DOCSLIB.ORG

German Prepositions and Their Kin. a Survey with Respect to the Resolution

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
German Prepositions and Their Kin. a Survey with Respect to the Resolution German prepositions and their kin. A survey with respect to the resolution of PP attachment ambiguities Martin Volk Stockholm University Department of Linguistics SE-10691 Stockholm [email protected] Abstract weekly computer science newspaper. In ad- This paper surveys German prepositions dition to this training corpus, we prepared and their relatives: contracted prepositions, a 3000 sentence corpus with manually an- pronominal adverbs, and reciprocal pro- notated syntax trees. From this treebank nouns. We elaborate on corpus frequencies we extracted over 4000 test cases with am- for these and on their properties with respect biguously positioned PPs for the evaluation to PP attachment. We show that prepo- of the disambiguation method. We will call sitions and contracted prepositions can be these test cases the ‘CZ test set’. handled together. They show an overall at- As a basis for this study we surveyed Ger- tachment tendency towards the noun. But man prepositions and their relatives and we pronominal adverbs and reciprocal pronouns checked for prepositions, contracted prepo- show an overall attachment tendency to- sitions, pronominal adverbs and reciprocal wards the verb and therefore must be treated pronouns whether they can mutually benefit separately.1 from each other with respect to attachment Keywords: Corpus linguistics, ambigu- tendencies. ity resolution, unsupervised learning 2 German prepositions 1 Introduction Prepositions in German are a class of words Any computer system for natural language relating linguistic elements to each other processing has to struggle with the problem with respect to a semantic dimension such of ambiguities. If the system is meant to ex- as local, temporal, causal or modal. They tract precise information from a text, these do not inflect and cannot function by them- ambiguities must be resolved. One of the selves as a sentence unit (cf. [Bußmann, most frequent ambiguities arises from the at- 1990]). But, unlike other function words, a tachment of prepositional phrases (PPs). A German preposition governs the grammati- PP that follows a noun (in English or Ger- cal case of its argument (genitive, dative or man) can be attached to the noun or to the accusative). Frequent German prepositions verb. We did an in-depth study on unsu- are an, f¨ur,in, mit, zwischen. pervised statistical methods to resolve such Prepositions are considered to be a closed ambiguities in German sentences based on word class. Nevertheless it is difficult to de- cooccurrence values derived from a shallow termine the exact number of German prepo- parsed corpus (see [Volk, 2001] and [Volk, sitions. [Schr¨oder, 1990] speaks of “more 2002]). than 200 prepositions”, but his “Lexikon Corpus processing consisted of proper deutscher Pr¨apositionen” lists only 110 of name recognition and classification, Part- them. In this dictionary all entries are of-Speech tagging, lemmatization, phrase marked with their case requirement and chunking, and clause boundary detection. their semantic features. For instance, ohne We used a corpus of more than 5 million requires the accusative and is marked with words from the Computer-Zeitung (CZ), a the semantic functions instrumental, modal, conditional and part-of.2 1This paper is based on my research at the Uni- 2 versity of Zurich in a project supported by the See also [Klaus, 1999] for a detailed comparison Swiss National Science Foundation under grant 12- of the range of German prepositions as listed in a 54106.98. number of recent grammar books. The lexical database CELEX [Baayen et The most frequent homographic func- al., 1995] contains 108 German prepositions tions are separable verb prefix and conjunc- with frequency counts derived from corpora tion. Fortunately, these functions are clearly of the “Institut f¨urdeutsche Sprache”. This marked by their position within the clause. results in the arbitrary inclusion of n¨ordlich, A clause conjunction usually occurs at the nord¨ostlich,s¨udlich while ¨ostlich and west- beginning of a clause, and a separated verb lich are missing. prefix mostly occurs at the end of a clause Searching through 5.5 million tokens of (rechte Satzklammer). A part-of-speech tag- our tagged computer magazine corpus we ger can therefore disambiguate these cases.5 found around 540,000 preposition tokens Typical (i.e. frequent) prepositions are corresponding to 99 preposition types.3 monomorphemic words (e.g. an, auf, f¨ur,in, These counts do not include contracted mit, ¨uber, von, zwischen). Many of the less prepositions. A list of the 66 most frequent frequent prepositions are derived or complex. German prepositions with frequencies from They have turned into prepositions over time our corpus can be found in appendix A. and still show traces of their origin. They are An early frequency count for German by derived from other parts-of-speech such as [Meier, 1964] lists 18 prepositions among the 100 most frequent word forms. 