first clause (e.g. α) the antecedent clause, the second clause (e.g. γ) the gapped clause, and the pronounced elements of the gapped clause remnants. Assuming that the Gap is present somehow in the syntax, we have three potential analyses, depending on the nature of the Gap. We may interpret it as (i) a null pro-form, (ii) a deleted element, or (iii) a trace of movement. I immediately rule out possibility (i), following Hankamer and Sag (1976), who argue that Gaps are Surface Anaphors as opposed to Deep Anaphors (i.e. null pro-forms), based on their Island sensitivity and the fact that they require a linguistic antecedent. The second idea (deletion) is as old as the term Gapping. The first detailed investigation of the phenomenon was in Rosss 1967 dissertation, where he coined its name, and gave a deletion analysis. In 1976, Sag suggested that the remnants A'-move out of the gapped clause before deletion, preserving the hypothesis that operations (such as deletion) affect entire constituents. My proposal is essentially Sags, differing significantly only in the assumption that remnants adjoin to VP, rather than at the sentence level, as in (2).1 (2) John likes caviar, and [VP Mary1 [VP beans2 [VP t1 likes t2 ] ] ]].
    [Show full text]
  • Treatment of Multiword Expressions and Compounds in Bulgarian
    Treatment of Multiword Expressions and Compounds in Bulgarian Petya Osenova and Kiril Simov Linguistic Modelling Deparment, IICT-BAS Acad. G. Bonchev 25A, 1113 Sofia, Bulgaria [email protected] and [email protected] Abstract 2012)), we will adopt the Multiword Expressions The paper shows that catena represen- classification, presented in (Sag et al., 2001). They tation together with valence information divide them into two groups: lexicalized phrases can provide a good way of encoding and institutionalized phrases. The former are fur- Multiword Expressions (beyond idioms). ther subdivided into fixed-expressions, semi-fixed It also discusses a strategy for mapping expressions and syntactically-flexible expressions. noun/verb compounds with their counter- Fixed expressions are said to be fully lexicalized part syntactic phrases. The data on Mul- and undergoing neither morphosyntactic variation tiword Expression comes from BulTree- nor internal modification. Semi-fixed expressions Bank, while the data on compounds comes have a fixed word order, but “undergo some degree from a morphological dictionary of Bul- of lexical variation, e.g. in the form of inflection, garian. variation in reflexive form, and determiner selec- tion” (non-decomposable idioms, proper names). 1 Introduction Syntactically-flexible expressions show more vari- Our work is based on the annotation of Multi- ation in their word order (light verb constructions, word Expressions (MWE) in the Bulgarian tree- decomposable idioms). We follow the understand- bank — BulTreeBank (Simov et al., 2004). We ing of (O’Grady, 1998) that MWEs have their in- use this representation for parsing and analysis of ternal syntactic structure which needs to be rep- compounds. BulTreeBank exists in two formats: resented in the lexicon as well as in the sentence HPSG-based (original - constituent-based with analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Observations on the Hebrew Desiderative Construction – a Dependency-Based Account in Terms of Catenae1
    Thomas Groß Some Observations on the Hebrew Desiderative Construction – A Dependency-Based Account in Terms of Catenae1 Abstract The Modern Hebrew (MH) desiderative construction must obey four conditions: 1. A subordinate clause headed by the clitic še= ‘that’ must be present. 2. The verb in the subordinate clause must be marked with future tense. 3. The grammatical properties genus, number, and person tend to be specified, i.e. if the future tense affix is underspecified, material tends to appear that aids specification, if contextual recovery is unavailable. 4. The units of form that make up the constructional meaning of the desiderative must qualify as a catena. A catena is a dependency-based unit of form, the parts of which are immediately continuous in the vertical dimension. The description of the individual parts of the desiderative must address trans-, pre-, and suffixes, and cliticization. Catena-based morphology is representational, monostratal, dependency-, construction-, and piece-based. 1. Purpose, means and claims The main purpose of this paper is to analyze the Hebrew desiderative construction. This construction is linguistically interesting and challenging for a number of reasons. 1. It is a periphrastic construction, with fairly transparent compositionality. 2. It is transclausal, i.e. some parts of the construction reside in the main clause, and others in the subordinated clause. The complementizer is also part of the construction. 3. The construction consists of more than one word, but it does not qualify as a constituent. Rather the construction cuts into words. 4. Two theoretically 1 I want to thank Outi Bat-El (Tel Aviv University) and three anonymous reviewers for their help and advice.
