1 option
Explaining syntax : representations, structures, and computation / Peter W. Culicover.
- Format:
- Book
- Language:
- English
- Subjects (All):
- English language--Syntax.
- English language.
- Grammar, Comparative and general--Syntax.
- Grammar, Comparative and general.
- Physical Description:
- xiii, 380 pages : illustrations ; 25 cm
- Place of Publication:
- Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2013.
- Contents:
- 1 Prologue. The Simpler Syntax Hypothesis (2006) 1
- 1.1 Introduction 1
- 1.2 Two views on the relation between syntax and semantics 2
- 1.3 Mainstream syntactic structures compared with Simpler Syntax 3
- 1.4 Application to Bare Argument Ellipsis 5
- 1.5 Some other cases where Fregean compositionality does not hold 7
- 1.5.1 Metonymy 7
- 1.5.2 Sound + motion construction 7
- 1.5.3 Beneficiary dative construction 7
- 1.6 Choosing between the two approaches 8
- 1.7 Rules of grammar are stored pieces of structure 9
- 1.8 Conclusion 11
- Part I Representations
- 2 OM-sentences: on the derivation of sentences with systematically unspecifiable interpretations (1972) 15
- 2.1 Introduction 16
- 2.2 On OM-sentences 16
- 2.2.1 The readings of OM-sentences 17
- 2.2.2 A possible source for and-OM-sentences 18
- 2.2.3 The conjunction 19
- 2.2.4 Or-OM-sentences 22
- 2.3 What can a consequential OM-sentence mean? 25
- 2.4 Some proposals for derivation 28
- 2.4.1 Can there be deletions? 28
- 2.4.2 Do consequential OM-sentences have if's in deep structure? 31
- 2.4.3 How do you derive an OM-sentence? 36
- 2.4.4 Comparing approaches 41
- 2.4.5 Sequence of tenses 42
- 2.4.6 The consequences for phrase structure 45
- 2.5 The incongruence reading of and-OM-sentences 46
- 2.6 Rhetorical OM-sentences and the incongruence reading 49
- 2.7 Summary 52
- 3 On the coherence of syntactic descriptions (1973) 53
- 3.1 Rules for tags 53
- 3.2 Orderings 55
- 3.3 Neg-contraction 57
- 3.4 More orderings 58
- 3.5 Emphatic tags 59
- 3.6 Some implications 60
- 3.7 The impossibility of collapsing tag rules 61
- 3.8 Similarity 63
- 3.9 Capturing similarity 65
- 3.10 Definitions 66
- 3.11 Coherence 68
- 3.12 Towards a general notion of similarity 69
- 4 Stress and focus in English (1983) 71
- 4.1 Introduction 71
- 4.2 Prosodic structure 74
- 4.2.1 The mapping 78
- 4.2.2 Accent placement 83
- 4.2.3 Stress 85
- 4.2.4 Wh-constructions 88
- 4.2.5 Cliticization 97
- 4.3 Assignment of focus 100
- 4.3.1 The formal representation of focus 101
- 4.3.2 Some applications of focus assignment 104
- 4.4 The interpretation of focus 105
- 4.5 Summary and review 114
- 5 Control, PRO, and the Projection Principle (1992) 120
- 5.1 Introduction 121
- 5.2 A theory of predication 122
- 5.2.1 Phrase structure and lexicon 124
- 5.2.2 A coindexing rule 127
- 5.2.3 VP predicates and control 134
- 5.2.4 Non-obligatory control and secondary predication 139
- 5.2.5 Control in Spanish 141
- 5.3 Arguments against syntactic PRO 146
- 5.3.1 Gapping (I) 147
- 5.3.2 Gapping (II) 147
- 5.3.3 Pseudo-clefts 148
- 5.3.4 Appositive relatives 148
- 5.3.5 Conjunction 149
- 5.3.6 Stylistic Inversion 149
- 5.4 Arguments of Koster and May (1981) for syntactic PRO 150
- 5.4.1 Wh-infinitives 151
- 5.4.2 Redundancy of base rules 152
- 5.4.3 Pseudo-clefts 153
- 5.4.4 Extraposition 153
- 5.4.5 Coordination 154
- 5.4.6 Construal 154
- 5.5 Comparison with the Projection Principle 155
- 5.5.1 The categorial component and the lexicon 156
- 5.5.2 Raising to subject 159
- 5.5.3 NP-trace 160
- 5.5.4 Acquisition 161
- 5.6 Conclusion 162
- 6 Negative curiosities (1982) 163
- 6.1 Introduction 164
- 6.2 Tags: the polarity facts 165