17 out of ² nouns (e.g. angesichts, zwecks), these 18 prepositions are also in our top-20 list. Only gegen is missing which is on rank ² adjectives (e.g. fern, unweit), 23 in our corpus. This means that the usage ² participle forms of verbs (e.g. of the most frequent prepositions is stable entsprechend, w¨ahrend; ungeachtet), or over corpora and time. All frequent prepositions in German have ² lexicalized prepositional phrases (e.g. some homograph serving as anhand, aufgrund, zugunsten). ² separable verb prefix (e.g. ab, auf, mit, German prepositions typically do not al- zu), low compounding. It is generally not possi- 4 ble to form a new preposition by a concate- ² clause conjunction (e.g. bis, um) , nation of prepositions. The two exceptions ² adverb (e.g. auf, f¨ur,¨uber) in often id- are gegen¨uber and mitsamt. Other concate- iomatic expressions (e.g. auf und davon, nated prepositions have led to adverbs like ¨uber und ¨uber), inzwischen, mitunter, zwischendurch. [Helbig and Buscha, 1998] call the ² infinitive marker (zu), monomorphemic prepositions primary ² proper name component (von), or prepositions and the derived preposi- tions secondary prepositions. This ² predicative adjective (e.g. an, auf, aus, distinction is based on the fact that only in, zu as in Die Maschine ist an/aus. primary prepositions form prepositional Die T¨urist auf/zu.). objects, pronominal adverbs (cf. section 2.2) 3These figures are based on automatically as- and prepositional reciprocal pronouns (cf. signed part-of-speech tags. If the tagger systemat- section 2.3). ically mistagged a preposition, the counting proce- In addition, this distinction corresponds dure does not find it. In the course of the project to different case requirements. The primary we realized that this happened to the prepositions prepositions govern accusative (durch, f¨ur, a, via and voller as used in the following example gegen, ohne, um) or dative (aus, bei, mit, sentences (all examples in this paper are from the Computer-Zeitung, Konradin-Verlag, 1993-1997). nach, von, zu) or both (an, auf, hinter, in, (1) Derselbe Service in der Regionalzone (bis neben, ¨uber, unter, vor, zwischen). Most zu 50 Kilometern) kostet 23 Pfennig a 60 of the secondary prepositions govern gen- Sekunden. itive (angesichts, bez¨uglich, dank). Some (2) Master und Host kommunizieren via IPX. 5Note the high degree of ambiguity for zu which (3) Windows steckt voller eigener Fehler. can be a preposition zu ihm, a separated verb prefix sie sieht ihm zu, the infinitive marker ihn zu sehen, a 4[Jaworska, 1999] (p. 306) argues that “clause- predicative adjective das Fenster ist zu, an adjectival introducing preposition-like elements are indeed or adverb marker zu gross, zu sehr, or the ordinal prepositions”. number marker sie kommen zu zweit. prepositions (most notably w¨ahrend) are in the probability estimates in [Ratnaparkhi, the process of changing from genitive to da- 1998] except that Ratnaparkhi includes a tive. Some prepositions do not show overt back-off to the uniform distribution for the case requirements (je, pro, per; cf. [Schaeder, zero denominator case. We added special 1998]) and are used with determiner-less precautions for this case in our disambigua- noun phrases. tion algorithm. The cooccurrence values are Some prepositions show other idiosyncra- also very similar to the probability estimates cies. The preposition bis often takes another in [Hindle and Rooth, 1993]. preposition (in, um, zu as in 4) or combines We started by computing the cooccur- with the particle hin plus a preposition (as rence values over word forms for nouns, in 5). The preposition zwischen is special in prepositions, and verbs based on their part- that it requires a plural argument (as in 6), of-speech tags. In order to compute the pair often realized as a coordination of NPs (as