    [Show full text]
  • On Pseudogapping in HPSG*
    On Pseudogapping in HPSG* Dong-woo Park Department of Laguage and Literature, Seoul National University 599 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul 151-742, Korea [email protected] Abstract. This study investigates the constraints imposed on the pseudogapping in the framework of Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG). Based on the existing schema to account for coordination and gapping, a new pseudogapping schema in coordination structures is proposed in this paper. In the process of capturing the constraints, new DOM lists are added and an existing DOM list is divided into two DOM lists depending on the feature of elements in each domain. Furthermore, new features SEP and INC are introduced. SEP is used for distinguishing prepositions which should be located in the same domain with the following NPs from those which can be separated from the following NPs. INC feature determines whether overlapping adverbs are in non-empty lists or not. Pseudogapping occurs not only in coordination structures, but in comparative or subordination structures. Thus, this paper introduces a pseudogapping schema that can be applied to all structures mentioned above. Keywords: DOM lists, SEP feature, INC feature, pseudogapping schema. 1 Introduction English has ellipsis like these examples. (1) a. Sluicing: She read something, but she won’t say what [vP ]. b. Verb Phrase Ellipsis: She read something and he did [vP ] too. c. Pseudogapping: She’ll read something to Sam, but she won’t [vP ] to Billy. d. Gapping: Some read something to Sam and others [vP ] to Billy. e. Right Node Raising: She deliberately [vP ], and he accidentally, read something.
    [Show full text]
  • Gapping and Stripping
    Gapping and Stripping Gapping and Stripping Kyle Johnson The Oxford Handbook of Ellipsis Edited by Jeroen van Craenenbroeck and Tanja Temmerman Print Publication Date: Dec 2018 Subject: Linguistics, Morphology and Syntax Online Publication Date: Jan 2019 DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198712398.013.24 Abstract and Keywords The chapter looks at the main attempts to model two constructions: gapping and strip­ ping. It reviews the ways in which these constructions are similar, exploring the thesis that they both stem from the same underlying process. One of those shared properties is their restriction to coordinations—a restriction that is not found elsewhere in the menagerie of ellipsis constructions. Methods of tying this restriction to the similarly gap­ ping/stripping-specific constraint against embedding the ellipsis or its antecedent are ex­ amined. The chapter focuses on the shortcomings of previous attempts to explain these conditions, and their counter-examples, and points to new directions of analysis that seem promising. Keywords: gapping, stripping, ellipsis, coordination, movement, small conjuncts, large conjuncts 23.1 Introduction THIS chapter looks at two constructions which are sometimes characterized as involving ellipsis. One is known as gapping, a name Ross (1970) suggested. And the other is vari­ ously known as stripping or Bare Argument Ellipsis.1 An example of gapping is (1), and stripping is illustrated by (2). (1) (2) The second conjunct of (1) is understood to have the same verb that the first conjunct has: likes. Similarly, in the second conjunct of (2), there is understood to be both a verb and a subject, each identical to those found in the first conjunct: Jones likes.
    [Show full text]
  • Transformational Grammarians and Other Paradoxes Abstract Keywords
    Barcelona, 8-9 September 2011 Transformational Grammarians and other Paradoxes Thomas Groß Aichi University 1 Machihata-cho 1-1, Toyohashi-shi, Aichi-ken, Japan [email protected] Abstract This paper argues that morphs can/should be granted node status in tree structures. Most theories of morphology do not do this. For instance, word-based morphologies (Anderson 1992 and others) see inflectional affixes appearing post-syntactically, producing a specific word form based on paradigmatic rules. On the other hand, derivational affixes attach prior to syntax. So-called “bracketing paradoxes” (Williams 1981, Pesetsky 1985, Spencer 1988, Sproat 1988, Beard 1991, Stump 1991) such as transformational grammarian concern primarily derivational affixes (here: -ian). If a theory can avoid bracketing (or structural) paradoxes by maintaining an entirely surface-based account, then this theory should be preferred over competing theories that posit different levels or strata in order to explain the same phenomenon. This contribution demonstrates that such a surface-based account is possible if the catena is acknowledged. The catena is a novel unit of syntax and morphosyntax that exists solely in the vertical dominance dimension. Keywords Bracketing paradox, catena, morph catena 1 Introduction (Williams 1981:219f) is credited with introducing “bracketing paradoxes” to theoretical linguistics. He puts forth examples such as the following: (1) a. hydroelectricity (2) a. Gödel numbering (3) a. atomic scientist For example (1a) Williams posits the next structure: (1) b. [hydro-[electric-ity]] The problem with (1b), Williams realizes, is that the structure cannot provide the adjective hydroelectric because the prefix and the root do not appear within a bracket that excludes the suffix.