- 6.2.1 Types of tag 166
- 6.2.2 Syntactic analysis of tags 168
- 6.2.3 Determinants of tag polarity 171
- 6.2.4 Deriving the ambiguity 175
- 6.2.5 Tags and surface structure scope 177
- 6.3 Any 179
- 6.4 More curiosities 184
- 6.5 Conclusion 188
- Part II Structures
- 7 Deriving dependent right adjuncts in English (1997) 191
- 7.1 Introduction 191
- 7.2 Properties of extraposition constructions 192
- 7.2.1 Relative clause extraposition 192
- 7.2.2 Result clause extraposition 196
- 7.3 The Complement Principle 199
- 7.4 Extraposition is not rightward movement 199
- 7.5 Leftward movement 200
- 7.5.1 Stranding 200
- 7.5.2 Low adjunct 201
- 7.5.3 High specifier 202
- 7.6 HNPS and PTI 203
- 7.6.1 Properties 203
- 7.6.2 Leftward movement and rightmost heavy noun phrases 206
- 7.6.3 Phrase bounding 209
- 7.7 Conclusion 210
- 8 Topicalization, inversion, and complementizers in English (1992) 212
- 8.1 Introduction 213
- 8.2 Two landing sites 215
- 8.3 Additional evidence 219
- 8.3.1 Suspension of that-t ECP effects 219
- 8.3.2 Subject Aux Inversion (SAI) 223
- 8.3.3 Whether 228
- 8.3.4 Elliptical constructions 230
- 8.3.5 Why and how come 233
- 8.4 Extension to focus 239
- 8.4.1 Licensing subjects 239
- 8.4.2 Implications of internal PolP 244
- 8.4.3 Pol as focus in English 247
- 8.4.4 Comparative Germanic 252
- 8.5 Summary 255
- 9 The Adverb Effect: evidence against ECP accounts of the that-t effect (1992) 256
- 9.1 The Adverb Effect 257
- 9.2 Other complementizers 262
- 9.3 Parasitic gaps 264
- 9.4 Summary 268
- 10 Stylistic Inversion in English: a reconsideration (2001) 269
- 10.1 Introduction 270
- 10.2 PP is a subject 271
- 10.3 Light and heavy inversion 276
- 10.4 Conclusion 289
- Part III Computation
- 11 A reconsideration of Dative Movements (1972) 295
- 11.1 Introduction 296
- 11.2 The syntax of indirect objects 296
- 11.3 Perceptual strategy constraints on acceptability 301
- 11.4 Application of perceptual strategy to dative movements 305
- 12 Markedness, antisymmetry, and complexity of constructions (2003) 309
- 12.1 Introduction 310
- 12.2 Change and clustering 311
- 12.2.1 The simulation model 311
- 12.2.2 Gaps 312
- 12.3 Markedness and computational complexity 317
- 12.3.1 OT 317
- 12.3.2 The basis for markedness 319
- 12.4 The computation of complexity 324
- 12.4.1 Distance 324
- 12.4.2 Stretching and twisting 329
- 12.5 Summary 332
- 13 Morphological complexity outside of universal grammar (1998) 334
- 13.1 Background 334
- 13.1.1 Types of inflectional morphology 335
- 13.1.2 A classical example: prefix-suffix asymmetry 336
- 13.2 Our approach 338
- 13.2.1 Complexity 339
- 13.2.2 Acquisition complexity: the dynamical component 339
- 13.3 Relevant studies in acquisition and processing 340
- 13.3.1 Lexical processing 340
- 13.3.2 External cues for morphology acquisition 340
- 13.3.3 Computational acquisition of paradigms 341
- 13.4 The complexity model 343
- 13.4.1 Semantic similarity 343
- 13.4.2 Similarity of forms 344
- 13.4.3 Model 0: standard Levenshtein distance 344
- 13.4.4 Model 1: matching strings in time 346
- 13.4.5 Possible further extensions 351
- 13.5 Conclusion 354
- 13.A Morphology acquisition by neural networks 354
- 13.B Templatic morphology, metathesis 355
- 13.B.1 Templatic morphology 355
- 13.B.2 Metathesis 356.
- Notes:
- Includes bibliographical references and index.
- ISBN:
- 9780199660230
- 0199660239
- OCLC:
- 834435387
The Penn Libraries is committed to describing library materials using current, accurate, and responsible language. If you discover outdated or inaccurate language, please fill out this feedback form to report it and suggest alternative language.