frequencies freq(N1;P ), we search the train- in 7). ing corpus for all token pairs in which a noun is immediately followed by a preposi- (4) Portables mit 486er-Prozessor tion. The treatment of verb + preposition werden bis zu 20 Prozent billiger. cooccurrences is different from the treatment of N+P pairs since verb and preposition are (5) ... und ber¨ucksichtigtauch Daten seldom adjacent to each other in a German und Datentypen bis hin zu Arrays sentence. On the contrary, they can be far oder den Records im VAX-Fortran. apart from each other, the only restriction (6) Die Verbindungstopologie zwischen being that they cooccur within the same den Prozessoren l¨aßtsich als clause. We use the clause boundary infor- dreidimensionaler Torus darstellen. mation in our training corpus to enforce this restriction. For computing the cooccurrence (7) Durch Microsoft Access m¨ussensich values we accept only verbs and nouns with die Anwender nicht mehr l¨anger an occurrence frequency of more than 10. zwischen Bedienerfreundlich- With the N+P and V+P cooccurrence val- keit und Leistung entscheiden. ues for word forms we did a first evaluation over the CZ test set with the following sim- Results for PP attachment ple disambiguation algorithm.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Subject Relatives and Expletives in Early New High German
    Subject Relatives and Expletives in Early New High German CAITLIN LIGHT University of Pennsylvania Introduction The status of the subject position in German has been the source of some de- bate.1 For example, some studies (Biberauer 2004; Richards and Biberauer 2005) have argued that German does not have an EPP requirement in the traditional sense. The absence of an expletive that occurs specifically in the subject position (as op- posed to the topic position in Spec,CP) seems to support the argument that Spec,TP has no special status in German. This paper will argue against such analyses, and show that in historical stages of German, we see evidence of a subject expletive licensed specifically to fill Spec,TP. This expletive, da in Early New High German (ENHG), is merged specifically when the logical subject does not move to Spec,TP, leaving the position empty. This sup- ports a traditional analysis of the EPP in German. Furthermore, I will show that the existence of expletive da lends support to the argument that two (non-topic) sub- ject positions are available in the German clause structure (cf. Haeberli 1999, 2000, 2005), which I take to be Spec,TP and Spec,vP (the base position of the subject). This study is based on data from a parsed corpus of Martin Luther’s Septem- bertestament, a translation of the New Testament published in 1522. Luther in- tended for his Bible translation to be accessible to a wide audience, and hence the text represents a more colloquial sample of ENHG. The Septembertestament cor- pus, at the time of this study, consisted of approximately 40,000 words that have been fully POS-tagged and parsed.
    [Show full text]
  • Portuguese Syntax
    Eckhard Bick PORTUGUESE SYNTAX Teaching manual Eckhard Bick, Portuguese Syntax Last updated: January 2000 2 Eckhard Bick, Portuguese Syntax 1. Introduction: Grammatical conventions 5 1.1. The flat classical model: word function, no form 6 1.2. Pure Dependency Grammar: word chains (syntactic form), no function 6 1.3. Pure Constituent Grammar: hierarchical word grouping (syntactic form), no function 7 1.4. Adding function 8 1.4.1. Dependency Grammar with function labels 8 1.4.2. Constraint Grammar 8 1.4.3. Enriched Constituent Grammar 9 2. Building trees: The notion of constituent 11 3. Clause level functions 14 3.1. Clause level arguments (valency governed) 14 3.2. Clause level adjuncts (not valency governed) 18 3.3. Syntactic function vs. semantic function 25 4. Subordination 29 5. The function of verbal constituents 34 6. Group forms and group level constituent function 38 6.1. Noun phrases (np) 40 6.2. Ad-word phrases (ap) 47 6.3. Prepositional phrases (pp) 51 6.4. Pronoun phrases 56 7. Clause types 59 7.1. Finite subclauses 62 7.1.1. Nominal finite subclauses 62 7.1.2. Attributive finite subclauses 63 7.1.3. Adverbial finite subclauses 63 7.2. Non-finite subclauses 64 7.2.1. Infinitive subclauses 64 7.2.2. Gerund subclauses 65 7.2.3. Participle subclauses 68 7.2.3.1. Attributive participles 68 7.2.3.2. Participles in verb chains 69 7.2.3.3. Ablativus absolutus 70 7.3. Averbal subclauses 73 7.4. ACI and causatives 76 8. Co-ordination 82 9.
