Search

Larson (1989) noted that rightward movement of a DP past a clausal adjunct can necessitate a parasitic gap inside that clausal adjunct. This paper argues that rightward DP-movement beyond certain adjunct clauses is movement beyond typical Heavy-NP Shift that is licensed by the need to bind the parasitic gap. I show that this correctly predicts a number of observations concerning the exceptional nature of the rightward movement involved. In particular, parasitic gaps are able to license rightward movement that is potentially unbounded and successive-cyclic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This response to Behme and Evans (2015) points out that understanding and correct representation of perspectives to be criticised is crucial for any kind of engagement. It then sequentially examines the points raised and tries to distinguish the content of the argument from its surrounding rhetoric. It concludes that there is a paucity of the former and an abundance of the latter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This review article examines some of the claims recently made in a book and article by Vyvyan Evans, which argue that the generative approach to syntax is flawed. It exposes a number of misrepresentations, misunderstandings and mistakes in these works and argues that the general case has not been made. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights: [•] I discuss the question whether particular phonological units are innate or acquired. [•] I show that both markedness and faithfulness constraints can be acquired. [•] I integrate generative and usage-based approaches to language. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: With the crystallization of the “generative enterprise” half a century ago, two concepts became salient: the initial state and final states of the language faculty, respectively, UG (the genetic component) and I-languages. Since then inquiry has gained far greater scope and depth. It has also led to sharpening of fundamental principles of language. At first, descriptive adequacy appeared to require rich and complex assumptions about UG. A primary goal has always been to overcome this deficiency. Core properties of concern have included compositionality, order, projection (labeling), and displacement. Early work assigned the first three to phrase structure rules and the last to the transformational component. Simplification of computational procedures suggests that compositionality and displacement (along with the “copy theory”) fall together while order may be a reflex of sensorimotor externalization, conclusions that have far-reaching consequences. As for labeling, minimal computation restricts options to the few that have considerable empirical support. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Chomskyan generative grammar has long been committed to the ‘double-interface’ assumption that the faculty of language (FL) serves two interfaces, PF and LF, and correlatively that expressions have phonological and semantic properties. The paper argues this gives rise to (a) a grounding problem for syntax – i.e. for the interpretable content of syntax – and (b) a problem for the assumption that FL is a generative computation. It is argued these problems are resolved if we think of syntax as grounded exclusively in semantic/conceptual properties. Since this implies that FL is phonology-free, it is argued that FL should not be distinguished from a generative computation describable as ‘the language of thought’ (LOT). The paper explores to what extent this (FL=LOT) thesis is consistent with Chomsky''s thinking. Chomsky''s recent work can be seen as pointing in that direction but it is not consistent with the double-interface assumption, which he continues to regard as conceptually necessary. In the light of discussion of the issues, the paper concludes with a speculation on the role of phonology in human cognition and its evolution. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Agreement lies at the heart of sentence structure in that it usually codifies the formal link between the subject and the predicate. In a way, although not strictly necessary, agreement tends to be what signals that a clause has been created. However, linguists and psycholinguists disagree as to whether this core process is essentially a semantic or a syntactic phenomenon, and there is evidence that suggests that it may be both things at the same time. suggests that in morphologically impoverished languages like English, low frequency of agreement operations makes for a weak morphosyntactic component that is unable to keep semantic interference at bay, at least in production (where meaning comes first). In his completion study, he manages to show that the strong morphosyntactic defences of German do seem to encapsulate number agreement from non-formal forces. In this paper, I examine the psycholinguistic literature on the processing of agreement in English and Spanish in search of fine-grained evidence for encapsulation in all the relevant domains (NP, clausal, supra-clausal). The different grounding of the features of gender and number is also analysed and evidence for their differentiality in the first cycles of processing is ruled out. In general, Berg's hypothesis is confirmed by existing processing measures (Spanish patterns like German due to its rich morphology), but the fine picture of agreement operations in English and Spanish is also sensitive to the different domains tested and to whether production or comprehension is taken into account. Finally, it is argued that gender classes and the agreement systems based on them constitute a major generative device when constructing the clause. This is because gender is less semantically grounded than number and therefore easier to recruit for phrasal packaging, as this merely requires the co-variance of form. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

