Extraposition from np
Download
1 / 39

extraposition from np - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 237 Views
  • Updated On :

Extraposition from NP. Heike Walker Georg-August University of Göttingen CoGETI Workshop Heidelberg 24-25 November 2006. Overview. Definition and Data Syntactic Analyses HPSG Analyses Discourse Constraints Conclusion. Definition and Data Syntactic Analyses HPSG Analyses

Related searches for extraposition from np

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'extraposition from np' - paul


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Extraposition from np

Extraposition from NP

Heike Walker

Georg-August University of Göttingen

CoGETI Workshop Heidelberg

24-25 November 2006


Overview
Overview

  • Definition and Data

  • Syntactic Analyses

  • HPSG Analyses

  • Discourse Constraints

  • Conclusion



Definition
Definition

Extraposition: a process by which an element

is moved to theright of, or subsequent to, its

canonicalposition.

Extraposition from NP: a process by which

an element is extraposed from an NP.


Categorial restrictions
Categorial restrictions

PP-Extraposition

  • A man appeared with green eyes.

  • I don‘t see much argument myself any longer against differential rents.(Keller 1995)

    Relative Clause Extraposition

  • A book appeared which was written by Chomsky. (Baltin 2001)

    Sentential complements

  • Mary mentioned the claim yesterday that John is intelligent. (Kiss 2002)


The position of attachment of the extraposed phrase
The Position of Attachment of the Extraposed Phrase

  • Syntactic tests (ellipsis, topicalization and pseudoclefting of VP) reveal a subject-object asymmetry of attachment sites

  • Phrase extraposed from object attached to VP

  • Phrase extraposed from subject attached to VP or IP (Culicover&Rochemont 1990)


Upward boundedness
Upward boundedness

  • *It was believed [S that John saw a picture _i in the newspaper by everyone] [of his brother]i.

  • Whoi did Mary say [S that John saw a picture of _i in the newspaper]? (Culicover&Rochemont 1990, 24)

    Ross (1967): Right Roof Constraint

    An element cannot move rightward out of the clause

    in which it originates.

  • Rightward movement more restricted than leftward movement


Insensitive to island constraints
Insensitive to island constraints

  • A man came into the room [with blond hair].

  • *[With what color hair]i did a man _i come into the room? (Culicover&Rochemont 1990, 24)

  • Rightward movement less restricted than leftward movement


Extraposition and topicalization
Extraposition and Topicalization

An extraposed relative clause cannot be related to a

topicalized phrase.

  • Antecedent contained in a topicalized VP:

    • a. John said he would meet a man at the party who was from Philadelphia, and meet a man at the party who was from Philadelphia he did.

      b. *John said he would meet a man at the party who was from Philadelphia, and meet a man at the party he did who was from Philadelphia. (Culicover&Rochemont 1990, 28)

  • Antecedent itself topicalized:

    • a. Microbrews that are located around the Bay Area, I like.

      b. *Micro brews, I like that are located around the Bay Area.

      (Kiss 2003)


Frozenness to further extraction
Frozenness to further extraction

No dislocation out of an extraposed phrase:

  • a. Whoi did you see a picture of _i in the newspaper?

    b. *Whoi did you see a picture in the newspaper of _i?

    But extraposition from wh-moved objects possible:

  • [Which book _j ]i did she write _i last year [that takes only two hours to read]j?

  • [Which woman _j ]i did he meet _i yesterday [from the south of France]j?

    (Keller 1995)



Extraposition as a rightward movement process
Extraposition as a rightward movement process

  • Extraposed phrase base-generated within the NP

  • Movement to a position adjoined to IP or VP

  • Extraposed phrase related to a gap within the antecedent NP

  • How is this adjunction licensed?


Baltin (1981): Generalized Subjacency

In the configuration A...[a...[b...B...]...]...A',

i. A' cannot be related to B where a and b are maximal projections of any major categories;

ii. A cannot be related to B where a and b are drawn from the following list of phrasal categories: (a) PP; (b) NP; (c) S or S' or both, depending on the specific language.