    [Show full text]
  • Adpositional Constructions of Location and Motion in Dutch
    Adpositional constructions of location and motion in Dutch Hans Smessaert, William Van Belle & Ingrid Van Canegem-Ardijns KU Leuven, KU Leuven & KHLeuven In traditional grammar, constructions of location and motion are standardly considered as adverbial adjuncts, i.e. as constituents that do not belong to the nuclear or core elements of the clause. However, in Dutch, as in many other languages, there are different classes of verbal predicates which require the presence of a location or motion constituent in order to yield a grammatical clause. Since these obligatory constituents are manifestly part of the verbal valency frame, the authors call them location and motion objects. The combination of the criterion of (non-)optionality and that of substitutability with pronominal or adverbial elements leads to the tripartition between adjunct, object and predicate complement. This distinction is further shown to pattern with different word order restrictions. 0. Introduction1 Spatial descriptions can be divided conceptually into place (static location) and motion (dynamic location). Levinson and Wilkins (2006: 531–533) argue that there are three different styles of conceptualization of motion events cross-linguistically. First, they differentiate between a durative and a non-durative conceptualization. In a durative conceptualization motion is conceived of as “translocation”, that is, “as a durative displacement of the figure along a continuous trajectory over time”. In a non-durative conceptualization motion is solely thought of as a change of state without transitional phases. Further, a non-durative conceptualization involves either change of location or change of locative relation. However, “it turns out that motion verbs in a language are not necessarily of a consistent type, although a predominant type of semantic content may often be discerned”.
    [Show full text]
  • Portuguese Syntax
    Eckhard Bick PORTUGUESE SYNTAX Teaching manual Last updated: January 2000 Eckhard Bick, Portuguese Syntax 1. Introduction: Grammatical conventions 4 1.1. The flat classical model: word function, no form 5 1.2. Pure Dependency Grammar: word chains (syntactic form), no function 5 1.3. Pure Constituent Grammar: hierarchical word grouping (syntactic form), no function 6 1.4. Adding function 7 1.4.1. Dependency Grammar with function labels 7 1.4.2. Constraint Grammar 7 1.4.3. Enriched Constituent Grammar 8 2. Building trees: The notion of constituent 10 3. Clause level functions 13 3.1. Clause level arguments (valency governed) 13 3.2. Clause level adjuncts (not valency governed) 17 3.3. Syntactic function vs. semantic function 24 4. Subordination 28 5. The function of verbal constituents 33 6. Group forms and group level constituent function 37 6.1. Noun phrases (np) 39 6.2. Ad-word phrases (ap) 46 6.3. Prepositional phrases (pp) 50 6.4. Pronoun phrases 55 7. Clause types 58 7.1. Finite subclauses 61 7.1.1. Nominal finite subclauses 61 7.1.2. Attributive finite subclauses 62 7.1.3. Adverbial finite subclauses 62 7.2. Non-finite subclauses 63 7.2.1. Infinitive subclauses 63 7.2.2. Gerund subclauses 64 7.2.3. Participle subclauses 67 7.2.3.1. Attributive participles 67 7.2.3.2. Participles in verb chains 68 7.2.3.3. Ablativus absolutus 69 7.3. Averbal subclauses 72 7.4. ACI and causatives 75 8. Co-ordination 81 9. Comparatives 88 10. Utterance function 96 2 Eckhard Bick, Portuguese Syntax 11.