    [Show full text]
  • Gapping Is VP-Ellipsis: a Reply to Johnson∗
    Gapping is VP-ellipsis: A reply to Johnson∗ Maziar Toosarvandani Massachusetts Institute of Technology October 8, 2012 Abstract Johnson (2009) argues that the gapping — e.g. Some had ordered mussels, and others swordfish— does not arise through VP-ellipsis because gapping has properties that VP-ellipsis does not. He proposes instead that the gap in gapping arises through ‘low coordination’ and across-the-board movement. I first show that Johnson’s across-the-board movement ac- count fails to generate gapping in coordination structures with corrective but (Vicente 2010, Toosarvandani, to appear-b). I then revive a version of the ellipsis account in which VP-ellipsis applies to low-coordination structures. This correctly generates gapping in corrective but sen- tences. Once the information-structural properties of low coordinations are taken into con- sideration— low coordinates must have parallel focus structures— it also derives the unique properties of gapping. 1 Introduction Gapping is the elliptical construction where the locus of finiteness in the clause (T and its host)goes missing—possibly, along with more—in the second and subsequent coordinates of a coordination. This leaves behind one or more remnants:1 (1) Some had ordered mussels, and others swordfish. In (1), T is realized on the perfect aspect auxiliary, which disappears in the second coordinate, along with everything else but the two DP remnants others and swordfish. Gapping bears a striking resemblance to pseudogapping, the elliptical construction in (2), which also strands one or more remnants, though it does not remove T. (2) Some had ordered mussels, and others had swordfish.
    [Show full text]
  • Class 2: Corpus-Based Studies on Ellipsis and English Gapping
    Corpus-based studies motivation Previous corpus studies PTB and ellipsis annotation Gapping in PTB Empirical Approaches to Elliptical Constructions Class 2: Corpus-based studies on ellipsis and English gapping Gabriela Bîlbîie1 and Anne Abeillé2 1University of Bucharest [email protected] 2Université Paris Diderot-Paris 7 [email protected] LSA 2017 Linguistic Institute 10 July 2017, University of Kentucky 1 / 76 N Corpus-based studies motivation Previous corpus studies PTB and ellipsis annotation Gapping in PTB Class 2 – Content 1 Corpus-based studies motivation 2 Previous corpus studies Meyer (1995) Greenbaum & Nelson (1999) Harbusch & Kempen (2011) 3 PTB and ellipsis annotation 4 Gapping in PTB Missing material Remnants 2 / 76 N Corpus-based studies motivation Previous corpus studies PTB and ellipsis annotation Gapping in PTB Plan 1 Corpus-based studies motivation 2 Previous corpus studies Meyer (1995) Greenbaum & Nelson (1999) Harbusch & Kempen (2011) 3 PTB and ellipsis annotation 4 Gapping in PTB Missing material Remnants 3 / 76 N Corpus-based studies motivation Previous corpus studies PTB and ellipsis annotation Gapping in PTB Ellipsis – a challenge for grammar Ellipsis : a form/meaning mismatch (significatio ex nihilo) 1 part of the material necessary for the interpretation is missing in the syntactic structure (’incomplete’ syntax) ; 2 the missing material is recovered from an antecedent in the context. Descriptive problem : A mass of elliptical constructions, on the basis of several criteria, e.g. syntactic function of the missing material (head or dependent), syntactic context (coordination, subordination ; dialogue), ellipsis directionnality (forward vs. backward ellipsis). ⇒ Sometimes, unstable terminology. Theoretical problem : A plethora of competitive analyses, with respect to the level at which reconstruction of the missing material takes place : syntactic reconstruction vs.
