This article explores the relationship between theory and observation in scientific research, specifically in the field of linguistics. It discusses different perspectives on the role of observation and data in linguistic research, with a focus on generative syntax. The article emphasizes the importance of intuitive judgments and introspective data in this field, while also acknowledging the value of linguistic corpora and experimental methods. It concludes by presenting two papers that offer new perspectives on existing data in linguistics. The article is part of a collection of papers written to honor the 90th birthday of Mary A. Kato, a respected linguist. These papers cover various topics in linguistics, including language acquisition, syntax, semantics, and the use of judgment data in research. The authors present their findings based on extensive research and analysis of data from different sources, such as corpora and experimental studies. The papers provide valuable insights into the field of linguistics and highlight the significance of judgment data in linguistic research. [Extracted from the article]
This sequence of elements is also compatible with R&D's proposal that the wh-phrase is in the Specifier of Foc, and Foc encodes the ! As a matter of fact, we had to assume that one morpheme, the declarative complementizer, is located in different syntactic positions and, at least in one case, it does not have the expected compositional import (examples (9)); moreover, we noticed that the interrogative complementizer, which by hypothesis corresponds to the ? R&D single out the special role of Foc in wh-questions by stipulating that "... a Foc head can only associate with wh-phrases if it is dominated by Int" (p. 58, discussion following [79]). Note that the anaphoric relation between Foc and the wh-phrase can be long-distance, as is the case in the extraction from a complement clause: (2) HT
The relationship between the distribution of nominalizers in Lhasa Tibetan and the argument/adjunct property of relevant syntactic elements is approached from a generative perspective. The distribution of nominalizers in Lhasa Tibetan demonstrates a regular pattern. Some nominalizers are bi-functional in that they can mark both participant and event nominalizations while others are uni-functional in that they can only mark participant nominalizations. It is found that the difference between the two types of nominalizers correlates to whether the nominalizer (NML) is argument-associated or adjunct-associated. An account of the correlation is developed in the theoretical framework of generative grammar. It is argued that the syntactic derivation of an NML-phrase gives rise to a binding relationship between the nominalizer and the suppressed element in the source constituent Aspect Phrase (AspP) or the AspP itself, leading to a condition on its semantic interpretation. The condition is satisfied in a participant NML-phrase headed by a nominalizer of either type and in an event NML-phrase headed by a bi-functional nominalizer. It is not in an event NML-phrase headed by a uni-functional nominalizer for the reason that in the calculation of event semantics arguments align with events while adjuncts align with predicates. Specifically, a bi-functional nominalizer, being argument-associated, semantically matches both a suppressed argument in a participant NML-phrase and the source constituent AspP, whereas a uni-functional one, being adjunct-associated, semantically matches a suppressed adjunct in a participant NML-phrase but not the source constituent AspP. Consequently, no event NML-phrase headed by an adjunct-associated nominalizer is found in this language. The findings of this study have implications for both analyzing the distribution of nominalizers in other Tibeto-Burman languages and the syntactic and semantic mechanisms that constrain them, and for classifying the argument/adjunct asymmetry, which is fundamental in most current linguistic frameworks as well as research on human sentence processing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
This paper provides an insight on the centrality of two main paradigms of the current linguistic theory in the field of Spanish as a second/foreign language acquisition, and its operative role in teaching. Generative Grammar (GG) as well as Cognitive Grammar (CG) are mentalist models, however, its postulates on the connection between human cognition and non-native linguistic knowledge are, in many cases, opposite; therefore, these models imply different conceptions of a pedagogical grammar. Throughout the paper, it is taken into consideration the way in which they are antagonistic, but also how they can be complementary. Even though GC has been more popular in classroom teaching, current GG may have a relevant impact on the curriculum, as well as on the instruction, by presenting a greater predictive capacity to identify the learner’s difficulties in processing certain linguistic structures. Finally, other key notions on linguistic knowledge, processability, and input, regarding didactic intervention, are also provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
In this article, we present corpus data from Dutch and English on long-distance movement and discuss its diachronic development in Dutch, English and German. Long-distance movement is the displacement phenomenon characterized by the appearance of a part of a dependent clause in a higher clause (e.g. What crimes did the FBI discover he had committed?). It has played a central role within generative grammar over the past few decades. The picture that emerges is that long-distance movement appears to be currently most productive in English and least productive in German, whereas Dutch occupies an in-between position. As we will argue, the productivity of long-distance movement is strongly tied to the availability of functional alternatives. German has at least three of such alternatives that are fully productive, whereas Dutch has one particularly productive one. The alternative constructions do not involve long-distance movement: the dependency between the constituent in the matrix clause and the position in the embedded clause where it is interpreted is formed indirectly, in the semantics, and not via syntactic movement. In English, long-distance movement is most productive when the complementizer is deleted. This is not just the case for subject movement but also for non-subject movement. Special attention is paid to the so-called that-trace effect and its alleged absence in German and Dutch. The general conclusion is that long-distance movement is possible in all languages under consideration, but more restricted than commonly assumed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Historiographers of linguistics have typically claimed that by the 1970s, generative grammarians were organizationally dominant in the field of linguistics in the United States. I demonstrate that such is not true. To support my assertion, I present evidence based on who held LSA offices in the 1970s and 1980s, on what was published in the journal Language, on presentations at LSA meetings, on the composition of summer Linguistics Institutes, on grants awarded to linguists, and on jobs advertised in the field. My explanation for the lack of generative dominance is based on various factors, including the immaturity and diversity of the field of linguistics, on generative grammar not being a grant-dependent enterprise, and on the attitude toward the LSA exhibited by Chomsky and many of his closest co-thinkers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