    [Show full text]
  • 205 Comparative Overview on Word-Compounding in English And
    ISSN2039Ͳ2117MediterraneanJournalofSocialSciencesVol.3(7)April2012 Comparative Overview on Word-Compounding in English and Albanian M.A. Esmeralda Sherko Faculty of Veterinary Medicine Department of Morpho-Functional Subjects, ESP Division Agricultural University of Tirana e-mail: [email protected] Abstract This paper presents a comparative bilingual overview, by comparing word formation in two languages, respectively Albanian and English, as well as the main word formation trends in both languages. Both languages display a variety of word formation techniques, but their classifications according to different ways are not in complete conformity with each other. An example of this is “pëngjitja”1, which in Albanian is classified as an independent class form the compound nouns, while in English it appears under the heading of “compounds”. The paper will also highlight spelling and phonetic differences in both languages. In Albanian language the “përngjitja” is formed by the monomial of word group or phrase, a prepositional phrase or a group of words in general. The syntactic relations between the terms of the phrase or the group are usually preserved clearly, even in the structure of the newly formed word -të përngjitur. In English compounding, which also includes përngjitja refers to the process of combining two words to form a new one, where the words added at the beginning to a certain extent subcategorizes the words following it. Key words: përngjitja, word-formation, Albanian, English, language 1. Introduction to word formation Word formation is the branch of linguistics that examines derived words synchronically and diachronically and in terms of their origin and functioning, their productivity or unproductivity, as well as their use in different styles of speech.
    [Show full text]
  • Systematic Parameterized Description of Pro-Forms in the Prague Dependency Treebank 2.0∗
    Systematic Parameterized Description of Pro-forms in the Prague Dependency Treebank 2.0¤ Magda ŠevcíkovᡠRazímová, Zdenekˇ Žabokrtský Institute of Formal and Applied Linguistics Charles University, Prague E-mail: {razimova,zabokrtsky}@ufal.mff.cuni.cz 1 Introduction A pro-form is a word that is used to replace or substitute other words, phrases, clauses, or sentences etc. Besides pronouns one can also distinguish pro-adjectives, pro-numerals, pro-adverbs, and pro-verbs.1 Pro-forms are related to a wide range of linguistic phenomena, from word- formative principles, through negation and quantification, to anaphoric and deictic functions. As it was recognized a long time ago (among others in Montague gram- mar), pro-forms are extremely important for studying natural language semantics, even if they constitute only a closed class. Recently, a lot of work has been invested into developing large data resources for exploring natural language semantics, e.g. in the fields of predicate-argument structures or lexical databases. However, the treatment of pro-forms and related phenomena receives only a relatively minor attention in this data-dominated era (perhaps with the only exception of data for anaphora resolution, mostly limited to personal and demonstrative pronouns). Even if tag sets used in various corpora and treebanks clearly indicate some differentiation within the set of pro-forms (e.g. ¤The research reported in this paper was supported by the projects 1ET101120503, GA-UK 352/2005 and GD201/05/H014. 1The well known difficulties with the heterogeneity of the criteria for delimitating the ‘traditional’ parts of speech lead to terminological confusion here: pronouns are often considered to span not only pro-nouns, but also some of the other pro-forms, especially pro-adjectives and also pro-adverbs, often denoted as pronominal adjectives and pronominal adverbs.
    [Show full text]
  • Parts of Speech in Novamorf, a New Morphological Annotation of Czech
    DOI 10.2478/jazcas-2019-0065 Parts OF SPEECH IN NovaMORF, a NEW MORPHOLOGICAL Annotation OF CZECH VLADIMÍR PETKEVIČ1 ‒ Jaroslava Hlaváčová2 ‒ KLÁRA OSOLSOBě3 ‒ Martin SVÁŠEK ‒ JOSEF ŠIMANDL 1 Institute of Theoretical and Computational Linguistics, Faculty of Arts, Charles University, Czech Republic 2 Institute of Formal and Applied Linguistics, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Czech Republic 3 Institute of the Czech Language, Faculty of Arts, Masaryk University, Czech Republic PETKEVIČ, Vladimír – HLAVÁČOVÁ, Jaroslava – OSOLSOBě, Klára – SVÁŠEK, Martin – ŠIMANDL, Josef: Parts of speech in NovaMorf, a new morphological annotation of Czech. Journal of Linguistics, 2019, Vol. 70, No 2, pp. 358 – 369. Abstract: A detailed morphological description of word forms in any language is a necessary condition for a successful automatic processing of linguistic data. The paper focuses on a new description of morphological categories, mainly on the subcategorization of parts of speech in Czech within the NovaMorf project. NovaMorf focuses on the description of morphological properties of Czech word forms in a more compact and consistent way and with a higher explicative power than approaches used so far. It also aims at the unification of diverse approaches to morphological annotation of Czech. NovaMorf approach will be reflected in a new morphological dictionary to be exploited for a new automatic morphological analysis (and disambiguation) of corpora of contemporary Czech. Keywords: NovaMorf, morphological annotation, parts of speech, morphological categories, subcategorization 1 INTRODUcTION We present a repertoire of morphological categories and, mainly, the parts of speech (POS) and their subcategorization distinguished in NovaMorf, the project of an innovated description of Czech morphology as a linguistic base for a new morphological analysis and subsequent disambiguation of Czech texts.