Problems with Generalized Subjacency:

  • Stipulation of the set of bounding nodes for leftward movement

  • Fails to block successive cyclic movement of the extraposed phrase in a fashion exactly parallel to wh-movement (Culicover&Rochemont 1990, 27)

  • Violation of the principle in (14):

    • I saw it [PP in [NP a magazine _i ]] yesterday

      [which was lying on the table]i. (Baltin 2001)


Guéron (1980) and Guéron&May (1984)

  • Extraposition as process of Move α, subject to bounding conditions (e.g. Subjacency)

  • Head-complement relation must be satisfied at the level of logical form (LF):

    The complement of X is a constituent governed by X. (Guéron 1980, 642)

  • Explanation of subject-object asymmetry


Arguments against movement account:

  • Unmotivated distinction between rightward and leftward movement

  • Coordinate structures:

    • A mani came in and a womanj went out whoi+j know each other very well. (Culicover&Rochemont 1990, 45)

    • John saw a mani and Mary saw a womanj whoi+j were wanted by the police. (Kiss 2002, 20n.)


Base generation
Base generation

  • Extraposed phrase base-generated in its extraposed position

  • How is this position licensed?

  • Culicover&Rochemont (1990): extraposed complements related to their antecedents by a relation of coindexing subject to the restrictions imposed by the Complement Principle:

    β is a potential complement of α (α,β=Xmax), only if α and β are in a government relation.

  • Problem: semantic relation between the extraposed element and its antecedent



Keller 1995
Keller (1995)

  • Extraposition as a nonlocal dependency

  • Nonlocal feature EXTRA to establish connection between an extraposed element and its antecedent

  • Lexical rule removes complement from the SUBCAT list and introduces it into the EXTRA set:



  • Extraposed phrase is bound on top of a phrase that introduces intervening material between the extraposed constituent and its antecedent

  • Feature PERIPHERY (PER), located under LOCAL

  • A phrase that is extraposed from is marked [PER left] if there is no material that could intervene between the extraposed constituent and its antecedent.

  • Otherwise it is [PER right] and EXTRA elements can be bound on top of it.

  • In case [PER left], the EXTRA element percolates up to find a phrase with right periphery

  • For English, all lexical entries marked [PER left]



Head extra schema
Head-Extra Schema additional immediate dominance schema is introduced

Keller (1995)


  • Head daughter [PER additional immediate dominance schema is introducedright] since the binding of extraposed phrases is only possible at the right periphery of a phrase

  • Mother node [PER extra] to disallow adjuncts on top of a head-extra structure (adjuncts specified as [MOD|LOC|PER non-extra])

    • *An entirely new band rings today, [several of whom are members of the congregation] at Great Torrington.

  • [INHER|EXTRA { }] requires all members of EXTRA to be bound at the same level; extraposed elements originating from the same phrase are sisters; ordered by LPCs


I don t see much argument myself any longer against differential rents
I don‘t see much argument myself any longer additional immediate dominance schema is introducedagainst differential rents.

(Keller 1995)


Kiss 2002 2003
Kiss (2002, 2003) additional immediate dominance schema is introduced

  • Relative Clause Extraposition

  • A non-movement account

  • Extraposition treated as an anaphoric process by means of percolation of anchors to which the relative clause is bound

  • Basic idea expressed by the principle of Generalized Modification:

    The index of a modifying phrase has to be identified with a suitable index contained in the phrase to which the modifier is adjoined.


  • Anchors are introduced by every NP (and VP) and projected through the set-valued non-local feature ANCHORS (contains INDEX and HANDLE features)

  • Projection governed by the Anchors Projection Principle:

    The anchors set of a headed phrase consists of the union of the anchors set of the daughters less those anchors that are specified as TO-BIND|ANCHORS on the head daughter.


  • The relative clause requires that the ANCHORS set of its syntactic sister contains a member that is token-identical to the ANCHORS feature of the relative clause

  • Upward boundedness is modelled by imposing restrictions on the Head-Filler Schema and the Head-Specifier Schema to the effect that all anchors of the daughters are specified as TO-BIND|ANCHORS.


Kiss (2003) syntactic sister contains a member that is token-identical to the ANCHORS feature of the relative clause


  • Definition and Data syntactic sister contains a member that is token-identical to the ANCHORS feature of the relative clause

  • Syntactic Analyses

  • HPSG Analyses

  • Discourse Constraints

  • Conclusion


  • Certain sentences not acceptable in isolation syntactic sister contains a member that is token-identical to the ANCHORS feature of the relative clause

  • Acceptability improved in an appropriate discourse context:

    • a. A man arrived who wasn‘t wearing any clothes.

      b. ??A man screamed who wasn‘t wearing any clothes.