The paper aims to compare musical language with verbal language, creating a new perspective on music and natural language. The three categories of linguistics, phonology, syntax and semantics are analyzed. Bernstein highlights the analogies between the linguistic categories and music, researching the same three components of linguistics in music. The possibility of applying the transformational grammar procedures to the musical text is studied. In the second part of the paper, the authors investigate the method of analysis based on harmony and counterpoint, differentiating several structural levels conceived by the theoretical musician H. Schenker. Schenkerian analyzes are a relatively recent appearance in the field of musical analysis, which proposes as an innovation in the field of musical analysis the structural vision of musical discourse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
I provide a critical survey of the role that semantics took in the several models of generative grammar, since the 1950s until the Minimalist Program. I distinguish four different periods. In the first section, I focus on the role of formal semantics in generative grammar until the 1970s. In Section 2 I present the period of linguistic wars, when the role of semantics in linguistic theory became a crucial topic of debate. In Section 3 I focus on the formulation of conditions on transformations and Binding Theory in the 1970s and 1980s, while in the last Section I discuss the role of semantics in the minimalist approach. In this section, I also propose a semantically-based model of generative grammar, which fully endorses minimalism and Chomsky's later position concerning the primary role of the semantic interface in the Universal Grammar modelization (Strong Minimalist Thesis). In the Discussion, I point out some theoretical problems deriving from Chomsky's internalist interpretation of model-theoretic semantics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
The topic of the given research is connected with the investigation of there sentences in English The word there is a polysemeous word and can be a pronoun or an adverb. As a pronoun it can be used as the subject of the verb 'be' to say that something exists or does not exist, or to draw attention to it; in front of certain verbs when you are saying that something exists, develops, or can be seen. Whether the verb is singular or plural depends on the noun which follows the verb; The word there can be used in the form of convention. It is used after 'hello' or 'hi' when you are greeting someone. When the word there is used as an adverb its semantics varies. The question of how the two ways of using there originated also plays some part in synchronic treatments, as reflected in recent developments in linguistics. In the field of generative grammar, defining the categorial status and syntactic function of there is of central importance. Grammarians are unanimous in their view that the there is often a subject in a sentence. However, there is disagreement about whether there is introduced transformationally, or whether it is already present in the syntactic deep structure. Proponents of generative grammar separate nominal there very strictly from adverbial there. They tend to regard the identity of form as coincidental. Syntactic analyses contribute little or nothing about the semantics of there. Characteristic of this is the recurrent description of there as "dummy there", indicating that it has no meaning. But we should say that in spite of the fact that dummy words have no meaning they do have a grammatical function. The author investigates syntax and semantics of the word 'there'. In the article the ambiguity of sentences with the word 'there' and its emphatic characteristics are shown. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
The I wh i -questions part examines how I wh i -questions are formed and how I wh i -elements are interpreted in Mandarin and English. Hu assumes that if a I wh i -question involves two I wh i -phrases, one must function to generate an accessible set so that the other one can be interpreted. In this sense, Hu's research constitutes both challenges and innovation for the approach to I wh i -questions and reflexives. [Extracted from the article]
In this contribution, I offer a summary of my 2014 Ph.D. dissertation from the University of Patras on headedness in word formation and lexical semantics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Within the framework of Generative Grammar, a standard (hypo)thesis has been that a (broad) wh-parameter may distinguish between two types of languages: those that front wh-elements (e.g., English) and those that realize them in situ (e.g., Chinese). Wh-fronting languages may also attest in situ arrangements, and a tacit (hypo)thesis, tied to the one above, is that in situ configurations translate to echo questions, while fronting configurations are genuine (information-seeking) questions. Neat as this taxonomy might look like, more recently it has been shown that, in Modem Greek, which is a typically wh-fronting language, each wh-configuration may map to either meaning. On the assumption that syntax mediates between form and meaning, mapping the former to the latter, the question that the Modern Greek evidence raises is to what extent syntax regulates the form-meaning associations under consideration. In other words, the question is "how much" of the relevant semantics is registered in the corresponding syntactic structures. Capitalizing on already documented evidence from distribution, interpretation, and intonation, the present paper argues that syntax encodes certain aspects of the relevant semantics, and pans out a formal system that attributes other aspects of this semantics to a direct interaction between PF and LF, thereby recognizing the existence of this interface area. The theoretical import(ance) of this analysis (part of which is prefigured elsewhere) is that it revisits the standard organization of the Grammar, as viewed from a Minimalist perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
BKG adopt an event structural approach to verb meaning whereby verbs are assumed to consist of an event structure that decomposes into event templates and roots. Similarly, in terms of idiosyncratic meaning, BKG note that there do not appear to be limits in how much idiosyncratic meaning roots can entail, recapping Grimshaw (2005). By doing so, BKG ultimately lay out a theory of verb meaning that has predictive power with regards to possible verb classes. The theory that BKG lays out regarding root meaning is of particular theoretical relevance since the role that roots play in meaning composition has generally been neglected. [Extracted from the article]