In languages like English, bare nominals are only used in special constructions, and they come with special meaning effects. This paper applies bidirectional Optimality Theory to explain why unmarked (articleless) forms have unmarked (stereotypical) meanings. The syntactic unmarkedness of bare nominals is embedded in a constraint-based typology of number, article use and referentiality. The semantic unmarkedness of the stereotypical interpretation falls out of the strongest meaning hypothesis. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The aim of this paper is to develop a representation of control that does not require a PRO-subject. I first analyse obligatory control using a de-compositional analysis of θ-roles, according to which θ-roles are divided into two selectional requirements. The resulting theory makes the same predictions as one based on PRO, yet avoids dependence on this ill-defined empty category. I then concentrate on Icelandic, tackling agreement phenomena in infinitival clauses. Again no PRO is necessary to cater for the data, which receive a uniform account using the mechanism outlined in the first half of the paper. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: We will provide a bidirectional Optimality Theoretic approach for fluid differential case marking, in particular fluid differential subject marking. Our claim is that although there is no fixed meaning associated with any particular type of case, a correspondence constraint between volitional meaning and ergative case interacts with markedness constraints and this interaction may result in fluid differential case marking. Thus, fluid differential subject marking is analysed as the emergence of the correspondence between volitional meaning and ergative case in a bidirectional process of optimization. We will argue that this type of differential case marking cannot be adequately explained in unidirectional OT syntax. In a bidirectional perspective, however, fluid differential case marking can be analysed on the basis of the same set of ranked constraints that accounts for the general pattern of case marking. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Languages appear to differ in the locality conditions that regulate nominative Case checking: a dative or ergative subject blocks nominative checking of an object in Faroese and Nez Perce, but not in Icelandic or Hindi. Languages also differ in the effect that object shift has on subject Case: object shift has no effect on subject Case in Icelandic, but causes ergative Case to appear on the subject in Nez Perce. These superficially unrelated effects follow if one violable locality constraint is added to the small set of Case faithfulness and markedness constraints within Optimality Theory. This locality constraint, Pure Domain, requires that the checking domain of a head contain only Cases checked by that head. Differences in the relative rank of Pure Domain with respect to Case faithfulness and markedness constraints produces the cross-linguistic variation noted above. This domain approach to Case locality captures the standard notion that a closer DP can interfere with the checking of a further DP, but it also captures the fact that a further DP can interfere with the checking of a closer DP, if that further DP is close enough, a situation that arises with object shift. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This article explores the characteristics and syntactic behaviour of a peculiar construction in which what seem to be two finite complementisers are allowed to co-occur in specific subordinate clauses. As well as providing a detailed description of the structure in a number of Romance varieties, this research focuses on the different roles played by items belonging to the category traditionally labelled as COMP and on the status of the subjects found in the left periphery. Adopting the so-called split-CP hypothesis the proposed analysis argues for the expression of both discourse and inflectional features at the C level, overtly realised as distinct heads, and claims that there are both topicalised and focalised positions available to pre-verbal subjects in the left periphery, be they a DP or a quantified element. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This paper discusses the semantically parenthetical use of clause-embedding verbs such as see, hear, think, believe, discover and know. When embedding verbs are used in this way, the embedded clause carries the main point of the utterance, while the main clause serves some discourse function. Frequently, this function is evidential, with the parenthetical verb carrying information about the source and reliability of the embedded claim, or about the speaker's emotional orientation to it. Other functions of parenthetical uses of verbs are discussed. Particular attention is paid to the parenthetical uses of verbs which are standardly assumed to require their complements to be presupposed. It is demonstrated that when so used, these verbs are in no way presuppositional; that is, there is no presumption, or even pretense, that their complements have common ground status. It is further demonstrated that this loss of presuppositionality is not accompanied by a lack of commitment on the part of the speaker to the truth of the complement, as in the standard cases of non-presuppositional uses of these predicates. It is argued that this non-presuppositional use of factive verbs provides support for the (minority) view that presupposition is not a conventional property of lexical items. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The grammatical forms known as tenses establish the time talked about in a sentence, in conjunction with other temporal expressions. Tense expresses a relation between Speech Time and Reference Time; the relation between Situation Time and Reference Time is under-specified for most tenses, though specified as simultaneous for English will. Tense interpretation depends on syntactic and discourse context at the level of the passage. Passages realize one of several Discourse Modes; each mode has distinctive linguistic characteristics. Tense conveys continuity in Narrative, while in Description tense is anaphoric. In Report and all other modes, tense is deictic. Temporal interpretation is determined by interpretive rules that take as input the surface structure of a sentence and the context in which it appears. Rules and interpretations are developed in the framework of Discourse Representation Theory. The information relevant to temporal interpretation is conveyed by features associated with tenses and adverbs by syntactic configuration, and by discourse context. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: In a criticism of my paper ‘Exaption and Linguistic Explanation’, Crain and Pietroski argue that Generative Grammar provides deep generalizations concerning the way children acquire competence in languages. I show that their examples of analyses are mere descriptions and that an exaptive approach to language acquisition provides more insightful avenues to explore. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

