By Samuel David Epstein, Erich M. Groat, Ruriko Kawashima, Hisatsugu Kitahara
A basic notion in all syntactic theories is that of a syntactic relation among syntactic items. whereas contemporary paintings within the Minimalist Framework has tried to provide an explanation for the character of syntactic items by way of easy and conceptually useful assumptions in regards to the language school, the family that carry among syntactic items has now not been equally explored. The authors start up such an exploration and argue that yes primary family members corresponding to c-command, dominance, and checking kinfolk should be defined inside of a derivational method of structure-building.This strategy has major results in regards to the structure of the syntactic part. Semantic and phonological interpretation needn't function upon the output phrase-structure illustration created via the syntactic derivation. Interpretation is extra quite simply computed derivationally, through reading the stairs of a derivation, instead of the one output constitution created by way of it. the result's a brand new and debatable level-free version of the syntactic element of the human language college. This topical and well timed Minimalist research will curiosity specialist and theoretical linguists, syntacticians, and somebody attracted to modern ways to syntactic concept.
Read Online or Download A Derivational Approach to Syntactic Relations PDF
Best grammar books
This monograph stories problems with present minimalist problem, reminiscent of even if adjustments within the expression of argument and syntactic constitution can all be attributed to the parameterization of particular sensible heads. specifically, this e-book reviews in-depth the level to which version within the expression of causation, on hand either intra- and crosslinguistically, will be accounted for by means of attractive basically to the microparameterization of the causative head, reason, as formerly argued for by means of linguists resembling Pylkk?
A cross-linguistic learn of grammatical morphemes expressing spatial relationships that discusses the connection among the best way people event house and how it's encoded grammatically in language. The dialogue of the similarities and modifications between languages within the encoding and expression of spatial kin facilities round the emergence and evolution of spatial grams, and the semantic and morphosyntactic features of 2 varieties of spatial grams.
The argument constitution of verbs, outlined because the a part of grammar that bargains with how individuals in verbal occasions are expressed in clauses, is a classical subject in linguistics that has bought huge recognition within the literature. This booklet investigates argument constitution in English from a usage-based viewpoint, taking the view that the cognitive illustration of grammar is formed via language use, and that an important features of grammatical association are tied to the frequency with which phrases and syntactic buildings are used.
- A Mink, a Fink, a Skating Rink: What is a Noun? (Words Are Categorical)
- Good Grammar!
- The Verb Phrase in English: Investigating Recent Language Change with Corpora (Studies in English Language)
- 1000 questions de français
- Patterns and Development in the English Clause System: A Corpus-Based Grammatical Overview
- Anaphora Resolution (Studies in Language and Linguistics)
Additional resources for A Derivational Approach to Syntactic Relations
Moreover, the derivational definition is an entirely natural subcase of a more general hypothesis (explored later): namely, all syntactic relations are formally expressed by the operation Concatenate A and B (= the Structural Description) forming C (= the Structural Change) common to both the structure-building operations (transformational rules) Merge and Move. Thus what Merge and Move do is establish relations including the "is a" relation and the C-command relation by virtue of concatenating categories.
Assuming for simplicity a structure without functional heads, we have (31) The generalization to be accounted for is that the specifier asymmetrically C-commands the complement. The derivation of (31) is as follows, given cyclic Merge: The Derivation of Syntactic Relations 43 Notice that DJohn was never a member of some tree that did not contain Dhimself. Rather, Merge2 pairs/concatenates DJohn itself (a member of the Numeration) with a tree containing Dhimself. , does not block) a Ccommand relation from John (= T1 of (27)) to himself (= T2 of (27)).
A reflexive requires an antecedent of a particular morphosyntactic type, by hypothesis an irreducible lexical property. "To have an antecedent" is to enter into a syntactic relation. However, the First Law, derivationally construed, precludes the reflexive from entering into any syntactic relation with the only morphosyntactically possible candidate "John" since, given cyclic merger, there existed a point in the derivation in which: (1) John was a member of Da (Spec), (2) himself was a member of Vb, and (3) Da and Vb were unconnected trees.