    [Show full text]
  • A Survey of Ellipsis in Chinese
    A Survey of Ellipsis in Chinese Timothy Osborne Junying Liang Zhejiang University Zhejiang University Hangzhou Hangzhou China China [email protected] [email protected] see which ellipsis mechanisms are and are not Abstract present. The analysis of ellipsis pursued below is de- Much work on ellipsis has been conducted pendency-based, and the catena unit plays a cen- using data from English, and many widely tral role in the account. A catena is a word or acknowledged types of ellipsis exist in Eng- combination of words that are linked together by lish. The extent to which the named ellipsis dependencies (Osborne et al. 2012). Ellipsis me- mechanisms exist in other languages is, chanisms in English have been shown to elide though, often not clear. This manuscript sur- veys ellipsis in Mandarin Chinese using a catenae. The survey seeks to determine the extent dependency-based approach to syntax. It to which the catena is also the central unit for a probes to see which ellipsis mechanisms exist theory of ellipsis in Mandarin. in Mandarin. The survey demonstrates that This contribution thus pursues three goals: 1) gapping, stripping, pseudogapping, sluicing, provide an initial exploration of ellipsis in Man- and comparative deletion do not exist in darin, 2) determine the extent to which the catena Mandarin (or are highly restricted) and that unit can serve as the basis for a theory of Manda- VP-ellipsis, answer ellipsis, and N-ellipsis are rin ellipsis, and 3) consider what can be learned all arguably present. Furthermore, zero ana- about ellipsis in general from a comparison of phora is frequent in Mandarin, whereas it is ellipsis mechanisms across English and Manda- absent from English (or highly restricted).
    [Show full text]
  • Filling in the Gaps: Assessing Syntactic & Semantic Approaches
    Filling in the Gaps: Assessing Syntactic & Semantic Approaches to Gapping by Nathaniel Little Advisor: Prof. Robert Frank Department of Linguistics, Yale University 1 May 2010 Little 2 Acknowledgments This thesis would not be possible except for the efforts of a number of wonderful people, to whom I am deeply indebted. My first and foremost thanks goes to my advisor, Robert Frank: first, for introducing me to the strange worlds of gapping and CCG, and foremost, for his inspiration, enthusiasm and (perhaps most of all) patience throughout the past two years, ever since I walked into “Compositional Syntax” as an optimistic junior in fall 2009. Without Professor Frank, I would not be where I am today, and to him I am extraordinarily grateful. A big “thank you” is also due to Raffaella Zanuttini, who has been a constant and steady source of assistance and encouragement. Her depth of knowledge has had an immense impact on my study of syntax and language at Yale. Further thanks go to my fellow seniors in linguistics; their support – both intellectual and emotional – offered a necessary respite from the trials, travails and tribulations of our final year together. Additionally, I would like to thank my friends; their tolerance for, and occasional genuine interest in, my extended gapping-related pontifications, gave me a forum to sharpen my own understanding of the topic. Their care and friendship certainly didn’t hurt, either. Finally, I would like to thank my family. To my parents, Lynn and Bruce Little; my brother, Chris; my sisters, Kattie and Carrie: thank you for your love, support and everything else throughout all these years! Little 3 Table of Contents Acknowledgments................
    [Show full text]
  • Goal Means Date Initiated Date Ended Extent Results
    Articles revised and expanded Adjunct (grammar) Increasing Exposure to Dependency Answer ellipsis Adjective phrase Adjunct (grammar) Antecedent contained… Antecedent-contained deletion Argument (linguistics) Argument (linguistics) Auxiliary verb Auxiliary verb Grammar via Wikipedia Branching (linguistics) Branching (linguistics) Catena (linguistics) Clause Timothy Osborne Clause Comparative Complement (linguistics) Complement (linguistics) Constituent (linguistics) Constituent (linguistics) Control (linguistics) Control (linguistics) Coordination (linguistics) Coordination (linguistics) Goal Means Extent Results Dependent-marking… Dependency grammar Date initiated Discontinuity (linguistics) Do-support Do-support Dependent-marking language To increase The number of page Ellipsis (linguistics) Create, revise, and November 2011 More than 70 articles Ellipsis (linguistics) Exceptional case-marking Endocentric exposure views for the articles Extrap. Exceptional case-marking expand Wikipedia were impacted Finite verb Date ended Gapping Finite verb touched by the Gapping to DG using articles on syntax by the initiative. Government (linguistics) Government (linguistics) March 2013 Grammatical relation Grammatical relation initiative has increased Head (linguistics) Head (linguistics) Wikipedia and grammar, Idiom Head-marking language significantly. Immediate constituent… Idiom Inverse copular… Immediate constituent adding the DG Inversion (linguistics) Lexical item analysis Inverse copular Light verb constructions Inversion Merge (linguistics)
    [Show full text]