One of the current debates within Optimality Theory is whether sequences are derived serially (cyclically or in strata) or in a parallel fashion. In this paper we describe two different types of domain effects found in the phonology of pronominal clitics in Catalan (Barcelona variety), and demonstrate that any type of serial analysis runs into problems, while a parallel analysis is fairly straightforward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper develops a generative analysis for a particular language contact phenomenon familiar in the variationist and language contact literature, namely indirect transfer [F. Klein, A quantitative study of syntactic and pragmatic indications of change in the Spanish of bilinguals in the U.S, in: W. Labov (Ed.), Locating Language in Time and Space, Academic Press, New York, 1980, p. 69; R. Mougeon, E. Beniak, Linguistic Consequences of Language Contact and Restriction: The Case of French in Ontario, OUP, Oxford, 1991; C. Silva-Corvalán, Language Contact and Change: Spanish in Los Angeles, OUP, Oxford, 1994]. This language contact effect, which is preferential rather than categorical, is difficult to deal with in traditional generative approaches, and has received no attention in this literature. My analysis focuses on Klein's study of synthetic/analytic verb forms used for the expression of progressive aspect in Spanish, where contact with English causes a skewing in the distribution of use of analytic forms in a bilingual variety compared to a similar monolingual variety. The analysis is carried out in a stochastic OT [P. Boersma, B. Hayes, Empirical tests of the Gradual Learning Algorithm. Linguistic Inquiry 32 (1) (2001) 45–86] framework, where I show that the indirect transfer effects observed by Klein can be captured by way of different ranking of a small set of OT constraints on a linear ranking scale. In addition to providing a model for the indirect transfer effects in Klein's study, my analysis also makes a typological prediction regarding morphosyntactic expression and Imperfective and Progressive verb forms: no language can have a synthetic Progressive and an analytic Imperfective. This prediction is supported by the absence of any such distribution in the surveys of Bybee et al. [The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1994] or Dahl [Tense and Aspect Systems, Blackwell, Oxford, 1985]. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores a theory of the meaning-form relation based on ranked and violable constraints [A. Prince, P. Smolensky, 1993. Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, and University of Colorado, Boulder], using the English genitive construction as a testing ground. Our main thesis is that partially ordered optimality-theoretic grammars allow us to relate four apparently independent empirical phenomena: (i) categorical grammaticality contrasts; (ii) variation and preferences in expression; (iii) ambiguity and preferences in interpretation; (iv) lexical organization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses a number of problems associated with the widely accepted analysis of differential object marking (DOM) as reflecting the semantic markedness of highly individuated (definite and/or animate) direct objects. Firstly, such an account is in conflict with established notions of transitivity which take a typical object to be highly affected, since affectedness can be shown to correlate with a high degree of individuation. Secondly, the notion of markedness reversal, which is employed as a means of providing a unified account of differential marking of subjects and of objects (e.g. Aissen, 2000), cannot unproblematically be applied to the kinds of oppositions typically involved in DOM. Finally, the predictions made for subject marking only partly correspond to attested linguistic data. An alternative analysis is proposed which takes accusative case-marking to be a marker of a high degree of affectedness in objects. By exploiting the association between affectedness and a high degree of individuation (definiteness/animacy), such an analysis can account for the DOM data, while avoiding the difficulties inherent to the approach which takes individuated objects to be semantically marked. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this introductory article is to provide a background to the articles contained in this special issue of Lingua that centers around variation in form, variation in meaning, and markedness. Theoretical and empirical considerations are brought together in this special issue in which the linguistic disciplines that are covered diverge. The different contributions deal with language processing, first language acquisition, language contact, functional-typology and generative morphology and syntax. Several papers in this special issue argue in favour of an Optimality Theoretic analysis of the data under discussion. This is not a coincidence, given that Optimality Theory is claimed to be a formal theory of markedness (cf. Gilbers and De Hoop, 1998, Lingua, 104, 1 for an introduction to OT). In Section 1, we present two hypotheses dealing with the relation between variation in form and variation in meaning. We discuss several dimensions along which markedness of forms and meanings can be measured in Section 2. In the final section we discuss the possibility that the concept of bidirectional optimization accounts for markedness as well as variation in form versus variation in meaning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]