    [Show full text]
  • Contextual Processing of Locative Prepositional Phrases
    Contextual processing of locative prepositional phrases Nicolas DENAND & Monique ROLBERT Laboratoire d’Informatique Fondamentale de Marseille 163, avenue de Luminy - Case 901 F-13288 Marseille Cedex 9 France {Nicolas.Denand,Monique.Rolbert}@lif.univ-mrs.fr Abstract locative uses is anaphorically linked to a NP. These uses were already studied (see, for exam- This paper deals with contextual aspects of loca- ple, (Ruwet, 1990)). tive preposition processing. Firstly, accordingly to a study on the referential behavior of the pronominal What about locative uses of the pronominal 1 adverb ”y” in its locative uses, we show that static adverb ”y” ? That is, when it is used to replace locative prepositions are functions, not only at the the locative prepositional complement of a verb conceptual level (as shown in previous studies), but (Locative Prepositional Phrase, or LPP), like also from a contextual point of view. Such functions in: introduce new objects in the discourse context, that (3)Cette ville est belle. J’y ai v´ecu autre- have to be taken into account in classical contex- fois.(This town is beautiful. I lived there tual processing tasks, such as reference resolution or formerly.) question answering. Then, we show how these phe- nomena can fit into contextual formalisms like DRT Here again, in a classical way, one can say that and DPL. ”y”/”there” refers to a ”place” introduced by a NP preceding the pronoun. We have a prob- 1 Introduction lem though, to rebuild the exact locative seman- tics of the pronominal sentence (here, something Most often, in a nominal anaphoric relation, a like ”in this town”).
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction . with the Substantives, Proper Names, Adjectives and Numerals the Pronouns Have in Common That They Take Part in the Categories of Case
    CHAPTER NINE PRONOUNS g.!. Introduction . With the substantives, proper names, adjectives and numerals the pronouns have in common that they take part in the categories of case. They can, however, not be reckoned to belong to any of these systems, because they are different from: substantives and proper names a.o. by the absence of the vocative category;' adjectives by the absence of the vocative and the categories of comparison; 2 numerals a.o. by the absence of the ordinal category." Moreover, they differ from all Greek words existing by their special kind of lexical meaning, the deictic meaning, in which one can distinguish between: a) The indication of the participants or non-participants of the speech event. b) The indication of different relations to these (non- )partici­ pants, or to the speech-event and the language used in it. This distinction runs roughly parallel with a significant difference in the structure of the minor systems constituted by the various pronouns: (r) The pronouns indicating the participants as such, EYW, 0',), and ~!J.eL<;, u!J.eL<;, do not have any correlated adverbs (cf. sub 2), and do not take part in the categories of number and gender: the difference in value between EyW and ~!J.eL<;, crU and u!J.ef:<; is not identical to that between e.g, t7t1to<; and Z7t1tOL . On the other hand these words take part in the oppositions of emphasis (E!J.e vs. !J.e) and of reflexivity (E!J.e vs. E!J.tXU"t"OV) . (2) The pronouns indicating relations to the participants or to the speech event as such do take part in the categories of number and gender, and with the exception of the definite article, consti­ tute minor systems or configurations, which comprise several 1 Except for ~(Lth-e:pe: in Homer e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Au Boulot! Reference Grammar Book (Pdf)
    Au boulot! 1lEFERENCE GRAMMAR OFFRENCH Revised Edition _ .....-,_fi'> - _.__ �-- .j .. -� -- ;·· . -,,...,.� �� � l' .- , �� r \ . - DaviaA. Dinneen Hope Cbris,tiansen Madeleine Kernen Herve Pensec Au boulot! REFERENCE GRAMMAR OFFRENCH David A. Dinneen Universityo/Kansas Hope Christiansen Universityof Arlcamas Madeleine Kernen SouthwestKISSOllri State Un;hlsity Herve Pensec SL OlafCollege Custom Editor: Peter Nowka © 1995 Dinneen, Christiansen, Kernen, & Pensec This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-commercial 4.0 ​ ​ International License (CC-BY-NC 4.0). ​ You are free to: ● Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format ​ ● Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material ​ Under the following terms: ● Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and ​ ​ ​ ​ indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but ​ not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. ● NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes. ​ ​ ​ ​ No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological ​ ​ ​ measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits. ​ The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Au Boulot! First-Year French and all affiliated supplementary content available at ​ http://hdl.handle.net/1808/15572 were conventionally published by Houghton Mifflin. ​ Upon going out of print, the rights reverted back to the authors, who subsequently worked with KU Libraries to openly license and make them available in KU ScholarWorks as open educational resources (OER). TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. vu The plan of the te:s:t . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. vin PartI.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Periphery of the English Adverb Olga Shevchenko Vitus Bering Kamchatka State University Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy, Russia
    SSRG International Journal of Humanities and Social Science (SSRG-IJHSS) – Volume 6 Issue 5 – Sep – Oct 2019 On the Periphery of the English Adverb Olga Shevchenko Vitus Bering Kamchatka State University Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy, Russia Abstract category belonging to the periphery. They share The prototypical approach is one of the characteristic features with more other examples than important achievements of cognitive grammar. these peripheral instances). The peripheral cases of a According to it, a lot of intricate phenomena category share characteristics with fewer other cases, observed in the English part-of-speech system can they have less in common with the other members of find explanation of their nature. The English adverb the category which are to be found close to the is not either a typical notional or formal part of prototype [5]. speech, it combines the characteristic features of both these groups. Besides, its borders are not clearly II. THE PROTOTYPICAL NATURE OF THE defined as a lot of words often referred to as adverbs ADVERB belong to the intermediary zones sharing properties The principles of cognitive grammar, among with other parts of speech which is manifested in them the prototypical approach, can work well in their semantic, morphological and syntactic description of the English part-of-speech system. peculiarities. The meaning of some adverbs is close Parts of speech are often characterized as classes of to that of pronouns; adverbs are either invariable or words which differ in grammatical meaning, the set form degrees of comparison; together with its most of morphological categories (or form), and syntactic characteristic syntactic function of adverbial modifier properties (combinability and the role in the the adverb can be used as practically any part of the sentence).
    [Show full text]
  • UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    UCLA UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Split Pronominal Adverbs in Dutch: Searching for Meaning in what is Considered Meaningless Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2qn6h0xf Author de Carlo, Nickolas Sebastiano Publication Date 2017 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles Split Pronominal Adverbs in Dutch: Searching for Meaning in what is Considered Meaningless A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Germanic Languages by Nickolas Sebastiano de Carlo 2017 © Copyright by Nickolas Sebastiano de Carlo 2017 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Split Pronominals in Dutch: Searching for Meaning in what is Considered Meaningless by Nickolas Sebastiano de Carlo Doctor of Philosophy in Germanic Languages University of California, Los Angeles, 2017 Professor Robert S. Kirsner, Chair Pure synonymy is a myth. This is true in the lexicon of a language as well as its grammar. As such, why do grammars of Dutch label the following two forms below as synonymous? Unsplit: Daarmee heb ik een probleem. Therewith have I a problem. Split: Daar heb ik een probleem mee. There have I a problem with. "I have a problem with that." Calling these two forms above "the same" is an oversimplification. In my dissertation, Itest for difference in meaning between the forms and the motivation to choose one form over the other. To accomplish this goal, Iuse a corpus-based approach integrated with tests from Construction Grammar. We analyze these data in R (a statistics computing language) and Excel. This dissertation includes four tests, all complete.
    [Show full text]