Lexicalised Locality: Local Domains and Non-Local Dependencies in a Lexicalised Tree Adjoining Grammar

Contemporary generative grammar assumes that syntactic structure is best described in terms of sets, and that locality conditions, as well as cross-linguistic variation, is determined at the level of designated functional heads. Syntactic operations (merge, MERGE, etc.) build a structure by deriving sets from lexical atoms and recursively (and monotonically) yielding sets of sets. Additional restrictions over the format of structural descriptions limit the number of elements involved in each operation to two at each derivational step, a head and a non-head. In this paper, we will explore an alternative direction for minimalist inquiry based on previous work, e.g., Frank (2002, 2006), albeit under novel assumptions. We propose a view of syntactic structure as a specification of relations in graphs, which correspond to the extended projection of lexical heads; these are elementary trees in Tree Adjoining Grammars. We present empirical motivation for a lexicalised approach to structure building, where the units of the grammar are elementary trees. Our proposal will be based on cross-linguistic evidence; we will consider the structure of elementary trees in Spanish, English and German. We will also explore the consequences of assuming that nodes in elementary trees are addresses for purposes of tree composition operations, substitution and adjunction.

[1]  Aravind K. Joshi,et al.  Tree-adjoining grammars and lexicalized grammars , 1992, Tree Automata and Languages.

[2]  Geoffrey Sampson,et al.  The single mother condition , 1975, Journal of Linguistics.

[3]  Yukio Oba,et al.  ON THE DOUBLE OBJECT CONSTRUCTION , 1993 .

[4]  David Adger,et al.  Features in Minimalist Syntax , 2011 .

[5]  E. Stabler The epicenter of linguistic behavior , 2013 .

[6]  Juan Uriagereka Multiple spell-out , 2005 .

[7]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  Minimalist inquiries : the framework , 1998 .

[8]  C. L. Hamblin QUESTIONS IN MONTAGUE ENGLISH , 1976 .

[9]  Luigi Rizzi,et al.  Functional Categories and Syntactic Theory , 2016 .

[10]  L. Karttunen Syntax and Semantics of Questions , 1977 .

[11]  H. V. Riemsdijk,et al.  Verb Projection Raising, Scope, and the Typology of Rules Affecting Verbs , 1986 .

[12]  Jane Grimshaw,et al.  Locality and Extended Projection , 2000 .

[13]  Susi Wurmbrand,et al.  Verb Clusters, Verb Raising, and Restructuring , 2007 .

[14]  Julie Anne,et al.  Phases in “ Beyond Explanatory Adequacy ” ∗ , 2002 .

[15]  Anca Muscholl,et al.  Trace Theory , 2011, Encyclopedia of Parallel Computing.

[16]  Kleanthes K. Grohmann,et al.  Barriers and Phases: Forward to the Past? , 2004 .

[17]  Robert Frank,et al.  Phase theory and Tree Adjoining Grammar , 2006 .

[18]  J. McCawley Parentheticals and discontinuous constituent structure , 1982 .

[19]  Esther Torrego Salcedo On inversion in Spanish and some of its effects , 1984 .

[20]  Jerold A. Edmondson,et al.  The Verbal Complex in Continental West Germanic , 1983 .

[21]  G. Cinque "Restructuring" and Functional Structure , 2001 .

[22]  Robert Frank,et al.  Monotonic C-Command: A New Perspective on Tree Adjoining Grammar , 2000, Grammars.

[23]  D. Krivochen,et al.  On the position of subjects in Spanish periphrases: Subjecthood left and right , 2019, Borealis – An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics.

[24]  Anthony S. Kroch,et al.  The Linguistic Relevance of Tree Adjoining Grammar , 1985 .

[25]  Diego Gabriel Krivochen,et al.  Tokens vs. Copies: Displacement Revisited† , 2016 .

[26]  R. Levine Right node (non-)raising , 1985 .

[27]  G. Cinque Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective , 1999 .

[28]  Saul Gorn,et al.  Handling the growth by definition of mechanical languages , 1967, AFIPS '67 (Spring).

[29]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The Minimalist Program , 1992 .

[30]  Aravind K. Joshi,et al.  Natural language parsing: Tree adjoining grammars: How much context-sensitivity is required to provide reasonable structural descriptions? , 1985 .

[31]  Noam Chomsky Derivation by phase , 1999 .

[32]  Robert Frank,et al.  Phrase Structure Composition and Syntactic Dependencies , 2002, Computational Linguistics.

[33]  Richard Montague,et al.  The Proper Treatment of Quantification in Ordinary English , 1973 .

[34]  Jean-Yves Pollock Verb movement, universal grammar and the structure of IP , 1989 .

[35]  T. Reinhart Wh-in-situ in the Framework of the Minimalist Program , 1998 .

[36]  G. Pullum,et al.  The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language , 2002 .

[37]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory , 1975 .

[38]  Aravind K. Joshi,et al.  Tree Adjunct Grammars , 1975, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[39]  Luigi Rizzi,et al.  The Cartography of Syntactic Structures , 2009 .

[40]  John Robert Ross,et al.  Constraints on variables in syntax , 1967 .

[41]  Marc Richards,et al.  Deriving the Edge: What’s in a Phase? , 2011 .

[42]  Noam Chomsky Some Puzzling Foundational Issues: The Reading Program , 2019 .

[43]  Steven Abney,et al.  The English Noun Phrase in its Sentential Aspect , 1972 .

[44]  Barbara Citko,et al.  On the Nature of Merge: External Merge, Internal Merge, and Parallel Merge , 2005, Linguistic Inquiry.