    • Suddenly there was the sound of lions growling. Several women screamed. Then a man screamed who was standing at the very edge of the crowd. (Culicover&Rochemont 1990, 29 n.14)


Verbs of appearance
Verbs of appearance syntactic sister contains a member that is token-identical to the ANCHORS feature of the relative clause

  • Guéron (1980): constraints on the level of LF interact with pragmatic factors (rules of semantic interpretation and discourse) to filter syntactic outputs

  • „Ss which are unacceptable in isolation become acceptable in a context in which the verb is pragmatically emptied of all semantic content beyond that of ‚appearence in the world of the discourse‘.“ (Guéron 1980, 653-4)

    • a. A man appeared from India.

      b. *A man died from India.

    • Several visitors from foreign countries died in the terrible accident. A woman died from Peru and a man died from India.


Question under discussion qud
Question Under Discussion (QUD) syntactic sister contains a member that is token-identical to the ANCHORS feature of the relative clause

Maynell (2003): Extraposition of restrictive relative clauses from definite NP subjects

  • a. A cocktail waitress entered the dining room who was wearing a blond wig.

    b. ??The cocktail waitress entered the dining room who was wearing a blond wig.


  • (23b) usually viewed as ungrammatical or unacceptable; ruled out by syntactic constraints (cf. Guéron 1980, Guéron&May 1984)

  • Maynell claims that the structure must be allowable by any syntactic theory; its acceptance depends on the relationship of the information conveyed by the extraposed phrase to the discourse context


  • Definite NP can introduce new referents into the discourse as long as these can be accommodated and added to the common ground of a discourse (part of the QUD)

  • Predicate must be non-informative with respect to the QUD

  • Extraposed relative clause must match the information status of its definite NP head

  • Extraposed relative clause must provide new information with respect to the immediateQUD


  • Definition and Data as long as these can be accommodated and added to the common ground of a discourse (

  • Syntactic Analyses

  • HPSG Analyses

  • Discourse Constraints

  • Conclusion


Conclusion
Conclusion as long as these can be accommodated and added to the common ground of a discourse (

  • Syntactic, semantic and pragmatic factors involved

  • My aim: to give an integrated approach to Extraposition

  • Open questions


References
References as long as these can be accommodated and added to the common ground of a discourse (

Baltin, Mark R. (1981): Strict Bounding. In Carl Lee Baker, John J.McCarthy, eds., The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition,Cambridge,Massachusetts: MIT, 257-295.

Baltin, Mark R. (Draft of 2001): Extraposition, the Right RoofConstraint,Result Clauses, Relative Clause Extraposition, and PPExtraposition. (http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/lingu/people/faculty/baltin/papers/extrapos.pdf).

Culicover, Peter W., Michael S. Rochemont (1990):Extraposition andtheComplement Principle. In LinguisticInquiry 21:1,23-47.

Guéron, Jacqueline (1980): On the Syntax and Semantics ofPPExtraposition. In Linguistic Inquiry 11:4,637-678.

Guéron, Jacqueline, Robert May (1984): Extraposition and LogicalForm.In Linguistic Inquiry 15:1, 1-31.


Keller, Frank (1995): Towards an Account of Extraposition in HPSG.InProceedings of the 7th Conference of the European Chapter ofthe Association for Computational Linguistics. Student Session.Dublin, 301-306. (http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/keller/papers/eacl95.pdf).

Kiss Tibor (2002): Semantic Constraints on Relative ClauseExtraposition. Forthcoming in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. (http://www.linguistics.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/~kiss/publications.html).

Kiss, Tibor (2003): Phrasal typology and the interaction of topicalization, wh-movement, and extraposition. In Jong-Bok Kim, Stephen Wechsler, eds., Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Stanford: CSLI, 109-128.

Maynell, Laurie A. (Draft of 2003): Discourse Constraints onExtraposition from Definite NP Subjects in English.

(http://www.ling.ohio-state.edu/~maynell/papers/RelClause.Ex.pdf).

Ross, John Robert (1967): Constraints on Variables in Syntax. DoctoralDissertation. Reproduced by The Linguistics Club of IndianaUniversity, Fall 1968. (Reprinted [1986]: Infinite Syntax! Norwood, NJ: Ablex.).


ad